4.2 Article

Relationships Between White Matter Hyperintensities, Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy and Dementia in a Population-based Sample of the Oldest Old

期刊

CURRENT ALZHEIMER RESEARCH
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 1090-1097

出版社

BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.2174/15672050113106660177

关键词

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy; magnetic resonance imaging; neuropathology; white matter hyperintensity

资金

  1. Finska Lakaresallskapet
  2. Liv och halsa Foundation
  3. Paivikki and Sakari Sohlberg Foundation
  4. Helsinki University Central Hospital competitive research fund
  5. Medical Research Council and Research Councils UK
  6. Alzheimers Research UK [ART-ESG2010-6] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. Medical Research Council [G0900652, G0502157, G0400074, G1100540] Funding Source: researchfish
  8. MRC [G0900652, G0502157, G0400074, G1100540] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previous reports suggest that brain white matter changes, a surrogate for small vessel disease, are related to cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA). However, this relationship has not been explored in population-based studies or in the oldest old (>85 years of age). We studied the relationships between white matter hyperintensities (WMH) determined by post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and neuropathologically assessed CAA in demented and non-demented subjects enrolled in the prospective community-based Finnish Vantaa 85+ Study. In this analysis, we evaluated scans and brain samples from 123 subjects (86% women) with a mean age of 90.6 years. We found CAA to be present in 63 % of the 123 subjects, whereas WMH was present in 74%, and dementia in 59 %. The presence of WMH of any severity did not relate to the presence or the degree of CAA severity, irrespective of the dementia status of the subjects. Furthermore, multivariate regression analysis showed a clear association between CAA and dementia but WMH was not related to dementia in this very old sample. We conclude that severe WMH may not be determined by CAA in this very elderly population.

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

4.2
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