Keywords: Neuro, Diffusion/other diffusion imaging techniques
Motivation: Congenital heart disease (CHD) negatively impacts brain development and cognition.
Goal(s): We aim to elucidate the role of clinical and environmental factors on brain development and cognition.
Approach: A cumulative clinical risk (CCR) score derived from neonatal, cardiac, and neurological variables, brain connectivity metrics using diffusion-MRI, and cognitive outcomes were obtained in 53 CHD adolescents and 75 controls.
Results: Higher CCR scores correlated with weaker brain network strength in a fronto-parietal-thalamic network, lower network segregation and poorer cognitive function, independent of family-environmental factors. These findings underscore the need for early risk assessment to predict brain development and aid vulnerable adolescents with CHD.
Impact: Adolescents with congenital heart disease demonstrate altered brain networks, particularly those who face a cumulative exposure to multiple risk factors over time. Early assessment of risk load could help predict brain development and support the most vulnerable patients early on.
1. Latal B. Neurodevelopmental Outcomes of the Child with Congenital Heart Disease. Clin Perinatol. 2016;43(1):173-185. doi:10.1016/j.clp.2015.11.012
2. Ehrler M, Bellinger DC, Cassidy AR, Newburger JW, Calderon J. Social cognition and behavioral outcomes in congenital heart disease: profiles and neuropsychiatric comorbidities. Child Neuropsychology. Published online 2023. doi:10.1080/09297049.2023.2196398
3. Sanz JH, Wang J, Berl MM, Armour AC, Cheng YI, Donofrio MT. Executive Function and Psychosocial Quality of Life in School Age Children with Congenital Heart Disease. Journal of Pediatrics. 2018;202:63-69. doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2018.07.018
4. Feldmann M, Guo T, Miller SP, et al. Delayed maturation of the structural brain connectome in neonates with congenital heart disease. Brain Commun. 2020;2(2). doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcaa209
5. Bhroin MN, Seada SA, Bonthrone AF, et al. Reduced structural connectivity in cortico-striatal-thalamic network in neonates with congenital heart disease. Neuroimage Clin. 2020;28. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2020.102423
6. Schmithorst VJ, Votava-Smith JK, Tran N, et al. Structural network topology correlates of microstructural brain dysmaturation in term infants with congenital heart disease. Hum Brain Mapp. 2018;39(11):4593-4610. doi:10.1002/hbm.24308
7. Panigrahy A, Schmithorst VJ, Wisnowski JL, et al. Relationship of white matter network topology and cognitive outcome in adolescents with d-transposition of the great arteries. Neuroimage Clin. 2015;7:438-448. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2015.01.013
8. Ehrler M, Naef N, Tuura ROG, Latal B. Executive function and brain development in adolescents with severe congenital heart disease (Teen Heart Study): protocol of a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2019;9(10). doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-032363
9. Fadnavis S, Batson J, Garyfallidis E. Patch2Self: Denoising Diffusion MRI with Self-Supervised Learning.
10. Tournier JD, Smith R, Raffelt D, et al. MRtrix3: A fast, flexible and open software framework for medical image processing and visualisation. Neuroimage. 2019;202. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116137
11. Kellner E, Dhital B, Kiselev VG, Reisert M. Gibbs-ringing artifact removal based on local subvoxel-shifts. Magn Reson Med. 2016;76(5):1574-1581. doi:10.1002/mrm.26054
12. Smith SM. Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum Brain Mapp. 2002;17(3):143-155. doi:10.1002/hbm.10062
13. Dhollander T, Connelly A. A Novel Iterative Approach to Reap the Benefits of Multi-Tissue CSD from Just Single-Shell (+b=0) Diffusion MRI Data. Vol 24.; 2016.
14. Dhollander T, Mito R, Raffelt D, Connelly A. Improved white matter response function estimation for 3-tissue constrained spherical deconvolution. Proc Intl Soc Mag Reson Med. Published online 2019. https://cds.ismrm.org/protected/19MProceedings/PDFfiles/0555.html
NBS-derived subnetwork with lower network connectivity strength in patients compared to controls
Note. Network contains 421 edges connecting 130 nodes. A) Box plots representing group comparison of mean subnetwork edge strength. The lower/upper box border=the first/third quartile. Thick line=median. Dots=outliers. B) Circular graph. _L=left hemisphere, _R=right hemisphere. Lines represent significant edges, the darker the stronger the effect. Colored edges connect nodes of the same brain region. Grey edges connect nodes of different brain regions.
Association between network segregation, estimated by local efficiency, and cumulative clinical risk score
Note. Local efficiency was log transformed to reach normal distribution of residuals. The model was corrected for sex and age. ß=standardized regression coefficient. p=p-value. * p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001. Line=regression line. Dots=individuals. Grey area=standard error.
NBS-derived subnetwork where lower network connectivity strength is associated with more cumulative clinical risk
Note: Network contains 57 edges connecting 39 nodes. A) ß=standardized regression coefficient. p=p-value. *** p<0.001. Line=regression line. Dots=individuals. Grey area=standard error. B) Circular graph. _L=left hemisphere, _R=right hemisphere. Lines represent significant edges, the darker the stronger the effect. Colored edges are connecting nodes of the same brain region. Grey edges connect nodes of different brain regions.