PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of automated hippocampal volumetry to help distinguish between patients with Alzheimer disease (AD), patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and elderly controls, by using established criteria for patients with AD and MCI as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The regional ethics committee approved the study and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The study included 25 patients with AD (11 men, 14 women; mean age +/- standard deviation [SD], 73 years +/- 6; Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, 24.4 +/- 2.7), 24 patients with amnestic MCI (10 men, 14 women; mean age +/- SD, 74 years +/- 8; MMSE score, 27.2 +/- 1.4) and 25 elderly healthy controls (13 men, 12 women; mean age +/- SD, 64 years +/- 8). For each participant, the hippocampi were automatically segmented on three-dimensional T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images with high spatial resolution. Segmentation was performed by using recently developed software that allows fast segmentation with minimal user input. Group differences in hippocampal volume were assessed by using Student t tests. To obtain robust estimates of P values, the correct classification rate, sensitivity, and specificity, bootstrap methods were used. RESULTS: Significant hippocampal volume reductions were detected in all groups of patients (-32% in AD patients vs controls, P < .001; -19% in MCI patients vs controls, P < .001; and -15% in AD patients vs MCI patients, P < .01). Individual classification on the basis of hippocampal volume resulted in 84% correct classification (sensitivity, 84%; specificity, 84%) between AD patients and controls and 73% correct classification (sensitivity, 75%; specificity, 70%) between MCI patients and controls. CONCLUSION: This automated method can serve as an alternative to manual tracing and may thus prove useful in assisting with the diagnosis of AD. (c) RSNA, 2008.
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the accuracy of automated hippocampal volumetry to help distinguish between patients with Alzheimer disease (AD), patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and elderly controls, by using established criteria for patients with AD and MCI as the reference standard. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The regional ethics committee approved the study and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The study included 25 patients with AD (11 men, 14 women; mean age +/- standard deviation [SD], 73 years +/- 6; Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, 24.4 +/- 2.7), 24 patients with amnestic MCI (10 men, 14 women; mean age +/- SD, 74 years +/- 8; MMSE score, 27.2 +/- 1.4) and 25 elderly healthy controls (13 men, 12 women; mean age +/- SD, 64 years +/- 8). For each participant, the hippocampi were automatically segmented on three-dimensional T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images with high spatial resolution. Segmentation was performed by using recently developed software that allows fast segmentation with minimal user input. Group differences in hippocampal volume were assessed by using Student t tests. To obtain robust estimates of P values, the correct classification rate, sensitivity, and specificity, bootstrap methods were used. RESULTS: Significant hippocampal volume reductions were detected in all groups of patients (-32% in ADpatients vs controls, P < .001; -19% in MCI patients vs controls, P < .001; and -15% in ADpatients vs MCI patients, P < .01). Individual classification on the basis of hippocampal volume resulted in 84% correct classification (sensitivity, 84%; specificity, 84%) between ADpatients and controls and 73% correct classification (sensitivity, 75%; specificity, 70%) between MCI patients and controls. CONCLUSION: This automated method can serve as an alternative to manual tracing and may thus prove useful in assisting with the diagnosis of AD. (c) RSNA, 2008.
Authors: Marina Boccardi; Rossana Ganzola; Martina Bocchetta; Michela Pievani; Alberto Redolfi; George Bartzokis; Richard Camicioli; John G Csernansky; Mony J de Leon; Leyla deToledo-Morrell; Ronald J Killiany; Stéphane Lehéricy; Johannes Pantel; Jens C Pruessner; H Soininen; Craig Watson; Simon Duchesne; Clifford R Jack; Giovanni B Frisoni Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2011 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Shannon L Risacher; Li Shen; John D West; Sungeun Kim; Brenna C McDonald; Laurel A Beckett; Danielle J Harvey; Clifford R Jack; Michael W Weiner; Andrew J Saykin Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Renée DeVivo; Lauren Zajac; Asim Mian; Anna Cervantes-Arslanian; Eric Steinberg; Michael L Alosco; Jesse Mez; Robert Stern; Ronald Killany Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2019-05-27 Impact factor: 2.892
Authors: Giovanni B Frisoni; Nick C Fox; Clifford R Jack; Philip Scheltens; Paul M Thompson Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Anouk G W van Norden; Karlijn F de Laat; Ilma Fick; Inge W M van Uden; Lucas J B van Oudheusden; Rob A R Gons; David G Norris; Marcel P Zwiers; Roy P C Kessels; Frank-Erik de Leeuw Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2011-03-09 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Shannon L Risacher; Andrew J Saykin; John D West; Li Shen; Hiram A Firpi; Brenna C McDonald Journal: Curr Alzheimer Res Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Rahul S Desikan; Howard J Cabral; Christopher P Hess; William P Dillon; Christine M Glastonbury; Michael W Weiner; Nicholas J Schmansky; Douglas N Greve; David H Salat; Randy L Buckner; Bruce Fischl Journal: Brain Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 13.501