4.7 Article

Dysfunctional brain circuitry in obsessive-compulsive disorder: Source and coherence analysis of EEG rhythms

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 49, 期 1, 页码 977-983

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.08.015

关键词

Obsessive-compulsive disorder; QEEG; EEG coherence; LORETA; Delta/ beta coupling; Thalamo-cortical dysrythmia

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of University and Scientific and Technological Research [9906151218_001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Morphological and functional studies suggested involvement of several cortical and subcortical circuitries in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The aim of the present study was to investigate networks involved in OCD pathophysiology, using power (coupling of EEG bands, low-resolution electromagnetic tomography-LORETA) and coherence analysis in drug naive patients. Method: EEG was obtained from 37 drug-naive patients with OCD and 37 age- and sex-matched controls. Resting EEG was recorded from 29 scalp channels. Coupling (ratio and correlation) between low and high frequencies was analyzed on Fz. For each frequency band, LORETA Current density distribution, intra-hemispheric and inter-hemispheric coherence analysis were computed. Results: OCD had increased Current density for delta in the insula and for beta in frontal, parietal and limbic OCD also had decreased inter-hemispheric coherence and reduced coupling between delta and beta lobes. frequencies. Conclusions: in OCD, increased frontal beta is consistent with previous evidence of frontal dysfunction. Hyperactivity of insular delta Sources, together with rhythms decoupling and reduced interhemispheric alpha coherence are consistent with additional involvement of cortico-subcortical functional connections. Combined use of power and coherence analysis may provide functional measures on different levels of involvement of cortico-subcortical circuits in neuropsychiatric disorders. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据