4.5 Article

Relationship between regional atrophy rates and cognitive decline in mild cognitive impairment

期刊

NEUROBIOLOGY OF AGING
卷 33, 期 2, 页码 242-253

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2010.03.015

关键词

Cognitive decline; Cortical thinning; Executive dysfunction; Naming; Semantic fluency; Verbal memory

资金

  1. National Center for Research Resources at the National Institutes of Health, USA
  2. Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) [U01 AG024904]
  3. National Institute on Aging
  4. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB)
  5. [U24 RR021382]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the relationship between regional atrophy rates and 2-year cognitive decline in a large cohort of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 103) and healthy controls (n = 90). Longitudinal magnetic resonance image (MRI) scans were analyzed using high-throughput image analysis procedures. Atrophy rates were derived by calculating percent cortical volume loss between baseline and 24 month scans. Stepwise regressions were performed to investigate the contribution of atrophy rates to language, memory, and executive functioning decline, controlling for age, gender, baseline performances, and disease progression. In MCI, left temporal lobe atrophy rates were associated with naming decline, whereas bilateral temporal, left frontal, and left anterior cingulate atrophy rates were associated with semantic fluency decline. Left entorhinal atrophy rate was associated with memory decline and bilateral frontal atrophy rates were associated with executive function decline. These data provide evidence that regional atrophy rates in MCI contribute to domain-specific cognitive decline, which appears to be partially independent of disease progression. MRI measures of regional atrophy can provide valuable information for understanding the neural basis of cognitive impairment in MCI. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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