BACKGROUND: Determination of diffusion tensor metrics in typically developing school-age children shows that maturational increases in fractional anisotropy (FA) vary across the brain and that age effects on FA are to increases in axial diffusivity in some regions, to decreases in radial diffusivity in some, and to both increases in axial and decreases in radial diffusivity in others. OBJECTIVE: When studying developing white matter (WM) using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), knowledge of age-related normative tensor metrics is important, as normal variations can mask or mimic disease effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Right-handed English-speaking children (n = 32) 6-18 years old (mean 11.0) were studied over 31 months, 7 longitudinally. Anisotropy data were analyzed using tract-based spatial statistics; 43 regions showing significant (P < 0.05) age effects on fractional anisotropy (FA) were analyzed for age effects (r), coefficient of variability (CV), and FA, axial and radial diffusivity. This study was IRB-approved. RESULTS: The callosal genu and splenium showed the highest FA values, smallest age effects, and lowest between-subject variability. Mean FA was lower and age effects were greatest in the dorsal callosal body. The highest age effects on FA were in the cingulum, centrum semiovale, right corticospinal tract, and right temporal WM. The dorsal callosal body, calcarine WM, superior frontal and temporal gyri, and right corticospinal tract showed the highest CV. Radial diffusivity decreased while axial diffusivity increased in the cingulum, decreased in the optic tracts, and showed minimal or no age effects in most other regions. CONCLUSION: Age effects on FA and variability in FA are location-dependant in developing WM.
BACKGROUND: Determination of diffusion tensor metrics in typically developing school-age children shows that maturational increases in fractional anisotropy (FA) vary across the brain and that age effects on FA are to increases in axial diffusivity in some regions, to decreases in radial diffusivity in some, and to both increases in axial and decreases in radial diffusivity in others. OBJECTIVE: When studying developing white matter (WM) using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), knowledge of age-related normative tensor metrics is important, as normal variations can mask or mimic disease effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Right-handed English-speaking children (n = 32) 6-18 years old (mean 11.0) were studied over 31 months, 7 longitudinally. Anisotropy data were analyzed using tract-based spatial statistics; 43 regions showing significant (P < 0.05) age effects on fractional anisotropy (FA) were analyzed for age effects (r), coefficient of variability (CV), and FA, axial and radial diffusivity. This study was IRB-approved. RESULTS: The callosal genu and splenium showed the highest FA values, smallest age effects, and lowest between-subject variability. Mean FA was lower and age effects were greatest in the dorsal callosal body. The highest age effects on FA were in the cingulum, centrum semiovale, right corticospinal tract, and right temporal WM. The dorsal callosal body, calcarine WM, superior frontal and temporal gyri, and right corticospinal tract showed the highest CV. Radial diffusivity decreased while axial diffusivity increased in the cingulum, decreased in the optic tracts, and showed minimal or no age effects in most other regions. CONCLUSION: Age effects on FA and variability in FA are location-dependant in developing WM.
Authors: A Ozturk; A D Sasson; J A D Farrell; B A Landman; A C B S da Motta; A Aralasmak; D M Yousem Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-03-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: T Richards; J Stevenson; J Crouch; L C Johnson; K Maravilla; P Stock; R Abbott; V Berninger Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2008-05-08 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Susumu Mori; Walter E Kaufmann; Christos Davatzikos; Bram Stieltjes; Laura Amodei; Kim Fredericksen; Godfrey D Pearlson; Elias R Melhem; Meiyappan Solaiyappan; Gerald V Raymond; Hugo W Moser; Peter C M van Zijl Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Gayle K Deutsch; Robert F Dougherty; Roland Bammer; Wai Ting Siok; John D E Gabrieli; Brian Wandell Journal: Cortex Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.027
Authors: W Yuan; S K Holland; V J Schmithorst; N C Walz; K M Cecil; B V Jones; P Karunanayaka; L Michaud; S L Wade Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2007-09-28 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Elise A Stave; Michael D De Bellis; Steven R Hooper; Donald P Woolley; Suk Ki Chang; Steven D Chen Journal: J Child Neurol Date: 2017-01-16 Impact factor: 1.987
Authors: A Cancelliere; F T Mangano; E L Air; B V Jones; M Altaye; A Rajagopal; S K Holland; D A Hertzler; W Yuan Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-01-31 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Chi T Ngo; Kylie H Alm; Athanasia Metoki; William Hampton; Tracy Riggins; Nora S Newcombe; Ingrid R Olson Journal: Dev Cogn Neurosci Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 6.464
Authors: Venla Kumpulainen; Harri Merisaari; Anni Copeland; Eero Silver; Elmo P Pulli; John D Lewis; Ekaterina Saukko; Jani Saunavaara; Linnea Karlsson; Hasse Karlsson; Jetro J Tuulari Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2022-08-15 Impact factor: 3.698
Authors: Lucy D Vanes; Michael Moutoussis; Gabriel Ziegler; Ian M Goodyer; Peter Fonagy; Peter B Jones; Edward T Bullmore; Raymond J Dolan Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2019-10-29 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Ai Peng Tan; Zhen Ming Ngoh; Shayne Siok Peng Yeo; Dawn Xin Ping Koh; Peter Gluckman; Yap Seng Chong; Lourdes Mary Daniel; Anne Rifkin-Graboi; Marielle V Fortier; Anqi Qiu; Michael Meaney Journal: Eur J Neurosci Date: 2021-06-23 Impact factor: 3.698