4.5 Article

Size and Shape of the Corpus Callosum in Adult Niemann-Pick Type C Reflects State and Trait Illness Variables

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 7, 页码 1340-1346

出版社

AMER SOC NEURORADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2490

关键词

-

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R03 HD058625, 1R03HD058625-01] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Variable alterations to the structure of the corpus callosum have been described in adults with NPC, a neurometabolic disorder known to result in both white and gray matter pathology. This study sought to examine tie structure of the callosum in a group of adult patients with NPC and compared callosal structure with a group of matched controls, and to relate callosal structure with state and trait illness variables. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine adult patients with NPC were matched to control subjects (n = 26) on age and sex. The corpus callosum was segmented from the midsagittal section of T1-weighted images on all subjects, and total area, length, bending angle, and mean thickness were calculated. In addition, 39 regional thickness measures were derived by using a previously published method. All measures were compared between groups, and analyzed alongside symptom measures, biochemical parameters, and ocular-motor measures. RESULTS: The callosal area and mean thickness were significantly reduced in the patient group, and regional thickness differences were greatest in the genu, posterior body, isthmus, and anterior splenium. Global callosal measures correlated significantly with duration of illness and symptom score, and at :rend level with degree of filipin staining. Measures of reflexive saccadic peak velocity and gain, and self-paced saccades, correlated strongly with total callosal area. CONCLUSIONS: Callosal structure and size reflect both state and trait markers in adult NPC, and they may be useful biomarkers to ndex both white and gray matter changes that reflect illness severity and progression.

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