Hougaard Anders
Department of Neurology, Glostrup Hospital, Nordre Ringvej 57, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark.
Dan Med J. 2015 Aug;62(8):B5129.
Migraine sufferers with aura often report visual discomfort outside of attacks and many consider bright or flickering light an attack-precipitating factor. The nature of this visual hypersensitivity and its relation to the underlying pathophysiology of the migraine aura is unknown. A useful technology to study these features of migraine with aura (MA) is functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which has the potential not only to detect, but also to localize hypersensitive cortex. The main objective of this thesis was to investigate the cortical responsivity of patients with MA during visual stimulation using fMRI. To optimize sensitivity, we applied a within-patient design by assessing functional interhemispheric differences in patients consistently experiencing visual aura in the same visual hemifield. To validate our data analysis methods, we initially studied healthy volunteers using single hemifield visual stimulation and compared the "stimulated" hemispheres (i.e. hemispheres contralateral to the visual stimulation) to the "non-stimulated" hemispheres. We then applied this validated method of interhemispheric comparison of fMRI-blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) activation to compare left versus right hemisphere responses to symmetric full-field visual stimulation in 54 healthy subjects (study I). This study concluded that, a) the applied visual stimulation is effective in activating large expanses of visual cortex, b) interhemispheric differences in fMRI-BOLD activation can be determined using the proposed method, and c) visual responses to symmetric full-field visual stimulation are asymmetrically distributed between the cerebral hemispheres. We investigated the effects of migraine aura, by including 20 patients with frequent side-fixed visual aura attacks, i.e. ≥= 90% of auras occurring in the same visual hemifield (study II). To circumvent bias relating to differences between right and left hemispheres (e.g. caused by physiological left/right bias, asymmetry of the visual stimulation or magnetic field inhomogeneity of the scanner), we included an equal number of patients with right- and left-sided symptoms. Further, we included 20 individually matched healthy controls with no history (including family history) of migraine. We compared the fMRI-BOLD responses to visual stimulation between symptomatic and asymptomatic hemispheres during the interictal phase and between migraine patients and controls. BOLD responses were selectively increased in the symptomatic hemispheres and localized in the inferior parietal lobule, the inferior frontal gyrus and the superior parietal lobule. The affected cortical areas comprise a visually driven functional network involved in oculomotor control, guidance of movement, motion perception, visual attention, and visual spatial memory. The patients also had significantly increased response in the same cortical areas when compared to controls. Since these findings theoretically could depend on aura-related differences in brain structure, we performed additional analyses (study III) to determine the relation between migraine aura and structural, cortical and subcortical, grey matter abnormalities. We analyzed structural MRI data from the same 20 patients and applied voxel-based morphometry and surface-based morphometry on a whole-hemisphere level and for specific anatomical regions of interest. Within-subject comparisons were made with regard to aura symptoms (N = 20 vs 20) and with regard to headache (N = 13 vs 13). We found no differences in grey matter structure with regard to aura symptoms in MA patients. Comparing the typical migraine headache side of the patients to the contralateral side revealed a difference in cortical thickness in the inferior frontal gyrus, which correlated significantly with the migraine attack frequency. In conclusion, we validated a method of interhemispheric comparison of fMRI-BOLD responses to visual stimulation. By using this method we discovered a lateralized alteration of a visually driven functional network in patients with side-fixed aura. These findings suggest a hyperexcitability of the visual system in the interictal phase of migraine with visual aura. Further, this abnormal function is not dependent on lateralized abnormalities of gray matter structure. However, alteration of the inferior frontal cortex related to headache lateralization could indicate structural reorganization of pain inhibitory circuits in response to the repeated intense nociceptive input due to the headache attacks.
有先兆的偏头痛患者经常报告在发作之外存在视觉不适,许多人认为明亮或闪烁的光线是诱发发作的因素。这种视觉超敏反应的本质及其与偏头痛先兆潜在病理生理学的关系尚不清楚。一种用于研究有先兆偏头痛(MA)这些特征的有用技术是功能磁共振成像(fMRI),它不仅有潜力检测超敏皮层,还能对其进行定位。本论文的主要目的是使用fMRI研究MA患者在视觉刺激期间的皮层反应性。为了优化敏感性,我们采用了患者内设计,通过评估在同一视觉半视野持续经历视觉先兆的患者的功能半球间差异。为了验证我们的数据分析方法,我们最初使用单一半视野视觉刺激研究健康志愿者,并将“受刺激”半球(即与视觉刺激对侧的半球)与“未受刺激”半球进行比较。然后,我们将这种经过验证的fMRI血氧水平依赖(BOLD)激活半球间比较方法应用于比较54名健康受试者对对称全视野视觉刺激的左右半球反应(研究I)。该研究得出结论:a)所应用的视觉刺激有效地激活了大片视觉皮层;b)可以使用所提出的方法确定fMRI-BOLD激活的半球间差异;c)对对称全视野视觉刺激的视觉反应在大脑半球之间不对称分布。我们纳入了20名频繁出现一侧固定视觉先兆发作的患者(即≥90%的先兆出现在同一视觉半视野)来研究偏头痛先兆的影响(研究II)。为了避免与左右半球差异相关的偏差(例如由生理左右偏差、视觉刺激不对称或扫描仪磁场不均匀引起),我们纳入了数量相等的有右侧和左侧症状的患者。此外,我们纳入了20名个体匹配的无偏头痛病史(包括家族病史)的健康对照。我们比较了发作间期有症状和无症状半球之间以及偏头痛患者与对照之间对视觉刺激的fMRI-BOLD反应。BOLD反应在有症状半球中选择性增加,并定位于顶下小叶、额下回和顶上小叶。受影响的皮层区域包括一个视觉驱动的功能网络,该网络参与眼球运动控制、运动引导、运动感知、视觉注意和视觉空间记忆。与对照相比,患者在相同皮层区域的反应也显著增加。由于这些发现理论上可能取决于与先兆相关的脑结构差异,我们进行了额外的分析(研究III)以确定偏头痛先兆与结构、皮层和皮层下灰质异常之间的关系。我们分析了来自相同20名患者的结构MRI数据,并在全半球水平以及特定感兴趣解剖区域应用基于体素的形态学和基于表面的形态学。在受试者内部就先兆症状(N = 20对20)和头痛(N = 13对13)进行了比较。我们发现MA患者中关于先兆症状的灰质结构没有差异。将患者典型偏头痛头痛侧与对侧进行比较,发现额下回皮层厚度存在差异,这与偏头痛发作频率显著相关。总之,我们验证了一种fMRI-BOLD对视觉刺激反应的半球间比较方法。通过使用这种方法,我们发现了一侧固定先兆患者中视觉驱动功能网络的侧向改变。这些发现表明在有视觉先兆的偏头痛发作间期视觉系统存在过度兴奋。此外,这种异常功能不依赖于灰质结构的侧向异常。然而,与头痛侧向化相关的额下皮层改变可能表明疼痛抑制回路因头痛发作反复强烈的伤害性输入而发生结构重组。