ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Exploring brain activity differences in functional constipation using fNIRS: a case-control study.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunctional constipation (FCon) involves central nervous system dysregulation, particularly in brain regions responsible for visceral sensation, emotional processing, and autonomic control. Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), we examined brain activity alterations in FCon patients to elucidate brain-gut interactions.
methodPatients with constipation meeting Rome IV criteria were recruited from Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, while healthy controls were enrolled from the local community. The cortical regions of interest (ROIs) included the prefrontal cortex (PFC), dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC), broca's area, primary motor cortex (M1), supplementary motor area (SMA)/premotor cortex (PMC), and primary somatosensory cortex (S1). Participants were monitored during resting state and three defecation-related tasks: imagined defecation, simulated defecation and anal sphincter contraction. Functional connectivity (FC) strength and regional brain activation (HbO concentration changes) were compared between groups and across tasks.
result64 patients and 64 healthy controls (50% females each) were included. There was no significant difference in average FC between groups (P = 0.757). In both groups, simulated defecation and anal sphincter contraction activated most ROIs more strongly than imagined defecation (P < 0.05). In healthy controls, anal sphincter contraction elicited significantly lower HbO than simulated defecation in the left Broca's area (P < 0.05); no significant differences between these two tasks were found in the FCon group. No significant between-group differences in HbO were found during any task. During imagined defecation, FCon patients showed a trend toward lower HbO across most ROIs, most notably in the right M1, with comparable levels in the right PFC. During simulated defecation, a similar trend of lower HbO in sensorimotor ROIs was observed alongside numerically higher HbO in the right PFC/DLPFC. During anal sphincter contraction, they showed numerically higher HbO across all ROIs. Progression curves further revealed a linear increasing pattern in FCon patients across tasks, contrasting with task-appropriate modulation in healthy controls.
conclusionThis first fNIRS study reveals task-specific cortical dysregulation in FCon. Although between-group differences were not statistically significant, these trends and dynamic patterns identify sensorimotor and prefrontal cortical targets for future neuromodulation therapies. Trial registration ChiCTR2500104882.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.