4.2 Article

Age-Related Changes in White Matter Lesions, Hippocampal Atrophy, and Cerebral Microbleeds in Healthy Subjects Without Major Cerebrovascular Risk Factors

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2009.12.010

关键词

Periventricular hyperintensity; cerebral amyloid angiopathy; Alzheimer's disease; deep or subcortical white matter hyperintensity; hippocampal atrophy; cerebral microbleeds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although cumulative evidence indicates that risk factors for arteriosclerosis have an impact on age-related changes in brain pathology, the influence of aging without major risk factors on changes in brain structures has not yet been fully elucidated. We used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to study how aging affects structural changes in the brain (eg, white matter lesions, hippocampal atrophy [HA], micro-bleeds) in normal subjects without major risk factors for cerebrovascular diseases. We studied 1108 subjects who underwent voluntary brain screening and had no cerebrovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or hyperlipidemia. We examined the conventional and T2-weighted MM to define white matter hyperintensities, HA, and cerebral microbleeds in addition to all physical parameters, blood biochemical data, and neuropsychiatric symptoms. We found that the prevalence of white matter lesions and HA increased significantly with age (P<.001). Logistic analysis showed that periventricular hyperintensity was significantly related to age (P <.0001) and depressive state (P <.01). A linear relation was found between white matter lesions and HA (P <.05). Cerebral microbleeds also increased with age, and their presence was associated with HA (P <.001). White matter lesions, HA, and cortical microbleeds were associated with one another in healthy elderly subjects, and these changes were affected by the aging process independent of any cerebrovascular risk factors. Cerebral amyloid angiopathy may underlie these age-related brain changes.

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

4.2
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