Zuozhen Cao1, Zhiyong Zhao1, Qinfeng Zhu1, Keqing Zhu2, Jing Zhang3, and Dan Wu1
1Department of Biomedical Engineering, Zhejiang University, HangZhou, China, 2China Brain Bank and Department of Neurology in Second Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University, HangZhou, China, 3Department of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital and School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, HangZhou, China
Synopsis
Keywords: Brain Connectivity, Diffusion/other diffusion imaging techniques, Ex-vivo, hippocampus, structure connectivity
Hippocampus is a critical brain structure associated
with many brain functions. The connectivity between hippocampal sub-regions and
cerebral cortex hasn’t been fully characterized, and spatial resolution is the
key to resolve such connectivity. We utilized 3D high-resolution
ex vivo diffusion MRI (dMRI) at 7T to investigate the structure connectivity
between hippocampal sub-regions and cortex and compared the results with in
vivo data. We found that different sub-regions demonstrated unique fiber projections
to cortex, and the high-resolution ex-vivo dMRI resulted in more connections with
temporal-occipital lobe and less connections to central gyrus and frontal lobe,
compared to lower-resolution in vivo dMRI.
Introduction
Hippocampus
is a critical brain structure associated with many funcitons. Hippocampal-cortical
connections play important roles in reflecting aging process(1), memory(2), navigation(3), and different
sub-regions of the hippocampus, such as CA1, CA3, dentate
gyrus (DG), take different functional roles and may be connected with
different areas of the cortex(4-8). Investigation of the subregional
connectivity requires high-resolution and thereby is challenging with in vivo
data. A previous study(6) reported hippocampal-cortical
connectivity pattern with in vivo diffusion MRI (dMRI) based on 1.05 mm resolution
Human Connectome Project (HCP)(9) data without further validations. Here,
we performed 3D high-resolution dMRI of ex vivo human brain at 7T and
quantified the projections from hippocampal subregions to the cortex. We
compared results from the original high-resolution and downsampled
lower-resolution data, and also compared the ex vivo data with in vivo data
from HCP that were also acquired at 7T.Methods
Data acquisition:
For the ex-vivo data, brain samples were collected from three normal subjects
(right hemispheres, aged between 54-64 years old, males). dMRI data were
acquired at a 7T Siemens MAGNETOM scanner using a 3D diffusion-weighted steady
state free precession (DW-SSFP) sequence with the following parameters: TR/TE =
29/21 ms, resolution = 0.8*0.8*0.8 mm³,
FOV = 180*113*82 mm³, 10 b0 + 60 b6000 s/mm.
For
in-vivo data, we selected 11 healthy adults (aged between 26-35 years old) from
HCP database (https://www.humanconnectome.org/),
which were scanned on a 7T Siemens system, with a 2D DW-EPI sequence at TR/TE =
7000/71.2 ms, resolution = 1.05*1.05*1.05 mm³,
FOV = 182*218*182 mm³, 15 b0 + 64 b1000 s/mm²
+ 64 b2000 s/mm².
Data processing: The
processing pipeline is shown in Figure 1. After preprocessing, for in-vivo
data, we used FreeSurfer7(10) to obtain
segmentation of cortex and hippocampus based on the T1w images and then
transformed the segmentation to dMRI space. For ex-vivo data, we transformed
the dMRI (half brain) to the MNI space by affine and nonlinear registration to
obtain the segmentation. Downstram analysis was the same for in-vivo and
ex-vivo datasets. Probabilistic fiber tracking was performed with the iFOD2
algorithm in MRtrix3(11), using eight hippocampal sub-regions
as seeds, including presubiculum, subiculum, CA1, CA3, CA4, granule
cell-molecular layer–dentate gyrus (GC-ML-DG), molecular layer (ML) and hippocampal
tail (HT) and cortex as target region.
To
quantifiy the hippocampal-cortical projection profiles, we calculated the sum
of tract density from each hippocample subregtion to the cortex parcels, which
was averaged over all subjects. In order to evaluate the reproducibility of the
subregion-specific fiber tracking, a template image was generated from all subjects
using MRtrix3 and ANTS(12), and individual tract
density maps were compared with the template image based on the similarity
between two images. Results
Here
we downsampled the 0.8mm isotropic ex-vivo images to 1.05 mm isotropic, so that
we could compared ex vivo tracktography at different resolutions and ex vivo
and in vivo data at matched resolution. Only the right hemisphere of in-vivo
brain was used to match the ex-vivo sample. Probabilistic tract density maps with
seeds in each hippocample sub-region were shown for the ex vivo and in vivo
data at different resolutions in Figure 2. Distinct hippocample cortical
projection patterns can be found. For presublicum, subiculum and HT, tracts mainly
were connected temporal and occipital lobe, while the other sub-regions also
projected to the medial-posterior parietal lobe. Reduction of resolution by
downsampling led to a reduction of parietal projections comparing the 0.8mm and
1.05mm ex vivo results. The in vivo tractography showed much denser connection
with the frontal lobe and medial parietal lobe.
The
mean projection intensity maps in Figure 3 demonstrated similar findings. The
1.05 mm ex-vivo data showed more connection with superior frontal lobe and
central gyrus than the 0.8mm data, indicating possible false positives to these
cortical regions due to insufficient resolution. The in-vivo data at the same
resolution showed similar projection patterns with the 1.05 mm ex viov data, but
even less projection to temporal-occipital lobe and more connections with the
central gyrus in partial lobe.
The
similarity matrix in Figure 4 showed the reproducibility between subjects wass
generally high (>0.7) for both ex vivo and in vivo data, except for CA4 and
HT in in-vivo group.Discussion and Conclusion
In
this study, we used both ex-vivo and in-vivo dMRI to characterize the structure
connectivity between hippocampal sub-regions and cortex. Results revealed that:
(1) the hippocampal sub-regions had unique connectivity patterns with cortex.
(2) compared to lower resolution in vivo data, high resolution ex-vivo dMRI pointed
to denser connctions between hippocampus and temporal-occipital lobe, which is
associated with memory(13) and visual
functiuons, and less connections with central gyrus, which was agree with
previous study(14). The difference in connectivity
pattern may be associated with the resolution difference, acquisition protocol,
sample preparation, as well as biological differences before and after
fixation. Acknowledgements
This
work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s
Republic of China (2018YFE0114600), the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (61801424, 81971606, 82122032, 2021ZD0200202), and the Science and
Technology Department of Zhejiang Province (202006140, 2022C03057).References
1.Elsaid
NMH, Coupe P, Saykin AJ, Wu YC. Structural connectivity mapping in human
hippocampal-subfields using super-resolution hybrid diffusion imaging: a
feasibility study. Neuroradiology. 2022;64(10):1989-2000.
2.Llufriu S, Rocca MA, Pagani E,
Riccitelli GC, Solana E, Colombo B, et al. Hippocampal-related memory network
in multiple sclerosis: A structural connectivity analysis. Mult Scler.
2019;25(6):801-10.
3.Rolls ET. Hippocampal spatial view
cells for memory and navigation, and their underlying connectivity in humans.
Hippocampus. 2022.
4.Deuker L, Doeller CF, Fell J, Axmacher
N. Human neuroimaging studies on the hippocampal CA3 region - integrating
evidence for pattern separation and completion. Front Cell Neurosci. 2014;8:64.
5. Dong H-W, Swanson LW, Chen L, Fanselow
MS, Toga AWJPotNAoS. Genomic–anatomic evidence for distinct functional domains
in hippocampal field CA1. 2009;106(28):11794-9.
6.Huang CC, Rolls ET, Hsu CH, Feng J, Lin
CP. Extensive Cortical Connectivity of the Human Hippocampal Memory System:
Beyond the "What" and "Where" Dual Stream Model. Cereb
Cortex. 2021;31(10):4652-69.
7.Kesner RP. An analysis of dentate gyrus
function (an update). Behav Brain Res. 2018;354:84-91.
8. Rockland KS, Van Hoesen GWJCC. Some
temporal and parietal cortical connections converge in CA1 of the primate
hippocampus. 1999;9(3):232-7.
9.Van Essen DC, Ugurbil K, Auerbach E,
Barch D, Behrens TE, Bucholz R, et al. The Human Connectome Project: a data
acquisition perspective. Neuroimage. 2012;62(4):2222-31.
10.Fischl B. FreeSurfer. Neuroimage.
2012;62(2):774-81.
11.Tournier JD, Smith R, Raffelt D, Tabbara
R, Dhollander T, Pietsch M, et al. MRtrix3: A fast, flexible and open software
framework for medical image processing and visualisation. Neuroimage.
2019;202:116137.
12. Avants BB, Tustison N, Song GJIj.
Advanced normalization tools (ANTS). 2009;2(365):1-35.
13.Opitz B. Memory function and the
hippocampus. Front Neurol Neurosci. 2014;34:51-9.
14.Maller JJ, Welton T, Middione M,
Callaghan FM, Rosenfeld JV, Grieve SM. Revealing the Hippocampal Connectome
through Super-Resolution 1150-Direction Diffusion MRI. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):2418.