OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of deep white matter hyperintensities (DWMH) and periventricular white matter hyperintensities (PVWMH) on progression of cognitive decline in non-demented elderly people. METHODS: All data come from the nested MRI sub-study of the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER). We performed a 3 year follow up study on 554 subjects of the PROSPER study using both repeatedmagnetic resonance imaging and cognitive testing. Cognitive decline and its dependency on WMH severity was assessed using linear regression models adjusted for sex, age, education, treatment group, and test version when applicable. RESULTS: We found that the volume of PVWMH at baseline was longitudinally associated with reduced mental processing speed (p = 0.0075). In addition, we found that the progression in PVWMH volume paralleled the decline in mental processing speed (p = 0.024). In contrast, neither presence nor progression of DWMH was associated with change in performance on any of the cognitive tests. CONCLUSION:PVWMH should not be considered benign but probably underlie impairment in cognitive processing speed.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of deep white matter hyperintensities (DWMH) and periventricular white matter hyperintensities (PVWMH) on progression of cognitive decline in non-demented elderly people. METHODS: All data come from the nested MRI sub-study of the PROspective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk (PROSPER). We performed a 3 year follow up study on 554 subjects of the PROSPER study using both repeated magnetic resonance imaging and cognitive testing. Cognitive decline and its dependency on WMH severity was assessed using linear regression models adjusted for sex, age, education, treatment group, and test version when applicable. RESULTS: We found that the volume of PVWMH at baseline was longitudinally associated with reduced mental processing speed (p = 0.0075). In addition, we found that the progression in PVWMH volume paralleled the decline in mental processing speed (p = 0.024). In contrast, neither presence nor progression of DWMH was associated with change in performance on any of the cognitive tests. CONCLUSION: PVWMH should not be considered benign but probably underlie impairment in cognitive processing speed.
Authors: Martha E Payne; Denise L Fetzer; James R MacFall; James M Provenzale; Christopher E Byrum; K Ranga R Krishnan Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2002-08-20 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: P Kapeller; R Barber; R J Vermeulen; H Adèr; P Scheltens; W Freidl; O Almkvist; M Moretti; T del Ser; P Vaghfeldt; C Enzinger; F Barkhof; D Inzitari; T Erkinjunti; R Schmidt; F Fazekas Journal: Stroke Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: P J Houx; J Shepherd; G-J Blauw; M B Murphy; I Ford; E L Bollen; B Buckley; D J Stott; W Jukema; M Hyland; A Gaw; J Norrie; A M Kamper; I J Perry; P W MacFarlane; A Edo Meinders; B J Sweeney; C J Packard; C Twomey; S M Cobbe; R G Westendorp Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: L H Kuller; L Shemanski; T Manolio; M Haan; L Fried; N Bryan; G L Burke; R Tracy; R Bhadelia Journal: Stroke Date: 1998-02 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: J Shepherd; G J Blauw; M B Murphy; S M Cobbe; E L Bollen; B M Buckley; I Ford; J W Jukema; M Hyland; A Gaw; A M Lagaay; I J Perry; P W Macfarlane; A E Meinders; B J Sweeney; C J Packard; R G Westendorp; C Twomey; D J Stott Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1999-11-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: James Shepherd; Gerard J Blauw; Michael B Murphy; Edward L E M Bollen; Brendan M Buckley; Stuart M Cobbe; Ian Ford; Allan Gaw; Michael Hyland; J Wouter Jukema; Adriaan M Kamper; Peter W Macfarlane; A Edo Meinders; John Norrie; Chris J Packard; Ivan J Perry; David J Stott; Brian J Sweeney; Cillian Twomey; Rudi G J Westendorp Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-11-23 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Jan Cees De Groot; Frank-Erik De Leeuw; Matthijs Oudkerk; Jan Van Gijn; Albert Hofman; Jellemer Jolles; Monique M B Breteler Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: E E Smith; D H Salat; J Jeng; C R McCreary; B Fischl; J D Schmahmann; B C Dickerson; A Viswanathan; M S Albert; D Blacker; S M Greenberg Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-04-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Ling Zheng; Wendy J Mack; Helena C Chui; Lara Heflin; Dan Mungas; Bruce Reed; Charles DeCarli; Michael W Weiner; Joel H Kramer Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-01-27 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Barbara Bucur; David J Madden; Julia Spaniol; James M Provenzale; Roberto Cabeza; Leonard E White; Scott A Huettel Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: J M Prager; C Thomas; W J Ankenbrandt; J R Meyer; Y Gao; A Ragin; S Sidharthan; R Hutten; Y G Wu Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-01-16 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Elizabeth L Stegemöller; Jonathan P Wilson; Audrey Hazamy; Mack C Shelley; Michael S Okun; Lori J P Altmann; Chris J Hass Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2014-02-20
Authors: S Debette; P A Wolf; A Beiser; R Au; J J Himali; A Pikula; S Auerbach; C Decarli; S Seshadri Journal: Neurology Date: 2009-12-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Virginia Elderkin-Thompson; Martina Ballmaier; Gerhard Hellemann; Daniel Pham; Helen Lavretsky; Anand Kumar Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 4.105