Limits...
Neuroanatomical substrates for the volitional regulation of heart rate.

Jones CL, Minati L, Nagai Y, Medford N, Harrison NA, Gray M, Ward J, Critchley HD - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: In contrast, activation of ventrolateral prefrontal and parietal cortices occurred when attempting to decrease heart rate.Biofeedback enhanced activity within occipito-temporal cortices, but there was no significant interaction with task conditions.Activity in regions including pregenual anterior cingulate and ventral striatum reflected the magnitude of successful task performance, which was negatively related to subclinical anxiety symptoms.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Clinical Imaging Sciences Centre, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex Brighton, UK ; Department of Psychiatry and Sackler Centre for Consciousness Science, Clinical Imaging Sciences Centre, University of Sussex Brighton, UK.

ABSTRACT
The control of physiological arousal can assist in the regulation of emotional state. A subset cortical and subcortical brain regions are implicated in autonomic control of bodily arousal during emotional behaviors. Here, we combined human functional neuroimaging with autonomic monitoring to identify neural mechanisms that support the volitional regulation of heart rate, a process that may be assisted by visual feedback. During functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), 15 healthy adults performed an experimental task in which they were prompted voluntarily to increase or decrease cardiovascular arousal (heart rate) during true, false, or absent visual feedback. Participants achieved appropriate changes in heart rate, without significant modulation of respiratory rate, and were overall not influenced by the presence of visual feedback. Increased activity in right amygdala, striatum and brainstem occurred when participants attempted to increase heart rate. In contrast, activation of ventrolateral prefrontal and parietal cortices occurred when attempting to decrease heart rate. Biofeedback enhanced activity within occipito-temporal cortices, but there was no significant interaction with task conditions. Activity in regions including pregenual anterior cingulate and ventral striatum reflected the magnitude of successful task performance, which was negatively related to subclinical anxiety symptoms. Measured changes in respiration correlated with posterior insula activation and heart rate, at a more lenient threshold, change correlated with insula, caudate, and midbrain activity. Our findings highlight a set of brain regions, notably ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, supporting volitional control of cardiovascular arousal. These data are relevant to understanding neural substrates supporting interaction between intentional and interoceptive states related to anxiety, with implications for biofeedback interventions, e.g., real-time fMRI, that target emotional regulation.

No MeSH data available.


(A) Plots the group effects of objective and feedback on heart rate. There was a significant main effect of objective (p < 0.05) but no interaction of objective and feedback. (B) Breathing rate, no significant main effects or interactions were found. Error bars show SEM.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4373272&req=5

Figure 3: (A) Plots the group effects of objective and feedback on heart rate. There was a significant main effect of objective (p < 0.05) but no interaction of objective and feedback. (B) Breathing rate, no significant main effects or interactions were found. Error bars show SEM.

Mentions: Heart rate changed in accordance with the task instructions: across participants, heart rate averaged 76 bpm for the intended arousal condition compared to 72 bpm for the intended relaxation blocks. Thus task objective had a significant effect on heart rate, F(2,14) = 19.2, p < 0.01, η2 = 0.58, with (see Figures 2 and 3A). Surprisingly, however, there was no suprathreshold main effect of feedback type on heart rate across participants and no overall interaction between objective and feedback on heart rate. This suggests that as a group, participants were able to increase or decrease their heart rate according to the objective, but the presence of feedback did not significantly impact performance. There was a trend for heart rate to increase more in the accurate biofeedback condition during the intended arousal conditions (Figures 2A and 3A).


Neuroanatomical substrates for the volitional regulation of heart rate.

Jones CL, Minati L, Nagai Y, Medford N, Harrison NA, Gray M, Ward J, Critchley HD - Front Psychol (2015)

(A) Plots the group effects of objective and feedback on heart rate. There was a significant main effect of objective (p < 0.05) but no interaction of objective and feedback. (B) Breathing rate, no significant main effects or interactions were found. Error bars show SEM.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4373272&req=5

Figure 3: (A) Plots the group effects of objective and feedback on heart rate. There was a significant main effect of objective (p < 0.05) but no interaction of objective and feedback. (B) Breathing rate, no significant main effects or interactions were found. Error bars show SEM.
Mentions: Heart rate changed in accordance with the task instructions: across participants, heart rate averaged 76 bpm for the intended arousal condition compared to 72 bpm for the intended relaxation blocks. Thus task objective had a significant effect on heart rate, F(2,14) = 19.2, p < 0.01, η2 = 0.58, with (see Figures 2 and 3A). Surprisingly, however, there was no suprathreshold main effect of feedback type on heart rate across participants and no overall interaction between objective and feedback on heart rate. This suggests that as a group, participants were able to increase or decrease their heart rate according to the objective, but the presence of feedback did not significantly impact performance. There was a trend for heart rate to increase more in the accurate biofeedback condition during the intended arousal conditions (Figures 2A and 3A).

Bottom Line: In contrast, activation of ventrolateral prefrontal and parietal cortices occurred when attempting to decrease heart rate.Biofeedback enhanced activity within occipito-temporal cortices, but there was no significant interaction with task conditions.Activity in regions including pregenual anterior cingulate and ventral striatum reflected the magnitude of successful task performance, which was negatively related to subclinical anxiety symptoms.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Clinical Imaging Sciences Centre, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex Brighton, UK ; Department of Psychiatry and Sackler Centre for Consciousness Science, Clinical Imaging Sciences Centre, University of Sussex Brighton, UK.

ABSTRACT
The control of physiological arousal can assist in the regulation of emotional state. A subset cortical and subcortical brain regions are implicated in autonomic control of bodily arousal during emotional behaviors. Here, we combined human functional neuroimaging with autonomic monitoring to identify neural mechanisms that support the volitional regulation of heart rate, a process that may be assisted by visual feedback. During functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), 15 healthy adults performed an experimental task in which they were prompted voluntarily to increase or decrease cardiovascular arousal (heart rate) during true, false, or absent visual feedback. Participants achieved appropriate changes in heart rate, without significant modulation of respiratory rate, and were overall not influenced by the presence of visual feedback. Increased activity in right amygdala, striatum and brainstem occurred when participants attempted to increase heart rate. In contrast, activation of ventrolateral prefrontal and parietal cortices occurred when attempting to decrease heart rate. Biofeedback enhanced activity within occipito-temporal cortices, but there was no significant interaction with task conditions. Activity in regions including pregenual anterior cingulate and ventral striatum reflected the magnitude of successful task performance, which was negatively related to subclinical anxiety symptoms. Measured changes in respiration correlated with posterior insula activation and heart rate, at a more lenient threshold, change correlated with insula, caudate, and midbrain activity. Our findings highlight a set of brain regions, notably ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, supporting volitional control of cardiovascular arousal. These data are relevant to understanding neural substrates supporting interaction between intentional and interoceptive states related to anxiety, with implications for biofeedback interventions, e.g., real-time fMRI, that target emotional regulation.

No MeSH data available.