| Title |
Reduced volume of gray matter in patients with trigeminal neuralgia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Imaging and Behavior, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11682-016-9529-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Meng Li, Jianhao Yan, Shumei Li, Tianyue Wang, Wenfeng Zhan, Hua Wen, Xiaofen Ma, Yong Zhang, Junzhang Tian, Guihua Jiang |
| Abstract |
Accumulating evidence from brain structural imaging studies has supported that chronic pain could induce changes in brain gray matter volume. However, few studies have focused on the gray matter alterations of Trigeminal neuralgia (TN). In this study, twenty-eight TN patients (thirteen females; mean age, 45.86 years ±11.17) and 28 healthy controls (HC; thirteen females; mean age, 44.89 years ±7.67) were included. Using voxel-based morphometry (VBM), we detected abnormalities in gray matter volume in the TN patients. Based on a voxel-wise analysis, the TN group showed significantly decreased gray matter volume in the bilateral superior/middle temporal gyrus (STG/MTG), bilateral parahippocampus, left anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), caudate nucleus, right fusiform gyrus, and right cerebellum compared with the HC. In addition, we found that the gray matter volume in the bilateral STG/MTG was negatively correlated with the duration of TN. These results provide compelling evidence for gray matter abnormalities in TN and suggest that the duration of TN may be a critical factor associated with brain alterations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 42 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 17% |
| Researcher | 5 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 17% |
| Unknown | 13 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 21% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 19% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,443,697
of 22,851,489 outputs
Outputs from Brain Imaging and Behavior
#863
of 1,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,898
of 298,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Imaging and Behavior
#32
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,851,489 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 298,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.