Structural and resting state functional connectivity of the subthalamic nucleus: identification of motor STN parts and the hyperdirect pathway

Deep brain stimulation (DBS) for Parkinson's disease often alleviates the motor symptoms, but causes cognitive and emotional side effects in a substantial number of cases. Identification of the motor part of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) as part of the presurgical workup could minimize these adverse effects. In this study, we assessed the STN's connectivity to motor, associative, and limbic brain areas, based on structural and functional connectivity analysis of volunteer data. For the structural connectivity, we used streamline counts derived from HARDI fiber tracking. The resulting tracks supported the existence of the so-called "hyperdirect" pathway in humans. Furthermore, we determined the connectivity of each STN voxel with the motor cortical areas. Functional connectivity was calculated based on functional MRI, as the correlation of the signal within a given brain voxel with the signal in the STN. Also, the signal per STN voxel was explained in terms of the correlation with motor or limbic brain seed ROI areas. Both right and left STN ROIs appeared to be structurally and functionally connected to brain areas that are part of the motor, associative, and limbic circuit. Furthermore, this study enabled us to assess the level of segregation of the STN motor part, which is relevant for the planning of STN DBS procedures.

Comparison of partial least squares regression and principal component regression for pelvic shape prediction.

This paper studied two different regression techniques for pelvic shape prediction, i.e., the partial least square regression (PLSR) and the principal component regression (PCR). Three different predictors such as surface landmarks, morphological parameters, or surface models of neighboring structures were used in a cross-validation study to predict the pelvic shape. Results obtained from applying these two different regression techniques were compared to the population mean model. In almost all the prediction experiments, both regression techniques unanimously generated better results than the population mean model, while the difference on prediction accuracy between these two regression methods is not statistically significant (α=0.01).