Clinical Evaluation of Cingulum Bundle Connectivity for Neurosurgical Hypothesis Development
Neurosurgery, ISSN: 1524-4040, Vol: 86, Issue: 5, Page: 724-735
2020
- 4Citations
- 21Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations4
- Citation Indexes4
- CrossRef3
- Captures21
- Readers21
- 21
Article Description
BACKGROUND: The cingulum bundle (CB) has long been a target for psychiatric neurosurgical procedures, but with limited understanding of the brain networks being impacted. Recent advances in human tractography could provide a foundation to better understand the effects of neurosurgical interventions on the CB; however, the reliability of tractography remains in question. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability of different tractography techniques, derived from typical, human diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) data, to characterize CB connectivity described in animal models. This will help validate the clinical applicability of tractography, and generate insight on current and future neurosurgical targets for psychiatric disorders. METHODS: Connectivity of the CB in 15 healthy human subjects was evaluated using DWI-based tractography, and compared to tract-tracing findings from nonhuman primates. Brain regions of interest were defined to coincide with the animal model. Tractography was performed using 3 techniques (FSL probabilistic, Camino probabilistic, and Camino deterministic). Differences in connectivity were assessed, and the CB segment with the greatest connectivity was determined. RESULTS: Each tractography technique successfully reproduced the animal tracing model with a mean accuracy of 72% (68-75%, P <. 05). Additionally, one region of the CB, the rostral dorsal segment, had significantly greater connectivity to associated brain structures than all other CB segments (P <. 05). CONCLUSION: Noninvasive, in vivo human analysis of the CB, using clinically available DWI for tractography, consistently reproduced the results of an animal tract-tracing model. This suggests that tractography of the CB can be used for clinical applications, which may aid in neurosurgical targeting for psychiatric disorders.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85083545434&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyz225; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31264700; https://journals.lww.com/10.1093/neuros/nyz225; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyz225; https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article/86/5/724/5527199
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know