Callosal Interhemispheric Communication in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: A Mediation Analysis on WM Microstructure Effects

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Hiploylee C,
   2. Dufort PA,
   3. Davis HS, et al

   . Longitudinal study of postconcussion syndrome: not everyone recovers. J Neurotrauma 2017;34:1511–23 doi:10.1089/neu.2016.4677 pmid:27784191

   CrossRefPubMed
2. 2.↵
   1. Levin HS,
   2. Diaz-Arrastia RR

   . Diagnosis, prognosis, and clinical management of mild traumatic brain injury. Lancet Neurol 2015;14:506–17 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00002-2 pmid:25801547

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. McAllister TW,
   2. Ford JC,
   3. Ji S, et al

   . Maximum principal strain and strain rate associated with concussion diagnosis correlates with changes in corpus callosum white matter indices. Ann Biomed Eng 2012;40:127–40 doi:10.1007/s10439-011-0402-6 pmid:21994062

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Patton DA,
   2. McIntosh AS,
   3. Kleiven S

   . The biomechanical determinants of concussion: finite element simulations to investigate tissue-level predictors of injury during sporting impacts to the unprotected head. J Appl Biomech 2015;31:264–68 doi:10.1123/jab.2014-0223 pmid:25781376

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Chung S,
   2. Fieremans E,
   3. Wang X, et al

   . White matter tract integrity: an indicator of axonal pathology after mild traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2018;35:1015–20 doi:10.1089/neu.2017.5320 pmid:29239261

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Chung S,
   2. Chen J,
   3. Li T, et al

   . Investigating brain white matter in football players with and without concussion using a biophysical model from multishell diffusion MRI. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2022;43:823–doi:10.3174/ajnr.A7522 pmid:35589140

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Rutgers DR,
   2. Fillard P,
   3. Paradot G, et al

   . Diffusion tensor imaging characteristics of the corpus callosum in mild, moderate, and severe traumatic brain injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:1730–35 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A1213 pmid:18617586

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Aoki Y,
   2. Inokuchi R,
   3. Gunshin M, et al

   . Diffusion tensor imaging studies of mild traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2012;83:870–76 doi:10.1136/jnnp-2012-302742 pmid:22797288

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Huynh-Le MP,
   2. Tibbs MD,
   3. Karunamuni R, et al

   . Microstructural injury to corpus callosum and intrahemispheric white matter tracts correlate with attention and processing speed decline after brain radiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2021;110:337–47 doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.12.046 pmid:33412257

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Quigley M,
    2. Cordes D,
    3. Turski P, et al

    . Role of the corpus callosum in functional connectivity. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:208–12 pmid:12591635

    PubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Marquez de la Plata CD,
    2. Garces J,
    3. Shokri Kojori E, et al

    . Deficits in functional connectivity of hippocampal and frontal lobe circuits after traumatic axonal injury. Arch Neurol 2011;68:74–84 doi:10.1001/archneurol.2010.342 pmid:21220676

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Bai L,
    2. Bai G,
    3. Wang S, et al

    . Strategic white matter injury associated with long-term information processing speed deficits in mild traumatic brain injury. Hum Brain Mapp 2020;41:4431–41 doi:10.1002/hbm.25135 pmid:32657510

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Schulte T,
    2. Muller-Oehring EM

    . Contribution of callosal connections to the interhemispheric integration of visuomotor and cognitive processes. Neuropsychol Rev 2010;20:174–90 doi:10.1007/s11065-010-9130-1 pmid:20411431

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Bacon JH,
    2. Bacon T,
    3. Kister I, et al

    . Posterior corpus callosum atrophy is correlated with worse performance on inter-hemispheric speed of processing task in unimpaired MS patients. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology, April 18–25, 2015. Washington, DC: No. 148
15. 15.↵
    1. Bloom JS,
    2. Hynd GW

    . The role of the corpus callosum in interhemispheric transfer of information: excitation or inhibition? Neuropsychol Rev 2005;15:59–71 doi:10.1007/s11065-005-6252-y pmid:16211466

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Basser PJ,
    2. Mattiello J,
    3. LeBihan D

    . Estimation of the effective self-diffusion tensor from the NMR spin echo. J Magn Reson B 1994;103:247–54 doi:10.1006/jmrb.1994.1037 pmid:8019776

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Jensen JH,
    2. Helpern JA,
    3. Ramani A, et al

    . Diffusional kurtosis imaging: the quantification of non-gaussian water diffusion by means of magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2005;53:1432–40 doi:10.1002/mrm.20508 pmid:15906300

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. 18.↵
    1. Novikov DS,
    2. Fieremans E,
    3. Jespersen SN, et al

    . Quantifying brain microstructure with diffusion MRI: theory and parameter estimation. NMR Biomed 2019;32:e3998 doi:10.1002/nbm.3998 pmid:30321478

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Coelho S,
    2. Baete SH,
    3. Lemberskiy G, et al

    . Reproducibility of the standard model of diffusion in white matter on clinical MRI systems. Neuroimage 2022;257:119290 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119290 pmid:35545197

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Cornelia Laule, John D. Port

    1. Jelescu IO,
    2. Fieremans E

    . Chapter 2 - Sensitivity and specificity of diffusion MRI to neuroinflammatory processes. In: Cornelia Laule, John D. Port, ed. Advances in Magnetic Resonance Technology and Applications. Academic Press; 2023;9: 31–50

    CrossRef
21. 21.↵
    1. Coronado-Leija R,
    2. Abdollahzadeh A,
    3. Lee HH, et al

    .] Volume electron microscopy in injured rat brain validates white matter microstructure metrics from diffusion MRI. ArXiv [Preprint]. 2024 Jan 9:arXiv:2310.04608v2 pmid:38259346

    PubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Liao Y,
    2. Coelho S,
    3. Chen J, et al

    . Mapping brain microstructure in vivo in health and disease using diffusion MRI. ArXiv 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16386. Accessed January 31, 2024
23. 23.↵
    1. Jelescu IO,
    2. Zurek M,
    3. Winters KV, et al

    . In vivo quantification of demyelination and recovery using compartment-specific diffusion MRI metrics validated by electron microscopy. Neuroimage 2016;132:104–14 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.02.004 pmid:26876473

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Jelescu IO,
    2. Veraart J,
    3. Adisetiyo V, et al

    . One diffusion acquisition and different white matter models: how does microstructure change in human early development based on WMTI and NODDI? Neuroimage 2015;107:242–56 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.12.009 pmid:25498427

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    1. Hui ES,
    2. Fieremans E,
    3. Jensen JH, et al

    . Stroke assessment with diffusional kurtosis imaging. Stroke 2012;43:2968–73 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.657742 pmid:22933581

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    1. de Kouchkovsky I,
    2. Fieremans E,
    3. Fleysher L, et al

    . Quantification of normal-appearing white matter tract integrity in multiple sclerosis: a diffusion kurtosis imaging study. J Neurol 2016;263:1146–55 doi:10.1007/s00415-016-8118-z pmid:27094571

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Chung S,
    2. Wang X,
    3. Fieremans E, et al

    . Altered relationship between working memory and brain microstructure after mild traumatic brain injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:1438–44 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6146 pmid:31371359

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Kim A,
    2. Bacon J,
    3. Bacon T, et al

    . Correlation of quantitative MR metrics of morphology and lesion load with performance on a novel inter-hemispheric speed of processing task in multiple sclerosis patients. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of Neuroradiology. April 25–30, 2015. Chicago, Illinois
29. 29.↵
    1. Kay T,
    2. Harrington DE,
    3. Adams R, et al

    . Definition of mild traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 1993;8:86–87

    CrossRef
30. 30.↵
    1. Potter S,
    2. Leigh E,
    3. Wade D, et al

    . The Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire: a confirmatory factor analysis. J Neurol 2006;253:1603–14 doi:10.1007/s00415-006-0275-z pmid:17063314

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
31. 31.↵
    1. Setsompop K,
    2. Gagoski BA,
    3. Polimeni JR, et al

    . Blipped-controlled aliasing in parallel imaging for simultaneous multislice echo planar imaging with reduced g-factor penalty. Magn Reson Med 2012;67:1210–24 doi:10.1002/mrm.23097 pmid:21858868

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Andersson JL,
    2. Skare S,
    3. Ashburner J

    . How to correct susceptibility distortions in spin-echo echo-planar images: application to diffusion tensor imaging. Neuroimage 2003;20:870–88 doi:10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00336-7 pmid:14568458

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 33.↵
    1. Veraart J,
    2. Novikov DS,
    3. Christiaens D, et al

    . Denoising of diffusion MRI using random matrix theory. Neuroimage 2016;142:394–406 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.08.016 pmid:27523449

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Ades-Aron B,
    2. Veraart J,
    3. Kochunov P, et al

    . Evaluation of the accuracy and precision of the diffusion parameter EStImation with Gibbs and NoisE removal pipeline. Neuroimage 2018;183:532–43 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.07.066 pmid:30077743

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Lee HH,
    2. Novikov DS,
    3. Fieremans E

    . Removal of partial Fourier-induced Gibbs (RPG) ringing artifacts in MRI. Magn Reson Med 2021;86:2733–50 doi:10.1002/mrm.28830 pmid:34227142

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Smith SM,
    2. Jenkinson M,
    3. Woolrich MW, et al

    . Advances in functional and structural MR image analysis and implementation as FSL. Neuroimage 2004;23(Suppl 1):S208–19 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.051 pmid:15501092

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    Standard Model Imaging (SMI) toolbox. https://github.com/NYU-DiffusionMRI/SMI. Accessed January 31, 2024
38. 38.↵
    1. Fortin JP,
    2. Parker D,
    3. Tunc B, et al

    . Harmonization of multi-site diffusion tensor imaging data. Neuroimage 2017;161:149–70 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.08.047 pmid:28826946

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Johnson WE,
    2. Li C,
    3. Rabinovic A

    . Adjusting batch effects in microarray expression data using empirical Bayes methods. Biostatistics 2007;8:118–27 doi:10.1093/biostatistics/kxj037 pmid:16632515

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
40. 40.↵
    1. Mori S,
    2. Oishi K,
    3. Jiang H, et al

    . Stereotaxic white matter atlas based on diffusion tensor imaging in an ICBM template. Neuroimage 2008;40:570–82 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.12.035 pmid:18255316

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
41. 41.↵
    1. Preacher KJ,
    2. Hayes AF

    . SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 2004;36:717–31 doi:10.3758/bf03206553 pmid:15641418

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
42. 42.↵
    1. Shenton ME,
    2. Hamoda HM,
    3. Schneiderman JS, et al

    . A review of magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging findings in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav 2012;6:137–92 doi:10.1007/s11682-012-9156-5 pmid:22438191

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
43. 43.↵
    1. Taquet M,
    2. Jankovski A,
    3. Rensonnet G, et al

    . Extra-axonal restricted diffusion as an in-vivo marker of reactive microglia. Sci Rep 2019;9:13874 doi:10.1038/s41598-019-50432-5 pmid:31554896

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Grossman EJ,
    2. Kirov II,
    3. Gonen O, et al

    . N-acetyl-aspartate levels correlate with intra-axonal compartment parameters from diffusion MRI. Neuroimage 2015;118:334–43 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.05.061 pmid:26037050

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Fieremans E,
    2. Benitez A,
    3. Jensen JH, et al

    . Novel white matter tract integrity metrics sensitive to Alzheimer disease progression. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:2105–12 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3553 pmid:23764722

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
46. 46.↵
    1. Ingalhalikar M,
    2. Smith A,
    3. Parker D, et al

    . Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014;111:823–28 doi:10.1073/pnas.1316909110 pmid:24297904

    Abstract/FREE Full Text