Why the study?
Heart rate variability is regularly assessed in neuroimaging studies, but the influence of a loud and cramped MRI environment on resting HRV measures required investigation.
Does the MRI environment influence resting HRV measures compared to a laboratory environment in healthy subjects?
Does the MRI environment influence resting HRV measures compared to a laboratory environment in healthy subjects?
The MRI environment does not systematically influence resting HRV measures when using PPG, indicating that the methodological choice of cardiac signal is more impactful than psychological factors during scanning.
Heart rate variability (HRV) is regularly assessed in neuroimaging studies as an indicator of autonomic, emotional or cognitive processes. In this study, we investigated the influence of a loud and cramped environment during magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on resting HRV measures. We compared recordings during functional MRI sessions with recordings in our autonomic laboratory (LAB) in 101 healthy subjects. In the LAB, we recorded an electrocardiogram (ECG) and a photoplethysmogram (PPG) over 15 min. During resting state functional MRI, we acquired a PPG for 15 min. We assessed anxiety levels before the scanning in each subject. In 27 participants, we performed follow-up sessions to investigate a possible effect of habituation. We found a high intra-class correlation ranging between 0.775 and 0.996, indicating high consistency across conditions. We observed no systematic influence of the MRI environment on any HRV index when PPG signals were analyzed. However, SDNN and RMSSD were significantly higher when extracted from the PPG compared to the ECG. Although we found a significant correlation of anxiety and the decrease in HRV from LAB to MRI, a familiarization session did not change the HRV outcome. Our results suggest that psychological factors are less influential on the HRV outcome during MRI than the methodological choice of the cardiac signal to analyze.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schumann et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: