BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Perihippocampal fissures (PHFs) and hippocampal sulcus residual cavities (HSCs) are common findings in the MR imaging examination of the hippocampus in aging and Alzheimer disease (AD); however, little is known about how to distinguish them or their relative clinical relevance. We hypothesized that prominence of the HSC, unlike PHF, is not significantly influenced by the hippocampal atrophy related to aging or AD. METHODS: We studied and evaluated these hippocampal CSF spaces on MR imaging scans from 130 normal control (NC) subjects (20-90 years of age) and 27 AD patients. RESULTS: HSC is poorly correlated with age and is not related to the magnitude of hippocampal atrophy. There is no significant difference of HSCs between AD and age-matched NCs, but in the extremely high HSCs group (top 20%), 91% of cases are NC. PHFs, on the other hand, are strongly correlated with age and are valuable in the diagnosis of AD. Location and communication with ambient cistern is the key to distinguish HSC from PHF. CONCLUSION: Identifying hippocampal atrophy (enlarged PHF) may be particularly challenging in the presence of HSC. Distinguishing among the CSF spaces in hippocampus may help in the radiologic evaluation of hippocampal atrophy. Patients with extremely high HSCs (>8.4) can be excluded from AD risk with 93% specificity.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Perihippocampal fissures (PHFs) and hippocampal sulcus residual cavities (HSCs) are common findings in the MR imaging examination of the hippocampus in aging and Alzheimer disease (AD); however, little is known about how to distinguish them or their relative clinical relevance. We hypothesized that prominence of the HSC, unlike PHF, is not significantly influenced by the hippocampal atrophy related to aging or AD. METHODS: We studied and evaluated these hippocampal CSF spaces on MR imaging scans from 130 normal control (NC) subjects (20-90 years of age) and 27 ADpatients. RESULTS:HSC is poorly correlated with age and is not related to the magnitude of hippocampal atrophy. There is no significant difference of HSCs between AD and age-matched NCs, but in the extremely high HSCs group (top 20%), 91% of cases are NC. PHFs, on the other hand, are strongly correlated with age and are valuable in the diagnosis of AD. Location and communication with ambient cistern is the key to distinguish HSC from PHF. CONCLUSION: Identifying hippocampal atrophy (enlarged PHF) may be particularly challenging in the presence of HSC. Distinguishing among the CSF spaces in hippocampus may help in the radiologic evaluation of hippocampal atrophy. Patients with extremely high HSCs (>8.4) can be excluded from AD risk with 93% specificity.
Authors: A E George; M J de Leon; L A Stylopoulos; J Miller; A Kluger; G Smith; D C Miller Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1990 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: M J de Leon; J Golomb; A E George; A Convit; C Y Tarshish; T McRae; S De Santi; G Smith; S H Ferris; M Noz Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1993 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: A Convit; M J de Leon; J Golomb; A E George; C Y Tarshish; M Bobinski; W Tsui; S De Santi; J Wegiel; H Wisniewski Journal: Psychiatr Q Date: 1993
Authors: D Bartrés-Faz; C Junqué; I C Clemente; J M Serra-Grabulosa; J Guardia; A López-Alomar; J Sánchez-Aldeguer; J M Mercader; N Bargalló; M Olondo; P Moral Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2001 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: M J De Leon; A E George; J Golomb; C Tarshish; A Convit; A Kluger; S De Santi; T McRae; S H Ferris; B Reisberg; C Ince; H Rusinek; M Bobinski; B Quinn; D C Miller; H M Wisniewski Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 1997 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Michal Schnaider Beeri; Hedok Lee; Hu Cheng; Daniel Wollman; Jeremy M Silverman; Isak Prohovnik Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2009-04-01 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Susanne J van Veluw; Laura E M Wisse; Hugo J Kuijf; Wim G M Spliet; Jeroen Hendrikse; Peter R Luijten; Mirjam I Geerlings; Geert Jan Biessels Journal: Neuroimage Clin Date: 2013-08-17 Impact factor: 4.881
Authors: Kim Blom; Huiberdina L Koek; Yolanda van der Graaf; Maarten H T Zwartbol; Laura E M Wisse; Jeroen Hendrikse; Geert Jan Biessels; Mirjam I Geerlings Journal: Brain Imaging Behav Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 3.978
Authors: Eliasz Engelhardt; Carla Tocquer; Charles André; Denise Madeira Moreira; Ivan Hideyo Okamoto; José Luiz de Sá Cavalcanti Journal: Dement Neuropsychol Date: 2011 Oct-Dec
Authors: Philipp G Sämann; Juan Eugenio Iglesias; Boris Gutman; Dominik Grotegerd; Ramona Leenings; Claas Flint; Udo Dannlowski; Emily K Clarke-Rubright; Rajendra A Morey; Theo G M van Erp; Christopher D Whelan; Laura K M Han; Laura S van Velzen; Bo Cao; Jean C Augustinack; Paul M Thompson; Neda Jahanshad; Lianne Schmaal Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2020-12-27 Impact factor: 5.038