Demographic and clinical information for healthy subjects and euthymic bipolar patients.

<p>BP: Bipolar patients; HS: Healthy subjects</p><p>Demographic and clinical information for healthy subjects and euthymic bipolar patients.</p

Psychophysiological interaction results.

<p>Panel A: Results provided by “within group” analysis in healthy subjects; Panel B: Results provided by “within group” analysis in bipolar patients; Panel C: Results provided by the “between-group” analysis in Bipolar patients vs. Healthy subjects. Red-scale areas represent regions showing positive connectivity with the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex; Blue-scale areas represent regions showing negative connectivity with the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Identified regions are projected onto 2D anatomical slices in axial, coronal and sagittal orientations (<i>p</i> < 0.005 uncorrected at whole brain level, <i>p</i>_FWE < 0.05 after small volume correction).</p

Behavioral performances for word-face emotional Stroop measured during fMRI.

<p><i>Note</i>: Data are reported as Mean (SD). BP: Bipolar patients; HS: Healthy subjects; LR: Low conflict resolution; HR: High conflict resolution; NC1: No conflict 1; NC2: No conflict 2.</p><p>Behavioral performances for word-face emotional Stroop measured during fMRI.</p

Example of two successive trials presented in word-face emotional Stroop.

<p>Stimuli were either congruent or incongruent according to the valence of facial expression (i.e., joyful or fearful) and the valence of the word written across them (i.e., <i>joie</i>: happy or <i>peur</i>: fear). High conflict resolution trials consisted of incongruent stimuli preceded by incongruent stimuli; Low conflict resolution trials consisted of incongruent stimuli preceded by congruent stimuli; No conflict trials consisted of congruent stimuli preceded by either congruent (NC1) or by incongruent stimuli (NC2) (not shown in the figure). Pictures were extracted from the “Montreal Set of Facial Display of Emotion” (MSFDE) database [<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0134961#pone.0134961.ref030" target="_blank">30</a>].</p

Results provided by between-group analyses.

<p>Panel A: Whole-brain comparison in HS vs BP during conflict monitoring (LR > HR) (<i>p</i> < 0.001 uncorrected at whole brain level, <i>p</i>_FWE < 0.05 after small volume correction). Identified regions are projected onto 2D anatomical slices in axial, coronal and sagittal orientations. Panel B: Region of interest analysis focused on bilateral amygdala. The graph shows the mean %MR signal intensity variations ± SE according to the group and the amount of the conflict (LR vs HR). *<i>p</i><0.05. <i>Abbreviations</i>: BP: Bipolar patients; HS: Healthy subjects; LR: Low conflict resolution; HR: High conflict resolution.</p

Behavioral performances during word-face emotional Stroop.

<p>Panel A: Illustration of behavioral dissociation between conflict monitoring and conflict resolution. The graph shows the mean response time ± SE according to the congruency of the current trial and the congruency of the previous trial. Panel B: Illustration of the increase emotional interference in euthymic bipolar patients. The graph shows the mean response time ± SE according to the group and the congruency of the current trial. *<i>p</i><0.05. <i>Abbreviations</i>: LR: Low conflict resolution; HR: High conflict resolution; NC: No conflict.</p

Results of the within-group analyses at whole-brain level during conflict monitoring in (A) healthy subjects and (B) euthymic bipolar patients.

<p>Identified regions are projected onto 2D anatomical slices in axial, coronal and sagittal orientations (<i>p</i> < 0.001 uncorrected at whole brain level, <i>p</i>_FWE < 0.05 after small volume correction).</p

Activation peaks during the emotional conflict monitoring, as revealed by within and between-group analyses.

<p>*<i>P</i>_FWE < 0.05 after small volume correction</p><p>LR: Low conflict resolution; HR: High conflict resolution; H: Hemisphere; R: Right; L: Left; k: number of voxels/cluster.</p><p>Activation peaks during the emotional conflict monitoring, as revealed by within and between-group analyses.</p

Stimulation settings determined post-operatively during the last follow-up visit for patients with advanced PD.

<p>Stimulation settings determined post-operatively during the last follow-up visit for patients with advanced PD.</p

Performance comparison between the modulation index and the 0–1 test outcome.

<p>(A) Exemplary LFP signals acquired along the lateral MER trajectory for the identification of the right STN in a case of PD (P8). (B) The respective instantaneous angular frequency series are characterized by a high rate of singularities. Here, angular frequency is defined as the derivative of the (unwrapped) phase estimated by means of the Hilbert transform after linear band-pass filtering the signal between 13 and 30 Hz. By setting as thresholds the limits of the band-pass filter (red horizontal lines), slip occurences are identified at the time points of threshold crossing (inset). (C) Comparative assessment of the modulation index and the 0–1 test outcome in four representative cases of PD. Results obtained by means of both measures are in good agreement in case of a relatively high signal to noise ratio (SNR) (cases P5 and P6: identification of significant cross-frequency coupling at +0.5 mm). On the contrary, in the presence of increased noise levels, the high rate of artificial phase slips renders the calculation of cross-frequency coupling by means of the modulation index unreliable. In particular, the index fails to discriminate sites with significant non-linear coupling from sites without, in case of a low SNR (cases P7 and P8: significant cross-frequency coupling at -3 mm and at -1.5 mm/+1 mm, respectively, identified only by means of the 0–1 test for chaos).</p