Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
In the study of neuro-electrophysiological recordings, aperiodic neural activity - activity with no characteristic frequency - has increasingly become a common feature of study. This interest has rapidly extended to clinical work, with many reports investigating aperiodic activity from patients from a broad range of clinical disorders. This work typically seeks to evaluate aperiodic activity as a putative biomarker relating to diagnosis or treatment response, and/or as a potential marker of underlying physiological activity. There is thus far no clear consensus on if and how aperiodic neural activity relates to clinical disorders, nor on the best practices for how to study it in clinical research. To address this, this systematic literature review, following PRISMA guidelines, examines reports of aperiodic activity in electrophysiological recordings with human patients with psychiatric and/or neurological disorders, finding 143 reports across 35 distinct disorders. Reports within and across disorders are summarized to evaluate current findings and examine what can be learned as pertains to the analysis, interpretations, and overall utility of aperiodic neural activity in clinical investigations. Aperiodic activity is commonly reported to relate to clinical diagnoses, with 31 of 35 disorders reporting a significant effect in diagnostic and/or treatment related studies. However, there is variation in the consistency of results across disorders, with the heterogeneity of patient groups, disease etiologies, and treatment status arising as common themes across different disorders. Overall, the current variability of results, potentially confounding covariates, and limitations in current understanding of aperiodic activity suggests further work is needed before aperiodic activity can be established as a potential biomarker and/or marker of underlying pathological physiology. Finally, a series of recommendations are proposed, based on the findings, limitations, and key discussion topics of the current literature to assist with guiding productive future work on the clinical utility of studying aperiodic neural activity.
In the study of neuro-electrophysiological recordings, aperiodic neural activity - activity with no characteristic frequency - has increasingly become a common feature of study. This interest has rapidly extended to clinical work, with many reports investigating aperiodic activity from patients from a broad range of clinical disorders. This work typically seeks to evaluate aperiodic activity as a putative biomarker relating to diagnosis or treatment response, and/or as a potential marker of underlying physiological activity. There is thus far no clear consensus on if and how aperiodic neural activity relates to clinical disorders, nor on the best practices for how to study it in clinical research. To address this, this systematic literature review, following PRISMA guidelines, examines reports of aperiodic activity in electrophysiological recordings with human patients with psychiatric and/or neurological disorders, finding 143 reports across 35 distinct disorders. Reports within and across disorders are summarized to evaluate current findings and examine what can be learned as pertains to the analysis, interpretations, and overall utility of aperiodic neural activity in clinical investigations. Aperiodic activity is commonly reported to relate to clinical diagnoses, with 31 of 35 disorders reporting a significant effect in diagnostic and/or treatment related studies. However, there is variation in the consistency of results across disorders, with the heterogeneity of patient groups, disease etiologies, and treatment status arising as common themes across different disorders. Overall, the current variability of results, potentially confounding covariates, and limitations in current understanding of aperiodic activity suggests further work is needed before aperiodic activity can be established as a potential biomarker and/or marker of underlying pathological physiology. Finally, a series of recommendations are proposed, based on the findings, limitations, and key discussion topics of the current literature to assist with guiding productive future work on the clinical utility of studying aperiodic neural activity.
Intracortial microstimulation (ICMS) is widely used in brain-machine interface for neuroprosthetics, particularly with aims of restoring lost sensory and motor functions. However, it remains poorly understood whether neuronal and blood flow responses by ICMS are spatially and temporally matched, as well as their underlying mechanism. Neurovascular coupling (NVC) is the process by which neuronal activity regulates blood flow in the brain to meet local metabolic demands. A hypothetically suboptimal NVC by ICMS may exacerbate the neuronal survival near electrode, contributing to neurodegeneration. In this study, we used wide-field imaging, laser speckle imaging and two-photon imaging in transgenic mice expressing calcium fluorescent indicators in neurons or vascular mural cells to examine this hypothesis. Our results showed blood flow responses are delayed at peak time and prolonged in duration compared with neuronal responses. By varying the stimulation amplitudes, we found that low stimulation intensity lower than 50μA preserved NVC. In contrast, high intensity stimulation caused spatially mismatched NVC, i.e. in the adjacent range within 200~400 μm from electrode tip, elicited blood flow compromises but neuronal activities increase. Ca2+ is the key regulator of contractile tone of vascular mural cells. Our results showed that Ca2+ sensitivity at vascular mural cells, i.e. vessel diameter change per unit of Ca2+ change, was decreased in the adjacent region of electrode, which partially explained the compromised and mismatched NVC, and which likely further lead to ischemia and neurodegeneration. This study offers a new insight into ICMS-associated neuronal and vascular physiology, and provides an important implication towards optimal design of ICMS: low intensities is more neuroprotective than high intensities by preserving NVC and preventing ischemia. Our discoveries pave the way for new research consideration and contribute to the development of more advanced brain-machine interface.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.