Activation of Different Brain Regions in the Resting State in Parkinson’s Patients Analyzed by fNIRS

Authors

  • Yufei Lu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61173/gjfjqc79

Keywords:

fNIRS, Parkinson’s disease, deep learning techniques, diagnostic accuracy

Abstract

Despite the difficulties associated with data processing, fNIRS technology shows promise for advancing cognitive studies and Parkinson’s disease research through the integration of deep learning techniques. The veracity and dependability of fNIRS data are contingent upon meticulous data collection, robust signal processing, and an acknowledgement of its inferior spatial resolution and restricted penetration depth in comparison to fMRI. The integration of resting and task state analyses using fNIRS provides a detailed insight into Parkinson’s disease, elucidating both the intrinsic brain connectivity disruptions and the dynamic responses to cognitive challenges. This enhances the diagnostic and treatment strategies employed in this field. The integration of fNIRS with EEG, motion capture, and advanced data analysis techniques markedly enhances the diagnostic accuracy of Parkinson’s disease. This is achieved by revealing distinct brain connectivity states and movement patterns, thereby paving the way for more sophisticated diagnostic and treatment approaches. The effective management of motion artefacts in fNIRS data for Parkinson’s disease research is achieved through the utilisation of advanced algorithms, including single-channel MAR, band-pass filtering and PCA. Collectively, these algorithms enhance the signal quality and facilitate the interpretability of brain activity patterns.

References

[1] Pinti P, et al. The present and future use of functional nearinfrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for cognitive neuroscience. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2020, 1464(1): 5-29.

[2] Paulmurugan K, et al. Brain–computer interfacing using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Biosensors, 2021, 11(10): 389.

[3] Chen X, et al. Performance improvement for detecting brain function using fNIRS: A multi-distance probe configuration with PPL method. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2020, 14: [pagination unknown].

[4] Soltanlou M, Sitnikova MA, Nuerk HC, Dresler T. Applications of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in studying cognitive development: The case of mathematics Dean&Francis Yufei Lu and language. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018, 9: [pagination unknown].

[5] Pinti P, et al. Current status and issues regarding preprocessing of fNIRS neuroimaging data: An investigation of diverse signal filtering methods within a general linear model framework. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2019, 12: [pagination unknown].

[6] Bizzego A, Neoh M, Gabrieli G, Esposito G. A machine learning perspective on fNIRS signal quality control approaches. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2022, 30: 2292-2300.

[7] Eastmond C, Subedi A, De S, Intes X. Deep learning in fNIRS: A review. Neurophotonics, 2022, 9(4): 041411.

[8] Raghu S, Kothai R, Sankar. Parkinson’s Disease-Review. Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science, 2020, 8: 113-124.

[9] Parkinson’s Disease and. [Details incomplete], 2004.

[10] Poster session 3: Parkinson’s Disease. Movement Disorders, 2002, 17(S5): S115-S165.

[11] Irani F, et al. Functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS): An emerging neuroimaging technology with important applications for the study of brain disorders. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2007, 21(1): 9-37.

[12] Orihuela-Espina F, et al. Quality control and assurance in functional near infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) experimentation. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 2010, 55(13): 3701.

[13] Pfeifer MD, Scholkmann F, Labruyère R. Signal processing in functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS): Methodological differences lead to different statistical results. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2018, 11: [pagination unknown].

[14] Xu G, et al. Test-retest reliability of fNIRS in resting-state cortical activity and brain network assessment in stroke patients. Biomedical Optics Express, 2023, 14(8): 4217-4236.

[15] Logothetis NK, Wandell BA. Interpreting the BOLD signal. Annual Review of Physiology, 2004, 66: 735-769.

[16] Biswal BB, et al. Toward discovery science of human brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2010, 107(10): 4734-4739.

[17] Greicius MD, Krasnow B, Reiss AL, Menon V. Functional connectivity in the resting brain: A network analysis of the default mode hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2003, 100(1): 253-258.

[18] Damoiseaux JS, et al. Consistent resting-state networks across healthy subjects. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006, 103(37): 13848-13853.

[19] Lu J, et al. fNIRS-based brain state transition features to signify functional degeneration after Parkinson’s Disease. Journal of Neural Engineering, 2022, 19(4): 046038.

[20] Wen D, et al. Task and non-task brain activation differences for assessment of depression and anxiety by fNIRS. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2021, 12.

[21] Wen D, et al. Task and non-task brain activation differences for assessment of depression and anxiety by fNIRS. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2021, 12.

[22] Abtahi M, et al. Merging fNIRS-EEG brain monitoring and body motion capture to distinguish Parkinson’s Disease. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2020, 28(6): 1246-1253.

[23] Lu J, et al. An fNIRS-based dynamic functional connectivity analysis method to signify functional neurodegeneration of Parkinson’s Disease. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2023, 31: 1199-1207.

[24] Bonilauri A, Sangiuliano Intra F, Baselli G, Baglio F. Assessment of fNIRS signal processing pipelines: Towards clinical applications. Applied Sciences, 2022, 12(1): 316.

[25] Chaddad A, Kamrani E, Lan JL, Sawan M. Denoising fNIRS signals to enhance brain imaging diagnosis. 2013 29th Southern Biomedical Engineering Conference, 2013.

Downloads

Published

2024-12-31