OBJECTIVE: To cross-sectionally compare the regional white matter fractional anisotropy (FA) of cognitively normal (CN) older individuals and patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD), separately focusing on the normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and white matter hyperintensities (WMH), and to test the independent effects of presumed degenerative and vascular process on FA differences. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with AD, 73 patients with MCI, and 95 CN subjects received diffusion tensor imaging and vascular risk evaluation. To properly control normal regional variability of FA, we divided cerebral white matter into 4 strata as measured from a series of young healthy individuals (H1 = highest; H2 = intermediate high; H3 = intermediate low; H4 = lowest anisotropy stratum). RESULTS: For overall cerebral white matter, patients with AD had significantly lower FA than CN individuals or patients with MCI in the regions with higher baseline anisotropy (H1, H2, and H3), corresponding to long corticocortical association fibers, but not in H4, which mostly includes heterogeneously oriented fibers. Vascular risk showed significant independent effects on FA in all strata except H1, which corresponds to the genu and splenium of the corpus callosum. Similar results were found within NAWM. FA in WMH was significantly lower than NAWM across all strata but was not associated with diagnosis or vascular risk. CONCLUSIONS: Both vascular and Alzheimer disease degenerative process contribute to microstructural injury of cerebral white matter across the spectrum of cognitive ability and have different region-specific injury patterns.
OBJECTIVE: To cross-sectionally compare the regional white matter fractional anisotropy (FA) of cognitively normal (CN) older individuals and patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer disease (AD), separately focusing on the normal-appearing white matter (NAWM) and white matter hyperintensities (WMH), and to test the independent effects of presumed degenerative and vascular process on FA differences. METHODS: Forty-seven patients with AD, 73 patients with MCI, and 95 CN subjects received diffusion tensor imaging and vascular risk evaluation. To properly control normal regional variability of FA, we divided cerebral white matter into 4 strata as measured from a series of young healthy individuals (H1 = highest; H2 = intermediate high; H3 = intermediate low; H4 = lowest anisotropy stratum). RESULTS: For overall cerebral white matter, patients with AD had significantly lower FA than CN individuals or patients with MCI in the regions with higher baseline anisotropy (H1, H2, and H3), corresponding to long corticocortical association fibers, but not in H4, which mostly includes heterogeneously oriented fibers. Vascular risk showed significant independent effects on FA in all strata except H1, which corresponds to the genu and splenium of the corpus callosum. Similar results were found within NAWM. FA in WMH was significantly lower than NAWM across all strata but was not associated with diagnosis or vascular risk. CONCLUSIONS: Both vascular and Alzheimer disease degenerative process contribute to microstructural injury of cerebral white matter across the spectrum of cognitive ability and have different region-specific injury patterns.
Authors: David Medina; Leyla DeToledo-Morrell; Fabio Urresta; John D E Gabrieli; Michael Moseley; Debra Fleischman; David A Bennett; Sue Leurgans; David A Turner; Glenn T Stebbins Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2005-07-07 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Charles DeCarli; Joseph Massaro; Danielle Harvey; John Hald; Mats Tullberg; Rhoda Au; Alexa Beiser; Ralph D'Agostino; Philip A Wolf Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Andreas Fellgiebel; Matthias J Müller; Paulo Wille; Paulo R Dellani; Armin Scheurich; Lutz G Schmidt; Peter Stoeter Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2005-01-12 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Natalie L Marchant; Bruce R Reed; Charles S DeCarli; Cindee M Madison; Michael W Weiner; Helena C Chui; William J Jagust Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2011-11-01 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: J He; V S S Wong; E Fletcher; P Maillard; D Y Lee; A-M Iosif; B Singh; O Martinez; A E Roach; S N Lockhart; L Beckett; D Mungas; S T Farias; O Carmichael; C DeCarli Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Romina M Uranga; Annadora J Bruce-Keller; Christopher D Morrison; Sun Ok Fernandez-Kim; Philip J Ebenezer; Le Zhang; Kalavathi Dasuri; Jeffrey N Keller Journal: J Neurochem Date: 2010-05-06 Impact factor: 5.372
Authors: Julia A Scott; Meredith N Braskie; Duygu Tosun; Pauline Maillard; Paul M Thompson; Michael Weiner; Charles DeCarli; Owen T Carmichael Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2016-08-24 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Lisa C Silbert; Hiroko H Dodge; Louie G Perkins; Lena Sherbakov; David Lahna; Deniz Erten-Lyons; Randall Woltjer; Lynne Shinto; Jeffrey A Kaye Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 9.910