Evidence Hub

Cortical complexity in eating disorders: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis

Enrico Collantoni, Gianni Pessotto, V. Meregalli, Christopher R. Madan, A. Miola, G. Cascino, A. M. Monteleone, Angela Favaro

European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 2025

525 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Eating disorders (EDs) are complex psychiatric conditions with neurodevelopmental and neuroprogressive underpinnings. Altered cortical morphology, including gyrification patterns, may reflect these processes, offering insights into EDs pathophysiology. This systematic review and qualitative synthesis aimed to describe available neuroimaging findings on cortical complexity, including gyrification and sulcal morphology, in individuals with EDs compared to healthy controls (HC). Thirteen studies, including 525 patients with anorexia nervosa (AN), 69 patients with bulimia nervosa (BN) and 478 HC, were reviewed. Data on local gyrification index (LGI), sulcal morphology, and related cortical measures were systematically analyzed to identify consistent patterns of brain alterations. A consistent reduction in LGI across frontal, temporal, and parietal regions was reported in patients with acute AN compared to HC. These findings suggest the presence of an altered cortical folding in AN, with alterations that may partially normalize following weight restoration. Studies on bulimia nervosa (BN) are limited, with findings remaining inconclusive. Emerging metrics, such as absolute mean curvature and fractal dimension, provide further insights but lack methodological consistency across studies. Altered cortical folding patterns, particularly decreased gyrification, may reflect neurodevelopmental disruption and the state-dependent effects of malnutrition in AN. Future research should focus…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 525 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free