Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
The DTI-ALPSindex (diffusion tensor image analysis along the perivascular space index) has been tested in several diseases, but a limited number of studies are available in healthy normal populations. Given that some of the examined diseases show asymmetric features (e.g. Parkinson's disease, epilepsy) and considering that the DTI-ALPSindex is calculated from white matter regions involved in motor and language functions, our aim was to examine whether the index is influenced by handedness and/or functional language lateralisation. Eighty-two Caucasian adults (35 males; mean age: 26.91 ± 10.17, range: 18-66 years) were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. Handedness was assessed by the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, while language lateralisation was determined by functional MRI at 3T using a verbal fluency paradigm. The left- and right-hemispheric as well as the bilateral DTI-ALPS indices were calculated independently by two observers. Multiple linear regression corrected for age and sex indicated that handedness was inversely related to the left ALPSindex by Observer1 (n = 81, two-tailed P = 0.030) and the bilateral ALPSindex by both observers (n = 82, P = 0.025 and P = 0.044), but not significantly related to the right ALPSindex. In females, multiple linear regression corrected for age indicated that language laterality index was inversely related to the left ALPSindex (n = 47, P index (n = 47, P ≤ 0.003) by both observers, but not significantly associated with the right ALPSindex. In males, language laterality index was not related to any of the ALPS indices. Providing further insights into the normal DTI-ALPS patterns, our study supports the hypothesis that both language laterality and handedness can affect DTI-ALPS index that should be considered in future studies.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.