# Comparative Analysis of Brain Coping Mechanisms in Small Left-Hemisphere Lesions: Incidental vs. Symptomatic Gliomas

## TL;DR

This study compares brain responses in patients with incidental and symptomatic small left-hemisphere gliomas to understand differences in brain plasticity and function.

## Contribution

The study directly compares incidental and symptomatic gliomas matched by lesion volume, offering new insights into their distinct brain impacts.

## Key findings

- No significant differences were found in fMRI networks between the two groups using t-tests.
- Significant differences emerged in fMRI networks when using masking techniques.
- No significant differences were observed in white-matter structures between the groups.

## Abstract

Background. Incidentally discovered low-grade gliomas (iLGGs) are very rare and little is still known about their associated functional imaging activation patterns, white-matter status, and plasticity potential. Recent studies shed light on several clinical factors responsible for the good clinical status observed in these patients versus those with their symptomatic counterpart (sLGGs), including small volume. Comparisons were typically carried out by comparing iLGGs with the wider and more heterogeneous sLGG group. In this study, we investigated whether iLGGs affect the brain differently from comparably small sLGGs. Method. Starting from a sample of 13 patients with iLGG, in the current comparative cross-sectional study, we identified a group of patients with sLGGs, primarily matched by lesion volume. We looked for potential differences between the two groups in language-related functional and structural parameters (the fMRI network associated with naming and white-matter fascicles). Results. The t-test did not show significant differences in the fMRI network, but these emerged when performing masking. No significant differences were observed at the white-matter level. Conclusions. Given that small volumes characterized both groups and that demographic variables were comparable, too, we hypothesized that differences between the two groups could be attributed to alternative lesion-related parameters. We discussed these findings from clinical and neurosurgical perspectives.