Mehta Ketan, Noecker Angela M, McIntyre Cameron C
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States; Department of Neurosurgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
Neuroimage. 2025 May 15;312:121211. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2025.121211. Epub 2025 Apr 11.
Structural connectivity models of the brain are commonly employed to identify pathways that are directly activated during deep brain stimulation (DBS). However, various connectomes differ in the technical parameters, parcellation schemes, and methodological approaches used in their construction.
The goal of this study was to compare and quantify variability in DBS pathway activation predictions when using different structural connectomes, while using identical electrode placements and stimulation volumes in the brain.
We analyzed four example structural connectomes: 1) Horn normative connectome (whole brain), 2) Yeh population-averaged tract-to-region pathway atlas (whole brain), 3) Petersen histology-based pathway atlas (subthalamic focused), and 4) Majtanik histology-based pathway atlas (anterior thalamus focused). DBS simulations were performed with each connectome, at four generalized locations for DBS electrode placement: 1) subthalamic nucleus, 2) anterior nucleus of thalamus, 3) ventral capsule, and 4) ventral intermediate nucleus of thalamus.
The choice of connectome used in the simulations resulted in notably distinct pathway activation predictions, and quantitative analysis indicated little congruence in the predicted patterns of brain network connectivity. The Horn and Yeh tractography-based connectomes provided estimates of DBS connectivity for any stimulation location in the brain, but have limitations in their anatomical validity. The Petersen and Majtanik histology-based connectomes are more anatomically realistic, but are only applicable to specific DBS targets because of their limited representation of pathways.
The widely varying and inconsistent inferences of DBS network connectivity raises substantial concern regarding the general reliability of connectomic DBS studies, especially those that lack anatomical and/or electrophysiological validation in their analyses.
大脑的结构连接模型通常用于识别在深部脑刺激（DBS）过程中直接被激活的通路。然而，各种连接组在构建时所使用的技术参数、分割方案和方法学途径上存在差异。
本研究的目的是在大脑中使用相同的电极位置和刺激体积的情况下，比较和量化使用不同结构连接组时DBS通路激活预测的变异性。
我们分析了四个示例性结构连接组：1）霍恩标准连接组（全脑），2）叶群体平均束到区域通路图谱（全脑），3）彼得森基于组织学的通路图谱（聚焦于丘脑底核），以及4）马伊塔尼克基于组织学的通路图谱（聚焦于丘脑前核）。对每个连接组进行DBS模拟，在DBS电极放置的四个通用位置进行：1）丘脑底核，2）丘脑前核，3）腹侧囊，以及4）丘脑腹中间核。
模拟中使用的连接组的选择导致了明显不同的通路激活预测，并且定量分析表明预测的脑网络连接模式几乎没有一致性。基于霍恩和叶的纤维束成像连接组提供了大脑中任何刺激位置的DBS连接性估计，但在解剖学有效性方面存在局限性。基于彼得森和马伊塔尼克组织学的连接组在解剖学上更符合实际，但由于其通路表示有限，仅适用于特定的DBS靶点。
DBS网络连接性的广泛不同且不一致的推断引发了对连接组学DBS研究的一般可靠性的重大关注，特别是那些在分析中缺乏解剖学和/或电生理验证的研究。
