4.6 Article

Framingham cardiovascular risk profile correlates with impaired hippocampal and cortical vasoreactivity to hypercapnia

期刊

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2010.145

关键词

atherosclerosis; cerebral blood flow; cognitive impairment; hippocampus; MRI

资金

  1. NIH-NIA [AG08051, AG12101, AG022374]
  2. Alzheimer's Association [IIRG-08-91038, NIRG-09-132490]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vascular risk factors affect cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cerebral vascular reactivity, contributing to cognitive decline. Hippocampus is vulnerable to both Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology and ischemia; nonetheless, the information about the impact of vascular risk on hippocampal perfusion is minimal. Cognitively, healthy elderly (NL = 18, 69.9 +/- 6.7 years) and subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI = 15, 74.9 +/- 8.1 years) were evaluated for the Framingham cardiovascular risk profile (FCRP). All underwent structural imaging and resting CBF assessment with arterial spin labeling (ASL) at 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In 24 subjects (NL = 17, MCI = 7), CBF was measured after a carbon dioxide rebreathing challenge. Across all subjects, FCRP negatively correlated with hippocampal (rho = -0.41, P = 0.049) and global cortical (rho = -0.46, P = 0.02) vasoreactivity to hypercapnia (VRh). The FCRP-VRh relationships were most pronounced in the MCI group: hippocampus (rho = -0.77, P = 0.04); global cortex (rho = -0.83, P = 0.02). The FCRP did not correlate with either volume or resting CBF. The hippocampal VRh was lower in MCI than in NL subjects (Z = -2.0, P = 0.047). This difference persisted after age and FCRP correction (F-[3,F-20] = 4.6, P = 0.05). An elevated risk for vascular pathology is associated with a reduced response to hypercapnia in both hippocampal and cortical tissue. The VRh is more sensitive to vascular burden than either resting CBF or brain volume. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2011) 31, 671-679; doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2010.145; published online 15 September 2010

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据