IntroductionThere is some debate on the relationship between essential tremor with rest tremor (rET) and the classic ET syndrome, and only few MRI studies compared ET and rET patients. This study aimed to explore structural cortical differences between ET and rET, to improve the knowledge of these tremor syndromes.MethodsThirty-three ET patients, 30 rET patients and 45 control subjects (HC) were enrolled. Several MR morphometric variables (thickness, surface area, volume, roughness, mean curvature) of brain cortical regions were extracted using Freesurfer on T1-weighted images and compared among groups. The performance of a machine learning approach (XGBoost) using the extracted morphometric features was tested in discriminating between ET and rET patients.ResultsrET patients showed increased roughness and mean curvature in some fronto-temporal areas compared with HC and ET, and these metrics significantly correlated with cognitive scores. Cortical volume in the left pars opercularis was also lower in rET than in ET patients. No differences were found between ET and HC. XGBoost discriminated between rET and ET with mean AUC of 0.86 +/- 0.11 in cross-validation analysis, using a model based on cortical volume. Cortical volume in the left pars opercularis was the most informative feature for classification between the two ET groups.ConclusionOur study demonstrated higher cortical involvement in fronto-temporal areas in rET than in ET patients, which may be linked to the cognitive status. A machine learning approach based on MR volumetric data demonstrated that these two ET subtypes can be distinguished using structural cortical features.

Cortical involvement in essential tremor with and without rest tremor: a machine learning study

Bianco M. G.;Quattrone A.;Sarica A.;Aracri F.;Calomino C.;Caligiuri M. E.;Novellino F.;Nistico R.;Buonocore J.;Vaccaro M. G.;
2023-01-01

Abstract

IntroductionThere is some debate on the relationship between essential tremor with rest tremor (rET) and the classic ET syndrome, and only few MRI studies compared ET and rET patients. This study aimed to explore structural cortical differences between ET and rET, to improve the knowledge of these tremor syndromes.MethodsThirty-three ET patients, 30 rET patients and 45 control subjects (HC) were enrolled. Several MR morphometric variables (thickness, surface area, volume, roughness, mean curvature) of brain cortical regions were extracted using Freesurfer on T1-weighted images and compared among groups. The performance of a machine learning approach (XGBoost) using the extracted morphometric features was tested in discriminating between ET and rET patients.ResultsrET patients showed increased roughness and mean curvature in some fronto-temporal areas compared with HC and ET, and these metrics significantly correlated with cognitive scores. Cortical volume in the left pars opercularis was also lower in rET than in ET patients. No differences were found between ET and HC. XGBoost discriminated between rET and ET with mean AUC of 0.86 +/- 0.11 in cross-validation analysis, using a model based on cortical volume. Cortical volume in the left pars opercularis was the most informative feature for classification between the two ET groups.ConclusionOur study demonstrated higher cortical involvement in fronto-temporal areas in rET than in ET patients, which may be linked to the cognitive status. A machine learning approach based on MR volumetric data demonstrated that these two ET subtypes can be distinguished using structural cortical features.
2023
Cortical thickness
Essential tremor plus
Machine learning
Rest tremor
Roughness
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12317/86897
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 3
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact