E0 ConsensusPreliminaryPEM ?Systematic-ReviewPeer-reviewedMachine draft
Using structural and functional MRI as a neuroimaging technique to investigate chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalopathy: a systematic review.
Almutairi, Basim, Langley, Christelle, Crawley, Esther et al. · BMJ open · 2020 · DOI
Quick Summary
This review examined brain imaging studies in ME/CFS patients using two main techniques: structural MRI (which shows the anatomy of the brain) and functional MRI (which shows which brain areas are active during tasks). Researchers found that ME/CFS patients showed some differences in brain structure and unusual patterns of brain activity, but these findings varied widely between studies. While these results suggest something is happening in the brains of ME/CFS patients, the researchers couldn't identify one clear pattern that all patients share.
Why It Matters
This comprehensive review demonstrates that neuroimaging changes occur in ME/CFS but that no single diagnostic biomarker has yet been identified, highlighting the need for larger, better-designed studies. Understanding these brain-level changes validates ME/CFS as a biological condition affecting neural function and may eventually lead to objective diagnostic tools and insights into disease mechanisms.
Observed Findings
- sMRI studies report differences in gray and white matter volume, ventricular enlargement, and hyperintensities in CFS/ME patients compared to controls
- Task-based fMRI consistently shows increased brain activation and recruitment of additional brain regions in CFS/ME patients during cognitive tasks
- During higher-load or more complex tasks, CFS/ME patients showed decreased activation in task-specific brain regions
- Three sMRI studies found no neuroanatomical differences between CFS/ME patients and healthy controls
- fMRI findings included both increased and decreased activation patterns depending on task demands
Inferred Conclusions
- Neuroimaging studies provide evidence that CFS/ME involves measurable differences in brain structure and function
- Inconsistencies in structural findings and variability in functional activation patterns may reflect the heterogeneous nature of CFS/ME or limitations in current neuroimaging methodology
- Robust study design, larger sample sizes, and patient subgrouping strategies are needed to establish a consistent neural profile or biomarker
- Current neuroimaging techniques have inherent limitations that prevent definitive characterization of the neural mechanisms underlying CFS/ME
Remaining Questions
What This Study Does Not Prove
This review does not establish ME/CFS as primarily neurological or prove that brain changes cause ME/CFS symptoms—correlation between imaging findings and disease has not been proven. The inconsistent findings across studies mean no single brain pattern can yet definitively diagnose or explain ME/CFS. The authors note that technical limitations of current neuroimaging methods (voxel-based statistics, fMRI signal interpretation) prevent drawing firm conclusions about underlying neural mechanisms.
Tags
Symptom:Cognitive DysfunctionFatigue
Biomarker:Neuroimaging
Method Flag:Weak Case DefinitionSmall SampleMixed Cohort
Metadata
- DOI
- 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031672
- PMID
- 32868345
- Review status
- Machine draft
- Evidence level
- Established evidence from major reviews, guidelines, or evidence maps
- Last updated
- 8 April 2026