4.5 Article

The relationship between white matter brain metabolites and cognition in normal aging: The GENIE study

期刊

BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 1164, 期 -, 页码 108-116

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.06.027

关键词

aging; brain; magnetic resonance spectroscopy; cognition

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) has demonstrated age-related changes in brain metabolites that may underlie micro-structural brain changes, but few studies have examined their relationship with cognitive decline. We performed a cross-sectional study of brain metabolism and cognitive function in 82 healthy adults (aged 50-90) participating in the GENIE (St GEorge's Neuropsychology and Imaging in the Elderly) study. Absolute metabolite concentrations were measured by proton chemical shift imaging within voxels placed in the centrum semiovale white matter. Cognitive abilities assessed were executive function, working memory, information processing speed, long-term memory and fluid intelligence. Correlations showed that all cognitive domains declined with age. Total creatine (tCr) concentration increased with age (r=0.495, p <0.001). Regression analyses were performed for each cognitive variable, including estimated intelligence and the metabolites, with age then added as a final step. A significant relationship was observed between tCr and executive function, long-term memory, and fluid intelligence, although these relationships did not remain significant after age was added as a final step in the regression. The regression analysis also demonstrated a significant relationship between N-acetylaspartate (NAA) and executive function. As there was no age-related decline in NAA, this argues against axonal loss with age; however the relationship between NAA and executive function independent of age and estimated intelligence is consistent with white matter axonal integrity having an important role in executive function in normal individuals. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. 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