BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MRI biomarkers play an important role in the diagnostic work-up of dementia, but their prognostic value is less well-understood. We investigated if simple MRI rating scales predict mortality in a memory clinic population. METHODS: We included 1138 consecutive patients attending our memory clinic. Diagnostic categories were: subjective complaints (n=220), mild cognitive impairment (n=160), Alzheimer disease (n=357), vascular dementia (n=46), other dementia (n=136), and other diagnosis (n=219). Baseline MRIs were assessed using visual rating scales for medial temporal lobe atrophy (range, 0-4), global cortical atrophy (range, 0-3), and white matter hyperintensities (range, 0-3). Number of microbleeds and presence of infarcts were recorded. Cox-regression models were used to calculate the risk of mortality. RESULTS: Mean follow-up duration was 2.6 (+/-1.9) years. In unadjusted models, all MRI markers except infarcts predicted mortality. After adjustment for age, sex, and diagnosis, white matter hyperintensities, and microbleeds predicted mortality (white matter hyperintensities: hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; microbleeds: HR, 1.02 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; categorized: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.0). The predictive effect of global cortical atrophy was restricted to younger subjects (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.6). An interaction between microbleeds and global cortical atrophy indicated that mortality was especially high in patients with both microbleeds and global cortical atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: Simple MRI biomarkers, in addition to their diagnostic use, have a prognostic value with respect to mortality in a memory clinic population. Microbleeds were the strongest predictor of mortality.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: MRI biomarkers play an important role in the diagnostic work-up of dementia, but their prognostic value is less well-understood. We investigated if simple MRI rating scales predict mortality in a memory clinic population. METHODS: We included 1138 consecutive patients attending our memory clinic. Diagnostic categories were: subjective complaints (n=220), mild cognitive impairment (n=160), Alzheimer disease (n=357), vascular dementia (n=46), other dementia (n=136), and other diagnosis (n=219). Baseline MRIs were assessed using visual rating scales for medial temporal lobe atrophy (range, 0-4), global cortical atrophy (range, 0-3), and white matter hyperintensities (range, 0-3). Number of microbleeds and presence of infarcts were recorded. Cox-regression models were used to calculate the risk of mortality. RESULTS: Mean follow-up duration was 2.6 (+/-1.9) years. In unadjusted models, all MRI markers except infarcts predicted mortality. After adjustment for age, sex, and diagnosis, white matter hyperintensities, and microbleeds predicted mortality (white matter hyperintensities: hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; microbleeds: HR, 1.02 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; categorized: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.0). The predictive effect of global cortical atrophy was restricted to younger subjects (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.6). An interaction between microbleeds and global cortical atrophy indicated that mortality was especially high in patients with both microbleeds and global cortical atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: Simple MRI biomarkers, in addition to their diagnostic use, have a prognostic value with respect to mortality in a memory clinic population. Microbleeds were the strongest predictor of mortality.
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: Jennifer L Whitwell; Clifford R Jack; Joseph R Duffy; Edythe A Strand; Jeffrey L Gunter; Matthew L Senjem; Matthew C Murphy; Kejal Kantarci; Mary M Machulda; Val J Lowe; Keith A Josephs Journal: Alzheimers Dement Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 21.566
Authors: Saloua Akoudad; Mohammad Arfan Ikram; Peter Jan Koudstaal; Albert Hofman; Aad van der Lugt; Meike Willemijn Vernooij Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2013-09-26 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: P J Olesen; X Guo; D Gustafson; A Börjesson-Hanson; S Sacuíu; C Eckerström; E D Bigler; I Skoog Journal: Neurology Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: M M A Conijn; M I Geerlings; G-J Biessels; T Takahara; T D Witkamp; J J M Zwanenburg; P R Luijten; J Hendrikse Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Andreas Charidimou; Sara Shams; Jose R Romero; Jie Ding; Roland Veltkamp; Solveig Horstmann; Gudny Eiriksdottir; Mark A van Buchem; Vilmundur Gudnason; Jayandra J Himali; M Edip Gurol; Anand Viswanathan; Toshio Imaizumi; Meike W Vernooij; Sudha Seshadri; Steven M Greenberg; Oscar R Benavente; Lenore J Launer; Ashkan Shoamanesh Journal: Int J Stroke Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 5.266
Authors: Kristine Yaffe; Carrie B Peltz; Susan K Ewing; Charles E McCulloch; Steve R Cummings; Jane A Cauley; Teresa A Hillier; Kristine E Ensrud Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2016-02-03 Impact factor: 6.053