OBJECTIVES: Magnetic resonance (MRI) studies rely on sulcal boundaries to delineate the human entorhinal cortex (EC) and typically show that EC size is reduced in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and a predictor of future dementia. However, it is unknown if variations in the EC sulcal patterns are associated with AD. We classified the lateral EC sulcal boundary as either a rhinal or collateral pattern and tested the hypotheses that the rhinal pattern was (1) more common in AD and (2) associated with a smaller EC size. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: MRI was used to determine the prevalence of the rhinal and collateral EC patterns in 421 subjects (212 AD, 107 old normal (ONL), and 102 young NL (YNL). Anatomical validation studies of normal subjects were conducted at postmortem in 34 brain hemispheres and in vivo with 21 MRI volume studies. EC pattern reliability was studied with MRI in both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs. PRINCIPAL OBSERVATIONS: The rhinal pattern was more frequent in the right hemisphere in AD (47%) compared with ONL (28%, odds ratio = 2.25, P = 0.001). EC pattern was not related to ApoE genotype. The validations showed that the EC sulcal pattern was not associated with the neuronal number, surface area, or volume of the EC. In patients with antemortem MRI studied at postmortem it was equivalently determined, that EC patterns are reliably determined on MRI and do not change with the progressive atrophy of AD. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that the right hemisphere rhinal pattern is over represented in AD as compared with control. However, in normal subjects the EC rhinal pattern is not associated with a diminished EC tissue size. It remains to be demonstrated if the right EC rhinal sulcus pattern association with AD reflects genetic or developmental influences.
OBJECTIVES: Magnetic resonance (MRI) studies rely on sulcal boundaries to delineate the human entorhinal cortex (EC) and typically show that EC size is reduced in Alzheimer's disease (AD) and a predictor of future dementia. However, it is unknown if variations in the EC sulcal patterns are associated with AD. We classified the lateral EC sulcal boundary as either a rhinal or collateral pattern and tested the hypotheses that the rhinal pattern was (1) more common in AD and (2) associated with a smaller EC size. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: MRI was used to determine the prevalence of the rhinal and collateral EC patterns in 421 subjects (212 AD, 107 old normal (ONL), and 102 young NL (YNL). Anatomical validation studies of normal subjects were conducted at postmortem in 34 brain hemispheres and in vivo with 21 MRI volume studies. EC pattern reliability was studied with MRI in both cross-sectional and longitudinal designs. PRINCIPAL OBSERVATIONS: The rhinal pattern was more frequent in the right hemisphere in AD (47%) compared with ONL (28%, odds ratio = 2.25, P = 0.001). EC pattern was not related to ApoE genotype. The validations showed that the EC sulcal pattern was not associated with the neuronal number, surface area, or volume of the EC. In patients with antemortem MRI studied at postmortem it was equivalently determined, that EC patterns are reliably determined on MRI and do not change with the progressive atrophy of AD. CONCLUSIONS: The data indicate that the right hemisphere rhinal pattern is over represented in AD as compared with control. However, in normal subjects the EC rhinal pattern is not associated with a diminished EC tissue size. It remains to be demonstrated if the right EC rhinal sulcus pattern association with AD reflects genetic or developmental influences.
Authors: C Garel; E Chantrel; H Brisse; M Elmaleh; D Luton; J F Oury; G Sebag; M Hassan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: C M Leonard; M A Eckert; L J Lombardino; T Oakland; J Kranzler; C M Mohr; W M King; A Freeman Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: M J de Leon; A Convit; O T Wolf; C Y Tarshish; S DeSanti; H Rusinek; W Tsui; E Kandil; A J Scherer; A Roche; A Imossi; E Thorn; M Bobinski; C Caraos; P Lesbre; D Schlyer; J Poirier; B Reisberg; J Fowler Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-08-28 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Ekaterina Rogaeva; Yan Meng; Joseph H Lee; Yongjun Gu; Toshitaka Kawarai; Fanggeng Zou; Taiichi Katayama; Clinton T Baldwin; Rong Cheng; Hiroshi Hasegawa; Fusheng Chen; Nobuto Shibata; Kathryn L Lunetta; Raphaelle Pardossi-Piquard; Christopher Bohm; Yosuke Wakutani; L Adrienne Cupples; Karen T Cuenco; Robert C Green; Lorenzo Pinessi; Innocenzo Rainero; Sandro Sorbi; Amalia Bruni; Ranjan Duara; Robert P Friedland; Rivka Inzelberg; Wolfgang Hampe; Hideaki Bujo; You-Qiang Song; Olav M Andersen; Thomas E Willnow; Neill Graff-Radford; Ronald C Petersen; Dennis Dickson; Sandy D Der; Paul E Fraser; Gerold Schmitt-Ulms; Steven Younkin; Richard Mayeux; Lindsay A Farrer; Peter St George-Hyslop Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2007-01-14 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: P M Thompson; M S Mega; R P Woods; C I Zoumalan; C J Lindshield; R E Blanton; J Moussai; C J Holmes; J L Cummings; A W Toga Journal: Cereb Cortex Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 5.357
Authors: David F Fischer; Renske van Dijk; Jacqueline A Sluijs; Suresh M Nair; Marco Racchi; Christiaan N Levelt; Fred W van Leeuwen; Elly M Hol Journal: FASEB J Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: C Delattre; C Bournonville; F Auger; R Lopes; C Delmaire; H Henon; A M Mendyk; S Bombois; J C Devedjian; D Leys; C Cordonnier; R Bordet; M Bastide Journal: Transl Stroke Res Date: 2017-10-16 Impact factor: 6.829
Authors: C C Price; M F Wood; C M Leonard; S Towler; J Ward; H Montijo; I Kellison; D Bowers; T Monk; J C Newcomer; I Schmalfuss Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Jean C Augustinack; Kristen E Huber; Allison A Stevens; Michelle Roy; Matthew P Frosch; André J W van der Kouwe; Lawrence L Wald; Koen Van Leemput; Ann C McKee; Bruce Fischl Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2012-08-30 Impact factor: 6.556