4.6 Article

Reduction in cerebeller volumes in preterm infants: Relationships to white matter injury and neurodevelopment at two years of age

期刊

PEDIATRIC RESEARCH
卷 60, 期 1, 页码 97-102

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1203/01.pdr.0000220324.27597.f0

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIMH NIH HHS [R21 MH67054] Funding Source: Medline
  2. OCPHP CDC HHS [P41 PR13218] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A Substantial number of prematurely born infants Will experience later neurodevelopmental challenges. Abnormal development of the cerebellum may be related to some of the impairments exhibited by preterm children. To test the hypothesis that cerebellar development is structurally impaired in preterm infants and associated with adverse outcomes, we Studied 83 preterm infants and 13 term controls using volumetric magnetic resonance imaging techniques to obtain cerebellar volumes (CV) at term corrected and subsequent neurodevelopmental assessment at 2 y of age. The preterm group had smaller mean CV at term compared with the term control infants [mean (SD) CV, 22.0 (5.0) versus 23.5 (5.0) cc: mean difference (95% confidence interval), 1.5 (-1.5, 4.4)] although this did not reach statistical significance. Within the preterm group. there was evidence of a reduction in CV related to the presence of white matter injury (WMI) after adjusting for intracranial volume (ICV) [WMI grade 1 versits grade 2: mean (SD) CV, 23.6 (5.0) versus 21.6 (4.5); p = 0.01; WMI grade I versus grade 3 and 4: 23.6 (5.0) versus 20.8 (5.6); p = 0.07]. Within the preterm infants, there Was no apparent relationship between CV at term and gestational age at birth after adjusting for ICV. At 2 y of age, CV showed a weak correlation with cognitive and motor development, although this was principally mediated by WMI. In conclusion, We found no evidence for a primary impairment in cerebellar development in relation to prematurity, although there was evidence for a secondary effect of cerebral WMI on cerebellar development independent of immaturity.

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