PMC9537947_01
Method pipeline. (A) The resting state network (RSN) atlas in CONN toolbox, which composed of 32 ROIs grouped into 8 networks. (B) Pipeline of the estimations of dynamic and static functional connectivity (dFC, sFC). DMN, default mode network; SMN, sensorimotor network; Vis, visual network; SN, salience network; DAN, dorsal attention network; FPN, frontal parietal network; Lan, language network; Cb, cerebellum.
fnins-16-987223-g001.jpg
PMC9537947_01_fnins-16-987223-g001.jpg
F1
The analysis pipeline is shown in Figure 1.
Static functional connectivity (FC) matrices and the cluster centroids of the dynamic FC matrices of the FBSS subject and the healthy controls (HC). Dashed boxes highlighted the distinct differences of the FC patterns observed between the FBSS patient and the HC groups.
fnins-16-987223-g002.jpg
PMC9537947_01_fnins-16-987223-g002.jpg
F2
In summary, the differences between our subject and HCs are: (1) decreased FC within salience network; (2) decreased FC connectivity between DMN and sensorimotor, salience and visual, salience and cerebellum; (3) increased FC within the visual network; and (4) increased FC between visual and cerebellum, as well as salience and language (Figure 2). DMN, language, and visual networks were observed in the FBSS subject. Decreased FC of the sensorimotor network coupling with the DMN, salience, dorsal attention networks were seen in the FBSS subject (Figure 2).
The fraction rate (%) and mean dwell time (number of windows) of each brain state calculated from the FBSS subject and the healthy controls (HC).
fnins-16-987223-g003.jpg
PMC9537947_01_fnins-16-987223-g003.jpg
F3
Quantitative metrics of dFCs revealed that FBSS patient seemed to have a trending of increased mean dwell time in a single dynamic state, whereas the healthy group showed relatively more distributed mean dwell time across the dynamic states (Figure 3).