4.7 Article

Proton MR spectroscopy detects a relative decrease of N-acetylaspartate in the medial temporal lobe of patients with AD

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 55, 期 5, 页码 684-688

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.55.5.684

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The reduction of N-acetylaspartate (NAA) detected by proton MR spectroscopy (H-1-MRS) represents a robust but unspecific marker for neuronal loss or dysfunction. Objective: To apply H-1-MRS in two brain regions that reflect the characteristic spatial distribution of neuronal loss in AD. These regions are the medial temporal lobe (MTL), which is affected early in AD, and the primary motor and sensory cortex (central region), which is affected late in the disease and might serve as an intraindividual control region in mild to moderate disease stages. Methods: Twenty patients and 18 volunteers underwent H-1-MRS in both brain areas. The metabolic ratios of NAA/creatine and choline/creatine were determined. Additionally, the metabolic ratios of the MTL were divided by the ratios of the central region to assess the relative change in the MTL in individual subjects. All ratios were correlated with psychometric test scores. Results: A significant reduction of NAA/creatine and choline/creatine ratios was detected in the MTL of patients with AD. In the central region, no significant difference between the groups was found. NAA/creatine (MTL/central region) was reduced in patients with AD and showed a correlation with the Mini-Mental State Examination and the cognitive part of the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale scores. Choline/creatine (MTL/central region) did not show a significant difference between groups. Conclusion: Assessing the distribution of NAA/creatine reduction guided by the expected neuropathologic change can improve the role of H-1-MRS in the assessment of AD. The disease severity can be monitored by relative reduction of NAA/creatine in the MTL in comparison with an intraindividual unaffected control region.

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

4.7
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