SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Altered Degree Centrality of Brain Networks in Parkinson's Disease With Freezing of Gait: A Resting-State Functional MRI Study.

Front Neurol · 2021-10-11

DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2021.743135PMID: 34707559

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease (PD) leads to devastating consequences; however, little is known about its functional brain network. We explored the differences in degree centrality (DC) of functional networks among PD with FOG (PD FOG+), PD without FOG (PD FOG-), and healthy control (HC) groups. In all, 24 PD FOG+, 37 PD FOG-, and 22 HCs were recruited and their resting-state functional magnetic imaging images were acquired. The whole brain network was analyzed using graph theory analysis. DC was compared among groups using the two-sample t-test. The DC values of disrupted brain regions were correlated with the FOG Questionnaire (FOGQ) scores. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed. We found significant differences in DC among groups. Compared with HCs, PD FOG+ patients showed decreased DC in the middle frontal gyrus (MFG), superior temporal gyrus (STG), parahippocampal gyrus (PhG), inferior temporal gyrus (ITG), and middle temporal gyrus (MTG). Compared with HC, PD FOG- presented with decreased DC in the MFG, STG, PhG, and ITG. Compared with PD FOG-, PD FOG+ showed decreased DC in the MFG and ITG. A negative correlation existed between the DC of ITG and FOGQ scores; the DC in ITG could distinguish PD FOG+ from PD FOG- and HC. The calculated AUCs were 81.3, 89.5, and 77.7% for PD FOG+ vs. HC, PD FOG- vs. HC, and PD FOG+ vs. PD FOG-, respectively. In conclusion, decreased DC of ITG in PD FOG+ patients compared to PD FOG- patients and HCs may be a unique feature for PD FOG+ and can likely distinguish PD FOG+ from PD FOG- and HC groups.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.