4.5 Article

White matter integrity of the medial forebrain bundle and attention and working memory deficits following traumatic brain injury

Journal

BRAIN AND BEHAVIOR
Volume 7, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.608

Keywords

attention; medial forebrain bundle; traumatic brain injury

Funding

  1. Monash Biomedical Imaging Centre, Monash University
  2. Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Objective: The medial forebrain bundle (MFB) contains ascending catecholamine fibers that project to the prefrontal cortex (PFC). Damage to these fibers following traumatic brain injury (TBI) may alter extracellular catecholamine levels in the PFC and impede attention and working memory ability. This study investigated white matter microstructure of the medial MFB, specifically the supero-lateral branch (slMFB), following TBI, and its association with performance on attention and working memory tasks. Method: Neuropsychological measures of attention and working memory were administered to 20 moderate-severe participants with TBI (posttraumatic amnesia M=40.0537.10days, median time since injury 10.48months, range 3.72-87.49) and 20 healthy controls. Probabilistic tractography was used to obtain fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) values for 17 participants with TBI and 20 healthy controls. Results: When compared to controls, participants with TBI were found to have significantly lower FA (p<.001) and higher MD (p<.001) slMFB values, and they were slower to complete tasks including Trail Making Task-A, Hayling, selective attention task, n-back, and Symbol Digit Modalities Test. Conclusion: This study was the first to demonstrate microstructural white matter damage within the slMFB following TBI. However, no evidence was found for an association of alterations to this tract and performance on attentional tasks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available