机构地区:[1]北京大学第三医院放射科,100191 [2]北京大学精神卫生研究所卫生部精神卫生重点实验室
出 处:《中华放射学杂志》2009年第5期490-494,共5页Chinese Journal of Radiology
基 金:国家自然科学基金资助项目(30500178);国家高技术研究发展计划(2007AA022421);国家“十五”攻关项目(2003BA712A11-03)
摘 要:目的应用MRDTI方法评价轻度认知功能障碍(MCI)及阿尔茨海默病(AD)脑白质微观结构完整性,进一步探讨脑白质异常与认知功能损害之间的关系。方法选取9例遗忘型MCI(MCI组)、15例可能AD(AD组)和11名年龄匹配的正常老年人(NC组),对常规脑部MRI脑白质表现正常的部位进行DTI扫描,测量不同脑区的各向异性指数(FA)及平均扩散率(MD),应用单因素方差分析对3组相应区域进行组间比较,并对所有被试DTI指数与临床认知评价量表积分进行相关性检验。结果MCI患者顶叶、半卵圆中心、后扣带回、海马旁回、颞叶、额叶FA值分别为0.31±0.03、0.39±0.03、0.62±0.05、0.59±0.05、0.47±0.08、0.32±0.04,MD值分别为(899±30)×10^-6、(782±53)×10^-6、(732±45)×10^-6、(806±38)×10^-6、(772±55)×10^-6、(792±35)×10^-6mm^2/s。AD患者相应部位FA值分别为0.28±0.04、0.37±0.03、0.55±0.06、0.52±0.05、0.40±0.05、0.27±0.04,MD值分别为(912±37)×10^-6、(800±67)×10^-6、(762±46)×10^-6、(874±57)×10^-6、(822±55)×10^-6、(822±39)×10^-6mm^2/s。NC组FA值分别为0.36±0.03、0.43±0.05、0.64±0.05、0.60±0.05、0.52±0.05、0.33±0.03,MD值分别为(866±37)×10^-6、(754±54)×10^-6、(718±32)×10^-6、(810±39)×10^-6、(755±48)×10^-6、(785±23)×10^-6mm^2/s。与NC组对比,MCI组的顶叶FA值明显下降(P〈0.01),AD组顶叶、半卵圆中心FA值亦明显减低(P〈0.01),且后扣带回、海马旁回及颞叶、额叶脑白质FA值及相应MD值差异有统计学意义(P〈0.05),同时这些区域DTI指数与临床认知评价量表积分具有相关性(P〈0.05)。结论MRDTI能够探测AD及MCI患者脑白质微观结构异常,顶叶脑自质FA值的异常在认知功能损害的早期即已发生,该脑区白�Objective To evaluate the microstructural integrity of white matter (WM) in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD) using DTI technique, and to explore the relationship between WM abnormalities and cognitive dysfunction. Methods Nine cases of amnestic MCI, 15 eases of mild probable AD and 11 eases of normal controls (NC) with normal-appearing WM (NAWM) were studied using 3.0 T MR system. Fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) were measured in different WM areas. One-way analysis of variance was used to test the difference among the three groups for DTI indices. Spearman Correlation analysis was applied to reveal the correlation between the DTI indices and the MMSE and CASI seores. Results The FA value in parietal, eentrum semiovale, posterior eingulate gyms, parahippocampus, temporal and frontal WM in MCI was 0. 31 ± 0. 03,0. 39 ± 0. 03,0. 62 ±0. 05,0. 59 ± 0. 05,0. 47 ± 0. 08,0. 32 ± 0. 04, respeetely, and MD value was ( 899 ± 30) ×10^-6,(782 ± 53) × 10^-6, (732 ±45) × 10^-6, (806 ± 38) × 10^-6, (772 ± 55) × 10^-6, (792 ± 35) × 10^-6 mm^2/s. The FA value of these regions in AD was 0.28 ±0.04, 0.37 ±0.03,0.55 ±0.06,0.52 ± 0. 05,0. 40 ± 0. 05,0. 27 ± 0. 04, and MD value was (912 ± 37 ) × 10^ -6, ( 800 ± 67 ) × 10^ -6, (762 ± 46 ) × 10^-6, (874±57) × 10^-6, (822 ±55) × 10^-6, (822 ±39) × 10^-6 mm^2/s. The FA value in NC was 0.36±0.03,0.43 ±0.05,0.64± 0.05, 0.60 ±0.05, 0.52 ±0.05,0.33 ±0.03, and MD value was (866±37) ×10^-6, (754 ±54) × 10^-6, (718 ±32) × 10^-6, (810 ±39) × 10^-6, (755 ±48) × 10^-6, (785 ±23) × 10^-6 mm^2/s. Compared with NC, the FA value in parietal WM was significantly decreased in MCI(P 〈0. 01 ), The significantly reduced FA values in parietal, centrum semiovale, posterior cingulate gyms, parahippocampus, temporal and frontal WM, as well as significantly elevated MD values were found in AD( P 〈 0. 05 �
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...