Do we need to revise the tripartite subdivision hypothesis of the human subthalamic nucleus (STN)? Response to Alkemade and Forstmann.

Details

Serval ID
serval:BIB_E35177A8D6F2
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Publication sub-type
Letter (letter): Communication to the publisher.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Do we need to revise the tripartite subdivision hypothesis of the human subthalamic nucleus (STN)? Response to Alkemade and Forstmann.
Journal
Neuroimage
Author(s)
Lambert C., Zrinzo L., Nagy Z., Lutti A., Hariz M., Foltynie T., Draganski B., Ashburner J., Frackowiak R.
ISSN
1095-9572 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1053-8119
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2015
Volume
110
Pages
1-2
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article Publication Status: ppublish Document Type: Editorial Material
Abstract
Recently in this journal, Alkemade and Forstmann again challenged the evidence for a tripartite organisation to the subthalamic nucleus (STN) (Alkemade & Forstmann 2014). Additionally, they raised specific issues with the earlier published results using 3T MRI to perform in vivo diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) based segmentation of the STN (Lambert et al. 2012). Their comments reveal a common misconception related to the underlying methodologies used, which we clarify in this reply, in addition to highlighting how their current conclusions are synonymous with our original paper. The ongoing debate, instigated by the controversies surrounding STN parcellation, raises important implications for the assumptions and methodologies employed in mapping functional brain anatomy, both in vivo and ex vivo, and reveals a fundamental emergent problem with the current techniques. These issues are reviewed, and potential strategies that could be developed to manage them in the future are discussed further.
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
18/02/2015 9:30
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:07
Usage data