4.4 Article

Detection of changes in cerebrospinal fluid space in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus using voxel-based morphometry

Journal

NEURORADIOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 5, Pages 381-386

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00234-009-0610-z

Keywords

Idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus; Cerebrospinal fluid space; Voxel-based morphometry; Magnetic resonance imaging

Funding

  1. Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare, Japan [2008-Nanchi-17]
  2. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, Japan

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We attempted to detect alterations in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) space in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) using voxel-based morphometry (VBM). We obtained sagittal volume images of the entire head by three-dimensional T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging and compared the regional distribution of CSF in 12 patients with iNPH, 14 patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD), and 17 healthy individuals using VBM with automatically extracted CSF objects. VBM demonstrated significant widening at the lateral ventricles and Sylvian fissures and narrowing of the CSF space at the high convexity/midline areas in iNPH patients, compared to the AD patients and healthy controls (p < 0.05, after correction with a false-discovery rate). In addition, the ratio of the CSF volume in the lateral ventricle/Sylvian fissure area to that in the high convexity/midline area in iNPH patients (3.9 +/- 1.2) was remarkably greater than that in AD patients (1.2 +/- 0.3) and controls (0.9 +/- 0.3; one-way ANOVA, p < 0.001; post hoc Tukey's test, p < 0.001); we could discriminate iNPH patients from those in the other two groups without any overlap, when using a cutoff level of 1.9. VBM using CSF objects can be used to delineate the characteristic alteration of the CSF space in iNPH patients, which has been evaluated by visual interpretation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available