Skip to main content
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2021 Jan 6;31(2):287–296. doi: 10.1111/jon.12825

Effects of an Allostatic Closed‐Loop Neurotechnology (HIRREM) on Brain Functional Connectivity Laterality in Military‐Related Traumatic Stress

Dale E Dagenbach 1,5, Charles H Tegeler 2,, Ashley R Morgan 3, Paul J Laurienti 3,5, Catherine L Tegeler 2, Sung W Lee 4, Lee Gerdes 6, Sean L Simpson 5,7
PMCID: PMC8005452  NIHMSID: NIHMS1663135  PMID: 33406294

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Brain asymmetries are reported in posttraumatic stress disorder, but many aspects of laterality and traumatic stress remain underexplored. This study explores lateralization changes in resting state brain network functional connectivity in a cohort with symptoms of military‐related traumatic stress, associated with use of a closed‐loop neurotechnology, HIRREM.

METHODS

Eighteen participants (17 males, mean age 41 years [SD = 7]) received 19.5 (1.1) HIRREM sessions over 12 days. Whole brain resting magnetic resonance imaging was done pre‐ and post‐HIRREM. Laterality of functional connectivity was assessed on a whole brain basis, and in six predefined networks or regions. Laterality of connectivity within networks or regions was assessed separately from laterality of connections between networks or regions.

RESULTS

Before HIRREM, significant laterality effects of connection type (ipsilateral for either side, or contralateral in either direction) were observed for the whole brain, within networks or regions, and between networks or regions. Post‐HIRREM, there were significant changes for within‐network or within‐region analysis in the motor network, and changes for between‐network or between‐region analyses for the salience network and the motor cortex.

CONCLUSIONS

Among military service members and Veterans with symptoms of traumatic stress, asymmetries of network and brain region connectivity patterns were identified prior to usage of HIRREM. A variety of changes in lateralized patterns of brain connectivity were identified postintervention. These laterality findings may inform future studies of brain connectivity in traumatic stress disorders, with potential to point to mechanisms of action for successful intervention.

Keywords: Functional MRI, HIRREM, laterality, network connectivity, posttraumatic stress

Introduction

Numerous studies have reported relative brain asymmetries in populations with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), compared to controls with or without a history of trauma. Structural neuroimaging has shown asymmetrical volumes of the hippocampus, amygdala, and other limbic regions, 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 as well as in the cerebellum. 6 Researchers have demonstrated asymmetrical patterns of activity, in frontal regions 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 and also temporoparietal regions. 7 , 8 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 Some of these investigations have been motivated by a model positing that the left and right prefrontal cortices mediate approach and withdrawal behavioral tendencies, respectively, 16 and more recent studies have examined asymmetry with a focus on specific symptom clusters within PTSD 10 or on the basis of trait versus state physiology. 11 Another impetus for such studies is provided by the bihemispheric autonomic model (BHAM) that suggests that traumatic stress may produce dominant and maladaptive asymmetries in the activity of homologous brain regions responsible for efferent autonomic signaling. 17 BHAM posits that arousal producing stressors may be associated with rightward dominance in brain regions related to autonomic management, whereas chronic stress may produce parasympathetic immobilization mediated by leftward dominance in those same regions, and therefore predicts that facilitation of adaptive symmetry across critical brain regions could be an important target for clinical interventions.

The current investigation extended the study of brain asymmetries associated with chronic stress by focusing on the lateralization of functional connectivity rather than structural or brain activation asymmetries per se. This reflects what Menon 18 has characterized as a paradigm shift in the understanding of psychiatric and neural disorders based on the analysis of alterations in functional connectivity within and between large scale intrinsic (resting state) brain networks. Studies of functional connectivity emphasize correlations in activity over time between different brain regions or nodes. Application of the tools of graph theory and network science to these data has identified relatively stable and consistent patterns of connectivity that have been used to define the large scale intrinsic brain networks Menon refers to (see Bullmore and Sporns 19 for a review of network science applications to brain imaging).

Menon's triple network model of pathology 18 highlights alterations in functional connectivity and interactions between the default mode (DMN), salience (SN), and central executive (CEN) networks as key to understanding disturbed psychological and cognitive functioning. The default mode network includes medial prefrontal cortex, the precuneus and posterior cingulate, lateral temporoparietal cortex, and the medial temporal lobe. It is implicated in self‐referential thought and interoreceptive processing. 20 The salience network includes the insula, amygdala, dorsal anterior cingulate, and the frontal poles. SN detects and processes autonomic and emotional information and directs behavior toward relevant events. 21 The central executive network includes dorsolateral prefrontal and posterior parietal cortex and is implicated in attention and executive functioning. 21 , 22 In general, the model assumes co‐activation of the SN and CEN, and deactivation of the DMN, when attention is directed outward, and the opposite pattern during inwardly focused thoughts. Consistent with this model, alterations in connectivity and interactions between the default mode network, the salience network, and the central executive network have been observed in depression, 23 Alzheimer's disease, 24 and schizophrenia. 25

Also consistent with Menon's model, multiple studies have reported altered functional connectivity patterns within and between these networks during resting states and while viewing emotionally salient stimuli in PTSD samples. 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 Among relevant findings are disturbances in the connectivity of the DMN, disturbances in switching between DMN and CEN while viewing salient stimuli, and altered SN and CEN connectivity. However, research specifically looking at the lateralization of functional connectivity in this population is lacking. The present study offers a first step toward filling this void by examining the lateralization of brain functional connectivity during a resting state observed in a cohort with symptoms of military‐related traumatic stress, before and after use of a neurotechnological clinical intervention designed to support symmetry in brain activation patterns.

The intervention used for this study, High‐resolution, relational, resonance‐based electroencephalic mirroring (HIRREM®, Brain State Technologies, Scottsdale, AZ), is a noninvasive, closed‐loop feedback, acoustic stimulation neurotechnology. 31 Two‐channel scalp recordings monitor brain electrical activity at high spectral resolutions. Specific frequencies are translated in real time into auditory tones of varying pitch and timing, and are echoed back via ear buds with as little as 4‐8 milliseconds delay. The intention is to support autocalibration, self‐adjustment, and relaxation of neural oscillatory dynamics, and shifts are observed toward improved hemispheric balance, as well as reduced hyperarousal. 32 The theoretical basis for HIRREM is supported by the paradigm of allostasis. 33

The use of HIRREM has been associated with significant reduction of self‐report symptoms of insomnia, 34 persisting symptoms following athletic concussion, 35 and perimenopausal symptoms, 36 as well as improved objective measurements of autonomic cardiovascular regulation (heart rate variability and baroreflex sensitivity). 37 Clinical outcomes associated with application of HIRREM for participants enrolled in the present study included significant improvements in multiple measures of autonomic cardiovascular regulation (SDNN, rMSSD, high frequency, low frequency, and total power, HF Alpha, sequence all, and systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressure) and significant reductions in self‐reported symptom inventory scores to 6 months following intervention completion (PTSD, insomnia, depression, and anxiety).

The PTSD Checklist—Military inventory (PCL‐M) 38 , 39 was used to evaluate symptoms of traumatic stress, which was of primary interest for this cohort. A drop of 10 points is considered as a clinically meaningful difference. 40 Through the follow‐up data collection 1 month following intervention completion, 83% of subjects reported PCL‐M scores that were at least 10 points lower than their baseline score. Significant reductions were durable through 6 months postintervention. There were also changes in network connectivity on whole brain, rest functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). 41

Based on the observed clinical changes, a theoretical orientation such as BHAM might predict a corresponding shift toward a more symmetric laterality profile. That prediction would be based on activity per se. Because the present study instead assessed the laterality of functional connectivity, the predictions are more tenuous. Previous assessments of the lateralization of brain networks assessed using functional connectivity analyses in a normal population have found differences both between networks and within networks. In one comprehensive study of normal, functional connectivity of the default mode, network was left lateralized, whereas the visual network was strongly right lateralized. Different components of the attention network and the frontal networks were left and right lateralized. Components of the sensorimotor network were left and right lateralized, although the degree of left lateralization was more pronounced. Finally, a basal ganglia network was symmetrical. 42 Given the exploratory nature of the present study, the strongest a priori predictions would be that there would be an imbalance in networks specifically associated with alterations in PTSD such as the salience network prior to treatment, and that such imbalance would be decreased posttreatment.

In the present report, the lateralization of functional connectivity was assessed using the networks in Menon's triple model (DMN, SN, and CEN) as possible loci, along with the basal ganglia because of previous research linking it to PTSD, 43 as well as motor cortex and visual cortex areas included in order to provide more complete coverage of the brain. Each of these areas was composed of multiple nodes in the network analysis. Lateralization of functional connectivity was determined by counting the number of links from all nodes in a given network or region to other nodes in the same network or region, to the homologous network or region on the contralateral side of the brain, or to other nodes outside of the network or region on the ipsilateral or contralateral side of the brain. These analyses were performed before and after the HIRREM clinical intervention in order to determine whether that intervention affected the lateralization of functional connectivity.

Methods

Participants

Eighteen participants (17 male; mean age = 41 years, SD = 6.9) were enrolled in an IRB‐approved open label pilot study conducted in the Department of Neurology at Wake Forest School of Medicine (Clinicaltrials.gov registration NCT03230890). Participants were either active duty members of the military (15) or recent Veterans (3). All participants were over the age of 18, and all had been either formally diagnosed with PTSD, had received medical treatment for traumatic stress symptoms, or had current symptoms indicative of PTSD based on a PCL‐M score of 50 or greater. Participants reported a mean of 20.5 years in service (8‐33), with eight deployments (2‐19), and reported having had symptoms of PTS lasting from 1 to 25 years. Of the 11 individuals who reported previous use of a psychoactive or sleep‐related medication, 10 had made recent adjustments to their regimen (withholding or discontinuing a medication that would entail exclusion) under the guidance of their medical provider. Eight participants had previously received cognitive behavioral therapy or psychotherapy. The most prevalent self‐reported co‐morbid health conditions included prior traumatic brain injury or concussion (15), insomnia (11), impaired memory or cognitive ability (10), depression (9), stress or anxiety (9), and tinnitus (9). Participants were recruited from a variety of sources: The Care Coalition, which serves the needs of the Special Operations community, physician referral from military facilities, physician referral from the community, referral from prior participants, or response to posted advertisement. Exclusion factors included severe hearing impairment, known seizure disorders, or the need for ongoing use of benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, antidepressants, opiates, sleep medications, stimulants, or thyroid hormones. Participants were instructed to refrain from recreational alcohol or drug use during the course of the study. There were no dropouts or serious adverse events reported.

HIRREM Sessions

Following informed consent, and as part of the enrollment data collection, baseline recordings were initially obtained for each participant in an assessment session of 45 minutes using two‐channel, three‐minute recordings from at least six paired locations on the scalp (F3/F4, C3/C4, P3/P4, T3/T4, FZ/OZ, O1/O2, FP1/FP2, and CB1/CB2). Recording for each location entailed 1 minute with eyes closed, 1 minute with eyes partially closed, and 1 minute with eyes open and performing cognitive tasks such as recalling numerical stimuli or reading from a passage.

Brainwave data from the baseline recordings were used to create individualized protocols for the initial HIRREM sessions, whereas review of data from the prior session was used for subsequent sessions. Duration of sessions was approximately 1.5‐2 hours. Typically, two sessions were completed daily, with a short break (20‐60 minutes) between them. Each session consisted of between four and 10 HIRREM protocols lasting between 5 and 40 minutes each. In these protocols, specific brain frequencies are translated into audible tones in real time that are echoed back to the participant through headphones in as little as 4 microseconds. Protocols were received with the participant sitting or reclining in a chair (Human Touch PC‐6). Some protocols were received with eyes open and others with eyes close, depending mostly upon the function of the lobe being observed based on scalp location during that particular protocol. The majority of the protocols received were with eyes closed to support the brain's internal regulation and reset. Specific protocols (varying scalp locations, design, and duration) were chosen by trained Technologists with an aim of supporting increasing hemispheric symmetry and optimal proportions of oscillation in specified frequency ranges, while keeping session duration to about 1.5‐2 hours. The mean number of sessions was 19.5 (SD = 1.1) administered over a period of 12 days.

MRI Data Acquisition

Brain imaging was done using MRI two times: once before and once just prior to departure, after completion of the HIRREM intervention. Due to scheduling needs, one participant's second scan was performed just prior to the final HIRREM session, but after completion of 18 of his 19 sessions. MRI data were acquired in a 3T Siemens Magnetom Skyra using a 32 channel head coil. Anatomical images were collected using a Magnetization Prepared Rapid Acquisition Gradient Echo (MPRAGE) sequence. fMRI images based on the blood oxygenation level‐dependent signal were acquired using echo planar imaging. Data used in the present report were acquired while the participants were in an eyes open resting state while focusing on a fixation point. Data were also collected in an eyes‐closed resting state, but these were not explored further because previous analyses of the present population found no difference between the eyes open and eyes closed conditions. 44 The MPRAGE was acquired in a sagittal plane using TR = 2,300 ms; voxel dimensions = .98 × .98 × 1.22 mm; 256 × 256 voxels; slice thickness = 1 mm. fMRI data were acquired in the axial plane using 187 images with TR = 2,000 ms and voxel dimensions of 4 × 4 × 4 mm with a resulting total scan time of 6 minutes and 14 seconds.

Brain Network Generation

Image processing used SPM8 software (http://www.fil.ion.uel.ac.uk/spm/) and MATLAB scripts previously developed in house. The MPRAGE was transformed into the axial plane and warped to fit Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) space using SPM8. The initial 8 volumes were removed from the fMRI data. Images were subsequently realigned to the first image in the series and coregistered with the structural image. The fMRI images were then normalized into MNI space using the transformation that was applied during warping of the structural image. Only voxels that overlapped with gray matter in the Automated Anatomical Labeling (AAL) atlas were retained in order to limit the analyses to gray matter. Physiological noise and low‐frequency drift were removed using a band‐pass filter of .009‐.08 Hz. 45 The six rigid‐body transformation parameters created during the realignment process and global mean time course for whole brain, whiter matter, and cerebrospinal fluid were regressed out of the functional data, 45 and image volumes with excessive motion were removed. 46

Network analyses used MATLAB scripts. Gray matter voxels obtained from the preprocessed functional data were used to create voxel‐based networks for each participant. The Pearson correlations between the time series for each voxel and every other voxel were calculated. The resulting correlation matrices were thresholded to remove weak links based on formula N = KS where N = number of nodes in the network, K = average degree or number of connections per node in the network, and S = 2.5. Analyses in the present paper focused on the networks created using the threshold of 2.5 based on previous research showing that that value yields networks with size to density ratios comparable to other naturally occurring networks. 47 This yielded networks that were undirected and unweighted with approximately equal densities across participants. 48

The regions of interest (ROIs) selected for individual network and region analyses were selected as follows: The attention network (analogous to the Central Executive Network per Menon), default mode network, and salience networks were derived from Menon's triple network model 17 and defined using the coordinates in Shirer and colleagues. 49 These consisted of large‐scale and overlapping brain regions. The basal ganglia, visual, and motor networks were defined using the scaled inclusivity from Moussa et al. 50 These maps identify functional communities across a population of 194 people and a minimum scaled inclusivity of 25 was used to threshold the networks. All left‐right assignments for these regions were based on the AAL atlas. The ROIs are shown in Figure 1.

Fig 1.

Fig 1

Maps showing location and extent of the regions of interest used in this study. Montreal Neurological Institute coordinates are listed below each slice.

Analyses

The laterality of functional connectivity was assessed first on a whole brain basis, and then in the six different specific networks or regions previously noted. For those networks or regions, the laterality of within‐network or region connectivity was analyzed separately from the lateral connections between networks or regions. Because of previous findings that gender may affect the lateralization of functional connectivity, 44 the analyses reported below were performed both with and without the one female participant. The exclusion of this participant did not change any of the statistical conclusions and therefore the analyses reported include the data from all participants.

Results

Whole Brain Connectivity Pre‐ and Post‐HIRREM

Connections across the whole brain were characterized in terms of whether they were between two left hemisphere nodes, two right hemisphere nodes, or between a left and a right hemisphere node. The mean number of connections of each type is shown in Figure 2. Because the networks constructed were undirected, the contralateral connections do not differentiate between left to right and right to left connections.

Fig 2.

Fig 2

Mean (Standard Error) within and between hemisphere functional connectivity. More contralateral connections than Left‐Left connections were observed based on repeated measures ANOVA and subsequent paired t‐tests, but no effects of time or interactions were significant. * = p < 0.05.

A 3 (type of connection: ipsilateral LL, ipsilateral RR, or contralateral LR or RL) × 2 (time of testing, pre‐ vs. post‐HIRREM) repeated measures analysis of variance was used to analyze lateralized differences in connectivity at the whole brain level. This analysis yielded a significant main effect of connection type (F(2,34) = 4.41, P < .05), but no effect of time and no interaction of type of connection with time. Subsequent paired t‐tests averaging across time showed that there were significantly more contralateral connections than L‐L connections in the whole brain data (t(17) = −3.55, P < .01). In addition, there were marginally more R‐R connections than L‐L connections (t(17) = −1.94, P < .10).

Laterality of Within Region and Within Network Connectivity Pre‐ and Post‐HIRREM

For each of the three specific networks and three ROIs in this study, the pattern of laterality of connectivity within that network or region was assessed. Node edges or connections were characterized as ipsilateral within network or region left hemisphere (LL), ipsilateral within region or network right hemisphere (RR), or within region or network across hemispheres (LR or RL). As was the case for the whole brain analyses, LR and RL connections were equivalent because the networks are undirected. The mean number of connections of each type for each region at each time is shown in Figure 3.

Fig 3.

Fig 3

Mean (Standard Error) within‐network or within‐region functional connectivity by hemisphere. Repeated measures ANOVAs and subsequent paired t‐tests showed (1) Attention Network Left‐Left (LL) and Right‐Right (RR) > contralateral; (2) DMN LL > RR, LL > contralateral; (3) Salience Network RR > contralateral, contralateral > LL; (4) Basal Ganglia contralateral > LL and RR, RR > LL; (5) Motor Cortex contralateral > LL; main effect of time and interaction of time and type of connection (not annotated on graph); and (6) Visual Cortex contralateral > LL, RR > LL. * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001.

Laterality effects were statistically evaluated using 3 (type of connection) × 2 (time, pre‐ and post‐HIRREM) repeated measures analyses of variance. Separate ANOVAs were conducted for each brain network or region. Main effects or interactions not specifically noted below were not significant.

Within the networks associated with Menon's triple network model, there were differences in lateralization of functional connectivity consistent with previous reports based on activation, but no changes in that pattern over time. The attention network was strongly connected to itself ipsilaterally but not contralaterally, the default mode network showed a tendency toward left lateralization, and the salience network showed a tendency toward right lateralization. In the attention network, a main effect of type of connection (F(2, 34) = 42.56, P < .0001) reflected fewer contralateral connections than connections within the left hemisphere (t(17) = 8.29, P < .001) or connections within the right hemisphere (t(17) = 7.38, P < .001). The default mode network analysis yielded a main effect of type of connection (F(2, 34) = 14.98, P < .001) reflecting fewer within right hemisphere default mode connections compared to within left hemisphere default mode connections (t(17) = 5.15, P < .001) and between hemisphere default mode connections (t(17) = 4.47, P < .001). The analysis of the salience network showed a main effect of type of connection (F(2, 34) = 23.87, P < .001) reflecting more ipsilateral right hemisphere connections, followed by more bilateral connections, and then ipsilateral left hemisphere connections. The differences in the number of connections were significantly different between each type (t(17) ≥ 2.77, P ≤ .02).

For the other three regions analyzed, there were differences in the types of connections, but the only effect of time (pre‐HIRREM vs. post‐HIRREM) occurred in the motor cortex. Connection type varied significantly within the basal ganglia (F(2,34) = 25.64, P < .001), reflecting more contralateral connections than ipsilateral connections within the left hemisphere (t(17) = 6.08, P < .001) or ipsilateral connections within the right hemisphere (t(17) = 3.21, P < .01). There also were more ipsilateral right hemisphere than left hemisphere connections (t(17) = 4.78, P < .001). A somewhat similar pattern occurred within the visual region: A significant main effect of connection type (F(2, 34) = 10.65, P < .001) reflected more contralateral connections than ipsilateral left hemisphere connections (t(17) = 4.31, P < .001). There were also more ipsilateral right hemisphere connections than left hemisphere connections (t(17) = 2.70, P < .02).

The motor region showed a main effect of connection (F(2,34) = 4.23, P < .05), reflecting significantly more contralateral connections than ipsilateral left hemisphere connections (t(17) = 2.22, P < .05). In addition, there was a main effect of time (F(1,17) = 5.15, P < .05) and an interaction between type and time (F(2,34) = 3.75, P < .05). The overall number of motor cortex connections decreased significantly at the second time of testing. Additionally, there were significantly more bilateral connections prior to HIRREM compared to ipsilateral left hemisphere connections (t(17) = 2.20, P = .05), whereas there were no significant differences in types of connections post‐HIRREM.

Laterality of Specific Region and Network Connectivity to Other Areas Pre‐ and Post‐HIRREM

The final set of analyses assessed the laterality of connections between the networks and specific ROIs to nodes outside of those networks or regions. Thus, analyses were based on the number of connections from a hemispheric location of a network or region (eg, left hemisphere salience network), whether the connections for the nodes from that region or network were to somewhere else in the same hemisphere, or elsewhere in the contralateral hemisphere (ipsilateral vs. contralateral). The mean number of connections of each type for each network or ROI is shown in Figure 4.

Fig 4.

Fig 4

Mean (Standard Error) between‐network or between‐region functional connectivity by hemisphere. Repeated measures ANOVAS and subsequent paired t‐tests showed: (1) Attention Network ipsilateral > contralateral; (2) DMN contralateral > ipsilateral; (3) Salience Network ipsilateral > contralateral, right > left, and hemisphere × time interaction (not annotated on graph); (4) Basal Ganglia contralateral > ipsilateral, right > left; (5) Motor contralateral > ipsilateral, right > left, type of connection interactions with time and hemisphere (not annotated); and (6) Visual contralateral > ipsilateral, right > left, hemisphere x type of connection interaction (not annotated). * = p < 0.05, ** = p < 0.01, *** = p < 0.001.

Statistical evaluation of these effects used 2 (hemisphere of network or region being evaluated) × 2 (type of connection, ipsilateral or contralateral) × 2 time (pre‐ vs. post‐HIRREM) repeated measures ANOVAs. Separate ANOVAs were performed for each network or region. Main effects or interactions not described below were not statistically significant.

The salience network showed significant main effects of hemisphere and ipsilateral/contralateral connectivity, and most importantly, an interaction of hemisphere with time (pre‐ vs. post‐HIRREM intervention). More connections involved the right hemisphere salience network (F(1,17) = 25.21, P < .001) and there were more ipsilateral than contralateral connections (F(1,17) = 7.51, P < .02). The interaction of hemisphere with time of testing (F(1,17) = 5.08, P <.05) reflected an increase in connections involving the left salience network post‐HIRREM compared to pre‐HIRREM, whereas the opposite pattern was true for the right salience network, although more connections involved the right salience network at both times. More specifically, the salience network in the left hemisphere increased an average of 2,470 connections, or 6.5%, whereas the salience network in the right hemisphere decreased an average of 2,127 connections, or 4.0%.

The analyses of the attention and the default mode networks showed no effects of hemisphere being evaluated, but did yield significant, although contrasting, main effects of the ipsilateral versus contralateral factor. The attention network had more ipsilateral connections than contralateral (F (1,17) = 22.94, P < .001). In contrast, the default mode network had more contralateral than ipsilateral connections (F(1,17) = 17.40, P ≤ .001).

The analyses of the other ROIs showed similar effects for all three: A main effect of hemisphere occurred for each region (F(1,17) = 11.35, P < .01 for the basal ganglia; F(1,17) = 15.74, P < .01 for the motor cortex; and F(1,17) = 15.82, P < .01 for the visual cortex), with each showing more right than left hemisphere connections. A main effect of type of connection also occurred for each region (F(1,17) = 72.14, P < .001 for the basal ganglia; F(1,17) = 12.23, P < .01 for the motor cortex; and F(1,17) = 47.98, P < .001 for the visual cortex), with each region having more contralateral than ipsilateral connections. No main effect of time was significant. Hemisphere × type of connection interactions also occurred for the motor (F(1,17) = 17.10, P < .001) and visual regions (F(1,17) = 9.23, P < .01). In both cases, this reflected more right than left hemisphere ipsilateral connections (t ≥ 3.87, P < .001), along with no significant difference in contralateral connections. Finally, an interaction of time and type of connection occurred for the motor cortex (F(1,17) = 5.11, P < .05), reflecting a large decrease in contralateral connections along with a slight increase in ipsilateral connections.

Post‐HIRREM Brain Lateralization and PTSD Symptoms

In a further check of the relationship between brain lateralization and PTSD symptoms in this sample, we correlated the symptoms reported on the PCL‐M inventory with whole brain lateralization, and with lateralization in the SN. PCL‐M scores were from baseline and immediately after the HIRREM sessions.

The whole brain analyses correlated type of connection (L‐L, R‐R [or L‐R]) as a percent of the total number of connections (L‐L + R‐R + L‐R) with PCL‐M scores. Pre‐HIRREM L‐L scores were unrelated to symptoms at any point. However, pre‐HIRREM R‐R scores correlated significantly with symptoms at baseline (r(16) = .53, P = .02) and after the HIRREM sessions (r(16) = .59, P. = .01). Pre‐HIRREM L‐R scores were significantly negatively correlated with symptoms at baseline (r = –.48, P = .04) and after the HIRREM sessions (r = –.54, P = .02). There were only trends in the correlations of post‐HIRREM type of connection scores with symptoms: L‐L scores were negatively correlated with symptoms after HIRREM (r (16) = –.46, P = .053), whereas R‐R scores were positively correlated (r(16) = .44, P = .07).

The relationship between symptoms and lateralization in the SN was analyzed in analogous manner, but no significant relationships were observed.

Discussion

Extensive evidence indicates a relationship between traumatic stress and hemispheric lateralization of brain activity. 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 To date, however, there has been little investigation regarding the presence of laterality patterns in network or brain regional connectivity under such conditions, and whether laterality patterns may change after a successful therapeutic intervention. The present study reports preliminary findings with respect to these questions based on a sample of military service members and recent Veterans with symptoms of military‐related traumatic stress who undertook usage of HIRREM, a closed‐loop, allostatic, echoing neurotechnology that has previously been shown to decrease asymmetries in brain activity. 32

At baseline, there were numerous main effects of connection type (ipsilateral for either side, or contralateral in either direction), for the whole brain as well as within networks or regions, and between networks or regions. In populations with no history of trauma, asymmetries of lateralization in functional networks have been demonstrated for the default mode, 51 , 52 motor regions, 53 , 54 and other networks, 55 , 56 and it may be that baseline findings shown in this study were within the range of “healthy variability.” Alternatively, most of the participants were affiliated with special operations and these changes may have been a consequence of neuroplastic changes from the intensive training required to become a special operations officer. Or, some portion of the baseline findings may have been related to the subjects’ traumatic stress history. Adjudication of these interpretations may be possible by comparison of the presently reported asymmetries with results from future hypothesis‐driven studies.

Regarding the outcomes that could be related to the intervention, a finding of particular interest was in between the network analysis: After HIRREM, there was a reduction in connections between the right hemispheric nodes of the salience network, and other regions. The salience network serves to detect and attend to goal relevant stimuli in the environment, 57 and it appears to show hyperconnectivity in PTSD. 58 Postinterventional decrease in connectivity between the right side of the salience network and other regions may have reflected decreased triggering of the sympathetic nervous system, potentially consistent with previously reported trends for decrease in rightward dominant temporal lobe electrical asymmetry, or improved HRV. 32 , 37 , 59 However, the correlations between symptoms reported on the PCL‐M and lateralization of the SN were not significant and thus suggest caution in this interpretation. The correlations between whole brain lateralization scores and the PCL‐M scores were significant in a manner consistent with the BHAM framework. 17 The percentage of R‐R connections was positively correlated with symptoms, which fits with the postulate of linkage between sympathetic hyperarousal and many high arousal state symptoms associated with PTSD. The percentage of bilateral L‐R connections showed a negative correlation with symptoms. This, along with the trend for negative correlation of L‐L connections with symptoms post‐HIRREM, also supports the BHAM postulate that better balance and improved parasympathetic influence is associated with reduced symptoms and the observed improvement in autonomic cardiovascular regulation (heart rate variability).

Alternatively, yet not mutually exclusively, the significance of these changes may rest in their indication of a change in dynamics at larger scales. It may be that, consistent with the allostasis model for “whole‐brain” therapeutic strategy 41 as well as other data from the study of EEG‐based intervention, 60 , 61 successful remediation of traumatic stress effects should be demonstrated as an array of changes across circuits or subsystems. As noted previously, numerous studies now characterize PTSD as a disorder of connectivity rather than abnormality of a specific neural area, and they point to the need for treatments that impact connectivity patterns, 60 and assessment of effects that take such changes into account.

These preliminary findings must be qualified by the limitations of the present study. The principal limitation of this study lay in its single‐arm design. A comparison arm was impractical because of the nature and timing of the training regimen of special operations officers as well as the reality that there is significant underreporting of symptomatology in military service members. 62 This was a small sample with associated issues such as limited power. We did not apply statistical techniques to adjust for multiple comparisons in that such an approach may have been excessively conservative for our exploratory objectives, and could obscure changes that might arise as correlated biological effects. It should also be noted that the method of counting the number of connections between nodes is relatively coarse, and moreover many of the ROIs used were relatively large such that other changes in connectivity may not have been detected. Because a majority of the participants reported prior traumatic brain injury or concussion as comorbid medical conditions, it is possible that this may have been the etiology of some of the baseline laterality findings. Finally, this study assesses changes in connectivity before and after the HIRREM intervention at the group level rather than at the individual level.

In conclusion, this study showed numerous asymmetries of network and brain region connectivity patterns at baseline in a group with symptoms of military‐related traumatic stress, mostly from special operations, prior to usage of HIRREM. After intervention, there were several changes compared to their baseline patterns, including a reduction in connections between the right hemispheric nodes of the salience network and other networks and regions. These findings provide further evidence for the value of using network connectivity analysis, including laterality, to understand traumatic stress effects, and may point to mechanisms of action for successful clinical intervention.

Acknowledgments and Disclosures: Katelyn McNab provided assistance with statistical analyses. Nancy C. Buchheimer assisted with the IRB approval and research grant management. Lindsay J. Howard and Krystal D. Schmidt helped with provision of the HIRREM intervention and the organization of data for analysis. Dr. Hossam A. Shaltout created Figures 2‐4. The primary financial support for this study was through the Joint Capability Technology Demonstration Program within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics) via a contract with the U.S. Special Operations Command (H92222‐14‐P‐0012). It is also supported by a research grant from The Susanne Marcus Collins Foundation, Inc. Sean L. Simpson was supported by NIBIB R01EB024559, and Wake Forest Clinical and Translational Science Institute (WF CTSI) NCATS UL1TR001420. Opinions, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Department of Defense. All coauthors affiliated with Wake Forest University or Wake Forest School of Medicine have no conflicts to report. Dr. Sung W. Lee was previously an employee of Brain State Technologies, and Lee Gerdes is employed by Brain State Technologies.

References

  • 1. Wignall EL, Dickson JM, Vaughan P, et al. Smaller hippocampal volume in patients with recent‐onset posttraumatic stress disorder. Biol Psychiatry 2004;56:832‐6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Karl A, Schaefer M, Malta LS, et al. A meta‐analysis of structural brain abnormalities in PTSD. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2006;30:1004‐31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Thomaes K, Dorrepaal E, Draijer N, et al. Reduced anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal volumes in child abuse‐related complex PTSD. J Clin Psychiatry 2010;71:1636‐44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Ahmed F, Spottiswoode BS, Carey PD, et al. Relationship between neurocognition and regional brain volumes in traumatized adolescents with and without posttraumatic stress disorder. Neuropsychobiology 2012;66:174‐84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Weems CF, Klabunde M, Russell JD, et al. Post‐traumatic stress and age variation in amygdala volumes among youth exposed to trauma. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2015;10:1661‐7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Baldacara L, Jackowski AP, Schoedl A, et al. Reduced cerebellar left hemisphere and vermal volume in adults with PTSD from a community sample. J Psychiatr Res 2011;45:1627‐33. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Kemp AH, Griffiths K, Felmingham KL, et al. Disorder specificity despite comorbidity: resting EEG alpha asymmetry in major depressive disorder and post‐traumatic stress disorder. Biol Psychol 2010;85:350‐4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Kim SH, Cornwell B, Kim SE. Individual differences in emotion regulation and hemispheric metabolic asymmetry. Biol Psychol 2012;89:382‐6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Meyer T, Smeets T, Giesbrecht T, et al. The role of frontal EEG asymmetry in post‐traumatic stress disorder. Biol Psychol 2015;108:62‐77 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Moran JK, Crombach A, Elbert T, et al. The individual contribution of DSM 5 symptom clusters of PTSD, life events, and childhood adversity to frontal oscillatory brain asymmetry in a large sample of active combatants. Biol Psychol 2017;129:305‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Meyer T, Quaedflieg C, Weijland K, et al. Frontal EEG asymmetry during symptom provocation predicts subjective responses to intrusions in survivors with and without PTSD. Psychophysiology 2018. 10.1111/psyp.12779 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Metzger LJ, Paige SR, Carson MA, et al. PTSD arousal and depression symptoms associated with increased right‐sided parietal EEG asymmetry. J Abnorm Psychol 2004;113:324‐9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Rabe S, Beauducel A, Zollner T, et al. Regional brain electrical activity in posttraumatic stress disorder after motor vehicle accident. J Abnorm Psychol 2006;115:687‐98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Engdahl B, Leuthold AC, Tan H‐R, et al. Post‐traumatic stress disorder: a right temporal lobe syndrome? J Neural Eng 2010;7:066005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Hunter M, Villarreal G, McHaffie GR, et al. Lateralized abnormalities in auditory M50 sensory gating and cortical thickness of the superior temporal gyrus in post‐traumatic stress disorder: preliminary results. Psychiatry Res 2011;191:138‐44. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Davidson RJ. Anterior cerebral asymmetry and the nature of emotion. Brain Cogn 1992;20:125‐51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Lee SW, Gerdes L, Tegeler CL, et al. A bihemispheric autonomic model for traumatic stress effects on health and behavior. Front Psychol 2014;5:843. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Menon V. Large‐scale brain networks and psychopathology: a unifying triple network model. Trends Cogn Sci 2011;15:483‐506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Bullmore E, Sporns O. Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nat Rev Neurosci 2009;10:186‐98. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Raichle ME, MacLeod AM, Snyder AZ, et al. A default mode of brain function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001;98:676‐82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Seeley WW, Menon V, Schatzberg AF, et al. Dissociable intrinsic connectivity networks for salience processing and executive control. J Neurosci 2007;27:2349‐56. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Miller EK, Cohen JD. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annu Rev Neurosci 2001;24:167‐202. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Mulders PC, van Eijndhoven PF, Schene AH, et al. Resting‐state functional connectivity in major depressive disorder: a review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2015;56:330‐44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Gomez‐Ramirez J, Wu J. Network‐based biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease: review and future directions. Front Aging Neurosci 2014;6:12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Woodward ND, Rogers B, Heckers S. Functional resting‐state networks are differentially affected in schizophrenia. Schizophr Res 2011;130:86‐93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Cisler JM, Steele JS, Lenow JK, et al. Functional reorganization of neural networks during repeated exposure to the traumatic memory in posttraumatic stress disorder: an exploratory fMRI study. J Psychiatr Res 2014;48:47‐55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Kennis M, Rademaker AR, van Rooij SJ, et al. Resting state functional connectivity of the anterior cingulate cortex in veterans with and without post‐traumatic stress disorder. Hum Brain Mapp 2015;36:99‐109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Daniels JK, McFarlane AC, Bluhm RL, et al. Switching between executive and default mode networks in posttraumatic stress disorder: alterations in functional connectivity. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2010;35:258‐66. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Bluhm RL, Williamson PC, Osuch EA, et al. Alterations in default network connectivity in posttraumatic stress disorder related to early‐life trauma. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2009;34:187‐94. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Lanius RA, Bluhm RL, Coupland NJ, et al. Default mode network connectivity as a predictor of post‐traumatic stress disorder symptom severity in acutely traumatized subjects. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2010;121:33‐40. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Gerdes L, Gerdes P, Lee SW, et al. HIRREM: a noninvasive, allostatic methodology for relaxation and auto‐calibration of neural oscillations. Brain Behav 2013;3:193‐205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Tegeler CH, Cook JF, Tegeler CL, et al. Clinical, hemispheric, and autonomic changes associated with use of closed‐loop, allostatic neurotechnology by a case series of individuals with self‐reported symptoms of post‐traumatic stress. BMC Psychiatry 2017;17:141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Sterling P. Homeostasis versus allostasis: implications for brain function and mental disorders. JAMA Psychiatry 2014;71:1192‐3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Tegeler CH, Kumar S, Conklin D, et al. Open label, randomized, crossover pilot trial of high resolution, relational, resonance‐based, electroencephalic mirroring (HIRREM) to relieve insomnia. Brain Behav 2012;2:814‐24 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Tegeler CH, Tegeler CL, Cook JF, et al. A preliminary study of the effectiveness of an allostatic, closed‐Loop, acoustic stimulation neurotechnology in the treatment of athletes with persisting post‐concussion symptoms. Sports Med Open 2016;2:39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Tegeler CL, Cook JF, Lee SW, et al. Pilot study of menopause‐related symptom reduction through a noninvasive EEG‐based technology for auto‐calibration of neural oscillations (HIRREM). Menopause 2013;20:1311‐58. [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Shaltout HA, Lee SW, Tegeler CL, et al. Improvements in heart rate variability, baroreflex sensitivity, and sleep after use of closed‐loop allostatic neurotechnology by a heterogeneous cohort. Front Public Health 2018;6:116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Weathers FW, Litz BT, Herman DS, et al. The PTSD Checklist (PCL): reliability, validity, and diagnostic utility. Proceedings of the Annual Convention of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies; October 24–27, 1993; San Antonio, TX. [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Blanchard EB, Jones‐Alexander J, Buckley TC, et al. Psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist (PCL). Behav Res Ther 1996;34:669‐73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Monson CM, Gradus JL, Young‐Xu Y, et al. Change in posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms: do clinicians and patients agree? Psychol Assess 2008;20:131‐8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Lee SW, Laurienti PJ, Burdette JH, et al. Functional brain network changes following use of an allostatic, closed‐Loop, acoustic stimulation neurotechnology for military‐related traumatic stress. J Neuroimaging 2019;29:70‐8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Biswal B, Yetkin FZ, Haughton VM, et al. Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo‐planar MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1995,. 34:537‐41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Rabinak CA, Angstadt M, Welsh RC, et al. Altered amygdala resting‐state functional connectivity in post‐traumatic stress disorder. Front Psychiatry 2011;2:62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Agcaoglu O, Miller R, Mayer AR, et al. Lateralization of resting state networks and relationship to age and gender. Neuroimage 2015;104:310‐25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Hayasaka S. Functional connectivity networks with and without global signal correction. Front Hum Neurosci 2013;7:880. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Power JD, Mitra A, Laumann TO, et al. Methods to detect, characterize, and remove motion artifact in resting state fMRI. Neuroimage 2014;84:320‐41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Laurienti PJ, Joyce KE, Telesford QK, et al. Universal fractal scaling of self‐organized networks. Physica A 2011;390:3608‐13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Hayasaka S, Laurienti PJ. Comparison of characteristics between region‐and voxel‐based network analyses in resting‐state fMRI data. Neuroimage 2010;50:499‐508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Shirer WR, Ryali S, Rykhlevskaia E, et al. Decoding subject‐driven cognitive states with whole‐brain connectivity patterns. Cereb Cortex 2012;22:158‐65. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Moussa MN, Steen MR, Laurienti PJ, et al. Consistency of network modules in resting‐state FMRI connectome data. PLoS One 2012;7:e44428. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Ushakov V, Sharaev MG, Kartashov SI, et al. Dynamic causal modeling of hippocampal links within the human default mode network: lateralization and computational stability of effective connections. Front Hum Neurosci 2016;10:528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Banks SJ, Zhuang X, Bayram E, et al. Default Mode Network lateralization and memory in healthy aging and Alzheimer's disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2018;66:1223‐34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Dinomais M, Chinier E, Richard I, et al. Hemispheric asymmetry of supplementary motor area proper: a functional connectivity study of the motor network. Motor Control 2016;20:33‐49. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Lou W, Peck KK, Brennan N, et al. Left‐lateralization of resting state functional connectivity between the presupplementary motor area and primary language areas. Neuroreport 2017;28:545‐50. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Jalili M. Hemispheric asymmetry of electroencephalography‐based functional brain networks. Neuroreport 2014;25:1266‐71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Hetu S, Luo Y, Saez I, et al. Asymmetry in functional connectivity of the human habenula revealed by high‐resolution cardiac‐gated resting state imaging. Hum Brain Mapp 2016;37:2602‐15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Chen T, Cai W, Ryali S, et al. Distinct global brain dynamics and spatiotemporal organization of the salience network. PLoS Biol 2016;14:e1002469. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Akiki TJ, Averill CL, Abdallah CG. A network‐based neurobiological model of PTSD: evidence from structural and functional neuroimaging studies. Curr Psychiatry Rep 2017;19:81. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Tegeler CL, Gerdes L, Shaltout HA, et al. Successful use of closed‐loop allostatic neurotechnology for post‐traumatic stress symptoms in military personnel: self‐reported and autonomic improvements. Mil Med Res 2017;4:38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Lanius RA, Frewen PA, Tursich M, et al. Restoring large‐scale brain networks in PTSD and related disorders: a proposal for neuroscientifically‐informed treatment interventions. Eur J Psychotraumatol 2015;6:27313. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Ros T, Frewen P, Theberge J, et al. Neurofeedback tunes scale‐free dynamics in spontaneous brain activity. Cereb Cortex 2017;27:4911‐22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Ramchand R, Rudavsky R, Grant S, et al. Prevalence of, risk factors for, and consequences of posttraumatic stress disorder and other mental health problems in military populations deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Curr Psychiatry Rep 2015;17:37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Neuroimaging are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES