4.5 Review

Compromised prefrontal structure and function are associated with slower walking in older adults

Journal

NEUROIMAGE-CLINICAL
Volume 20, Issue -, Pages 620-626

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.08.017

Keywords

Older adults; Gait speed; Walking; Diffusion tensor imaging; White matter; Executive function

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute on Aging [R01-AG041785, T32-AG023480]
  2. United States Department of Veterans Affairs Clinical Sciences R&D (CSRD) Service [1IK2CX000706-01A2]
  3. Harvard Catalyst \ The Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center (National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health) [KL2 TR002542, UL 1TR002541]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Our previous work demonstrates that reduced activation of the executive network is associated with slow walking speed in a cohort of older adults from the MOBILIZE Boston Study. However, the influence of underlying white matter integrity on the activation of this network and walking speed is unknown. Thus, we used diffusion-weighted imaging and fMRI during an n-back task to assess associations between executive network structure, function, and walking speed. Whole-brain tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) were used to identify regions of white matter microstructural integrity that were associated with walking speed. The integrity of these regions was then entered into multiple regression models to predict task performance and executive network activation during the n-back task. Among the significant associations of FA with walking speed, we observed the anterior thalamic radiation and superior longitudinal fasciculus were further associated with both n-back response speed and executive network activation. These findings suggest that subtle damage to frontal white matter may contribute to altered executive network activation and slower walking in older adults.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available