| Literature DB >> 22131273 |
Martina Minnerop1, Bernd Weber, Jan-Christoph Schoene-Bake, Sandra Roeske, Sandra Mirbach, Christian Anspach, Christiane Schneider-Gold, Regina C Betz, Christoph Helmstaedter, Marc Tittgemeyer, Thomas Klockgether, Cornelia Kornblum.
Abstract
Myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2 are progressive multisystemic disorders with potential brain involvement. We compared 22 myotonic dystrophy type 1 and 22 myotonic dystrophy type 2 clinically and neuropsychologically well-characterized patients and a corresponding healthy control group using structural brain magnetic resonance imaging at 3 T (T(1)/T(2)/diffusion-weighted). Voxel-based morphometry and diffusion tensor imaging with tract-based spatial statistics were applied for voxel-wise analysis of cerebral grey and white matter affection (P(corrected) < 0.05). We further examined the association of structural brain changes with clinical and neuropsychological data. White matter lesions rated visually were more prevalent and severe in myotonic dystrophy type 1 compared with controls, with frontal white matter most prominently affected in both disorders, and temporal lesions restricted to myotonic dystrophy type 1. Voxel-based morphometry analyses demonstrated extensive white matter involvement in all cerebral lobes, brainstem and corpus callosum in myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2, while grey matter decrease (cortical areas, thalamus, putamen) was restricted to myotonic dystrophy type 1. Accordingly, we found more prominent white matter affection in myotonic dystrophy type 1 than myotonic dystrophy type 2 by diffusion tensor imaging. Association fibres throughout the whole brain, limbic system fibre tracts, the callosal body and projection fibres (e.g. internal/external capsules) were affected in myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2. Central motor pathways were exclusively impaired in myotonic dystrophy type 1. We found mild executive and attentional deficits in our patients when neuropsychological tests were corrected for manual motor dysfunctioning. Regression analyses revealed associations of white matter affection with several clinical parameters in both disease entities, but not with neuropsychological performance. We showed that depressed mood and fatigue were more prominent in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 with less white matter affection (early disease stages), contrary to patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2. Thus, depression in myotonic dystrophies might be a reactive adjustment disorder rather than a direct consequence of structural brain damage. Associations of white matter affection with age/disease duration as well as patterns of cerebral water diffusion parameters pointed towards an ongoing process of myelin destruction and/or axonal loss in our cross-sectional study design. Our data suggest that both myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2 are serious white matter diseases with prominent callosal body and limbic system affection. White matter changes dominated the extent of grey matter changes, which might argue against Wallerian degeneration as the major cause of white matter affection in myotonic dystrophies.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22131273 PMCID: PMC3235566 DOI: 10.1093/brain/awr299
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Brain ISSN: 0006-8950 Impact factor: 13.501
Clinical characteristics of patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 and myotonic dystrophy type 2 and healthy controls (mean ± SD)
| Myotonic dystrophy type 1 patient group | Myotonic dystrophy type 2 patient group | Control group | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22 | 22 | 22 | |
| Age | 52.5 ± 10.1 | 50.1 ± 9.0 | |
| Sex (M/F) | 9/13 | 12/10 | 11/11 |
| CTG repeat length (range) | 614 ± 306 (80–1100) | – | – |
| Educational level | 11.6 ± 2.1 | 11.7 ± 1.8 | |
| Duration of disease (years) | 13.2 ± 7.0 | 11.9 ± 9.9 | – |
| Severity of disease (Muscular Impairment Rating Scale) | 3.6 ± 0.9 | – | – |
| Motor performance (Purdue Pegboard bimanual, cut-off <11 pairs in 30 s) | 11.6 ± 1.3 | ||
| Depressed mood (BDI score, cut off >10) | 2.1 ± 3.5 |
Educational levels were assessed as a combination score of graduation and professional qualification (sum score).
*P < 0.05, i.e. significant difference compared with control group.
Neuropsychological function, controlled for motor performance, in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 and myotonic dystrophy type 2 compared with controls (mean ± SD)
| Myotonic dystrophy type 1 ( | Myotonic dystrophy type 2 ( | Controls ( | Myotonic dystrophy type 1 versus controls | Myotonic dystrophy type 2 versus controls | Myotonic dystrophy type 1 versus myotonic dystrophy type 2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Focused attention (c.I.T.S) | 19.64 (5.06) | 20.55 (5.48) | 15.76 (2.77) | 3.135 (0.084) | 0.876 (0.355) | |
| Interference (c.I.T.I) | 27.50 (7.84) | 25.82 (5.65) | 19.38 (4.71) | 0.057 (0.812) | ||
| Psychomotoric speed (TMT A) | 33.45 (11.70) | 39.00 (16.29) | 36.24 (14.29) | 2.136 (0.152) | 0.208 (0.651) | 3.660 (0.063) |
| Attention shift, mental flexibility (TMT B) | 96.52 (48.75) | 90.27 (35.24) | 83.52 (32.70) | 0.001 (0.970) | 0.662 (0.421) | 0.002 (0.961) |
| Naming (Boston Naming) | 54.36 (4.09) | 56.32 (7.47) | 56.67 (3.48) | 1.199 (0.280) | 2.719 (0.107) | 0.627 (0.433) |
| Phonematic fluency | 29.50 (7.74) | 29.45 (8.96) | 33.57 (9.54) | 0.011 (0.918) | 0.261 (0.612) | 0.235 (0.631) |
| Semantic fluency | 23.77 (5.77) | 22.18 (6.34) | 24.48 (4.57) | 0.204 (0.654) | 0.717 (0.402) | 1.420 (0.240) |
| Visual–spatial / visual–constructive abilities (Blocktest) | 22.32 (10.54) | 29.95 (9.79) | 27.90 (8.01) | 0.499 (0.484) | 2.432 (0.127) | |
| Reaction time (NeurocogFX) | 263.82 (55.56) | 291.64 (73.85) | 258.52 (47.80) | 0.001 (0.974) | 1.555 (0.220) | 3.919 (0.054) |
| Choice reaction time (NeurocogFX) | 98.64 (58.56) | 141.86 (60.30) | 135.76 (57.85) | 0.229 (0.635) | ||
| Interference (NeurocogFX) | 388.91 (57.14) | 450.59 (84.34) | 412.57 (71.22) | 3.528 (0.068) | 1.642 (0.207) | |
| Verbal memory-recognition (NeurocogFX) | 43.16 (4.91) | 36.50 (6.86) | 40.88 (2.98) | 0.051 (0.823) | ||
| Figural memory-recognition (NeurocogFX) | 5.59 (7.43) | 7.68 (8.16) | 6.57 (8.53) | 0.711 (0.404) | 2.863 (0.056) | 0.072 (0.790) |
a Significant influence of motor performance.
Names of the applied test or test battery for each neuropsychological function are given in brackets. For details regarding the neuropsychological tests, see Supplementary material.
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.
c.I.T.S = subtest (symbol counting) of the Cerebraler Insuffizienztest; c.I.T.I = subtest (response inhibition) of the Cerebraler Insuffizienztest; NeurocogFX = omputerised neuropsychological screening test battery; TMT = Trail-Making Test.
Sleep scales in patients with myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2 compared with controls (mean ± SD)
| Cut-off Values | Myotonic dystrophy type 1 ( | Myotonic dystrophy type 2 ( | Controls ( | Myotonic dystrophy type 1 versus controls | Myotonic dystrophy type 2 versus controls | Myotonic dystrophy type 1 versus myotonic dystrophy type 2 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PSQI total-score | >5 | 5.67 (3.43) | 5.85 (3.82) | 3.11 (2.23) | 0.026 (0.872) | ||
| KFSS | >3.7 | 4.38 (1.59) | 4.61 (1.73) | 2.26 (0.72) | 0.118 (0.733) | ||
| Daytime Sleepiness Scale | >10 | 11.27 (3.87) | 8.76 (5.48) | 6.47 (3.06) | 2.465 (0.125) | 2.601 (0.115) | |
| Epworth Sleepiness Scale | >10 | 9.50 (3.20) | 7.19 (4.01) | 5.67 (2.35) | 1.661 (0.206) | 4.005 (0.052) | |
| Ullanlinna | >13 | 9.68 (5.02) | 6.10 (3.16) | 5.42 (1.92) | 0.866 (0.358) |
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.
Ullanlinna = Ullanlinna-Narcolepsy Scale.
Pearson product–moment correlation coefficient for correlations (P-values are given in brackets) between neuropsychological tests and fatigue/sleepiness scales with age, disease duration, motor performance and BDI score
| Function | Focused attention | Interference | Choice reaction time | Verbal memory-rec. | Depressed mood | Fatigue | Daytime sleepiness | Sleep quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Test) | (c.I.T.S) | (c.I.T.I) | (Neuro-Cog FX) | (Neuro-Cog FX) | (BDI) | (KFSS) | (DSS) | (PSQI) |
| Myotonic dystrophy type 1 | ||||||||
| Age | 0.14 (0.534) | −0.30 (0.169) | −0.04 (0.877) | −0.42 (0.053) | −0.27 (0.233) | |||
| Disease duration | 0.02 (0.938) | 0.23 (0.295) | 0.07 (0.745) | −0.29 (0.187) | −0.20 (0.366) | −0.28 (0.206) | −0.15 (0.505) | −0.36 (0.113) |
| Motor performance | 0.40 (0.066) | −0.23 (0.301) | 0.016 (0.943) | −0.23 (0.308) | ||||
| Depressed mood | −0.25 (0.912) | 0.68 (0.763) | −0.14 (0.536) | 0.91 (0.687) | − | |||
| Myotonic dystrophy type 2 | ||||||||
| Age | 0.07 (0.768) | 0.28 (0.205) | −0.03 (0.879) | −0.33 (0.134) | 0.04 (0.850) | 0.05 (0.836) | 0.1 (0.667) | −0.41 (0.077) |
| Disease duration | −0.29 (0.195) | −0.02 (0.932) | −0.10 (0.657) | −0.34 (0.125) | 0.09 (0.684) | −0.08 (0.728) | 0.04 (0.857) | −0.10 (0.664) |
| Motor performance | −0.09 (0.682) | 0.24 (0.290) | 0.31 (0.166) | −0.23 (0.319) | −0.26 (0.249) | −0.03 (0.891) | ||
| Depressed mood | 0.18 (0.444) | 0.15 (0.947) | 0.16 (0.488) | −0.43 (0.853) | – | 0.28 (0.216) | 0.36 (0.111) | 0.34 (0.139) |
| Controls | ||||||||
| Age | 0.33 (0.144) | 0.33 (0.145) | 0.31 (0.170) | 0.22 (0.331) | −0.14 (0.558) | 0.01 (0.959) | 0.07 (0.784) | −0.12 (0.634) |
| Motor performance | 0.72 (0.758) | −0.22 (0.350) | −0.19 (0.403) | −0.02 (0.935) | 0.29 (0.234) | −0.18 (0.470) | 0.19 (0.427) | 0.16 (0.508) |
| Depressed mood | 0.04 (0.866) | 0.18 (0.461) | −0.39 (0.98) | −0.33 (0.167) | – | −0.4 (0.887) | 0.44 (0.061) |
Names of the applied test or test battery for each neuropsychological function are given in brackets. For details regarding the neuropsychological tests, see Supplementary material.
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001.
c.I.T.S = subtest (symbol counting) of the Cerebraler Insuffizienztest; c.I.T.I = subtest (response inhibition) of the Cerebraler Insuffizienztest; DSS = Daytime Sleepiness Scale; NeurocogFX =computerised neuropsychological screening test battery.
White matter hyperintensities rated according the ARWMC scale in patients with myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2 and control subjects (mean ± SD)
| Myotonic dystrophy type 1 patient group | Myotonic dystrophy type 2 patient group | Control group | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total score | 1.0 ± 1.75 (0.15) | 0.39 ± 0.66 | |
| Frontal subscore | 0.09 ± 0.29 | ||
| Parieto-occipital subscore | 0.45 ± 1.14 (0.52) | 0.45 ± 1.10 (0.51) | 0.26 ± 0.62 |
| Temporal subscore | 0.18 ± 0.85 (0.32) | 0 | 0 |
| Infratentorial subscore | 0 (0.32) | 0 (0.32) | 0.04 ± 0.21 |
*Significant differences (P < 0.05) between patient and control groups. P-values are given in brackets.
ARWMC = age-related white matter change score.
Figure 1Neuroimaging results of the brain (VBM, group comparisons). Displayed results of VBM analyses are based on a threshold of Pfalse discovery rate < 0.05 at voxel-level with an extended cluster threshold of 10 voxels. The coordinates refer to the MNI reference space. (A) Grey matter decrease in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 compared with controls. (B) White matter decrease in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 compared with controls. (C) Grey matter decrease in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 compared with controls (no clusters detected). (D) White matter decrease in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 compared with controls.
Figure 2Neuroimaging results of the brain (DTI, group comparison of fractional anisotropy values). Displayed results of tract-based spatial statistics analyses of fractional anisotropy values (group comparison) are based on a corrected threshold of Pfamily wise error < 0.05. Mean tract-based spatial statistics tract skeleton is overlaid on the mean fractional anisotropy image (display threshold of 0.1). The coordinates refer to the MNI reference space. (A) Fractional anisotropy reduction in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 compared with healthy controls. (B) Fractional anisotropy reduction in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 compared with healthy controls. (C) Fractional anisotropy reduction in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 compared with patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2.
Figure 3Neuroimaging results of the brain (DTI, group comparison of fractional anisotropy values, axial, radial and mean diffusivity). Displayed results of tract-based spatial statistics analyses of different diffusivity indices (fractional anisotropy, axial diffusivity, radial diffusivity, mean diffusivity) are based on a corrected threshold of Pfamily wise error < 0.05. Mean tract-based spatial statistics tract skeleton is overlaid on the mean fractional anisotropy image (display threshold of 0.1). The coordinates refer to the MNI reference space. (A and E) Fractional anisotropy reduction in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (A) and patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 (E) compared with healthy controls. (B and F) Increase in axial diffusivity in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (B) and patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 (F) compared with healthy controls. (C and G) Increase in radial diffusivity in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (C) and patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 (G) compared with healthy controls. (D and H) Increase of mean diffusivity in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (D) and patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 (H) compared with healthy controls.
Figure 4Neuroimaging results of the brain (DTI, correlation analyses between white matter affection (fractional anisotropy values) and clinical parameters). Correlation analyses in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (A–G) and myotonic dystrophy type 2 (H–L). Displayed results of Tract-based spatial statistics analyses of fractional anisotropy values are based on a corrected threshold of Pthreshold-free cluster enhancement < 0.05. Mean tract-based spatial statistics tract skeleton is overlaid on the mean fractional anisotropy image (display threshold of 0.1). The coordinates refer to the MNI reference space. Correlations of fractional anisotropy values in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 with age and disease duration (A and B), CTG repeat length (C), Muscular Impairment Rating Scale score (D), motor performance (E). Positive correlation of fractional anisotropy values in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 with depressed mood (BDI score, F) and fatigue (KFSS score, G). Correlations of fractional anisotropy values in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 with age (H), disease duration (I) and motor performance (J). Negative correlations of fractional anisotropy values in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 2 with depressed mood (BDI score, K) and fatigue (KFSS score, L).