OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate age-corrected brain MR elastography (MRE) findings in four dementia cohorts (Alzheimer disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, frontotemporal dementia, and normal pressure hydrocephalus) and determine the potential use as a differentiating biomarker in dementia subtypes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained to perform MRE on 84 subjects: 20 patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus, eight with Alzheimer disease, five with dementia with Lewy bodies, five with frontotemporal dementia, and 46 cognitively normal control subjects. Shear waves of 60-Hz vibration frequency were transmitted into the brain using a pillowlike passive driver, and brain stiffness was determined in eight different regions (cerebrum, frontal, occipital, parietal, temporal, deep gray matter-white matter, sensorimotor cortex, and cerebellum). All stiffness values were age-corrected and compared with control subjects. The Wilcoxon rank sum test and linear regression were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Regional stiffness patterns unique to each dementing disorder were observed. Patients with Alzheimer disease and frontotemporal dementia showed decreased cerebral stiffness (p = 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively) with regional softening of the frontal and temporal lobes. Patients with Alzheimer disease additionally showed parietal lobe and sensorimotor region softening (p = 0.039 and p = 0.018, respectively). Patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus showed stiffening of the parietal, occipital, and sensorimotor regions (p = 0.007, p < 0.001, and p < 0.0001, respectively). Patients with dementia with Lewy bodies did not show significant stiffness changes in any of the regions. CONCLUSION: Quantitative MRE of changes in brain viscoelastic structure shows unique regional brain stiffness patterns between common dementia subtypes.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate age-corrected brain MR elastography (MRE) findings in four dementia cohorts (Alzheimer disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, frontotemporal dementia, and normal pressure hydrocephalus) and determine the potential use as a differentiating biomarker in dementia subtypes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval and written informed consent were obtained to perform MRE on 84 subjects: 20 patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus, eight with Alzheimer disease, five with dementia with Lewy bodies, five with frontotemporal dementia, and 46 cognitively normal control subjects. Shear waves of 60-Hz vibration frequency were transmitted into the brain using a pillowlike passive driver, and brain stiffness was determined in eight different regions (cerebrum, frontal, occipital, parietal, temporal, deep gray matter-white matter, sensorimotor cortex, and cerebellum). All stiffness values were age-corrected and compared with control subjects. The Wilcoxon rank sum test and linear regression were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Regional stiffness patterns unique to each dementing disorder were observed. Patients with Alzheimer disease and frontotemporal dementia showed decreased cerebral stiffness (p = 0.001 and p = 0.002, respectively) with regional softening of the frontal and temporal lobes. Patients with Alzheimer disease additionally showed parietal lobe and sensorimotor region softening (p = 0.039 and p = 0.018, respectively). Patients with normal pressure hydrocephalus showed stiffening of the parietal, occipital, and sensorimotor regions (p = 0.007, p < 0.001, and p < 0.0001, respectively). Patients with dementia with Lewy bodies did not show significant stiffness changes in any of the regions. CONCLUSION: Quantitative MRE of changes in brain viscoelastic structure shows unique regional brain stiffness patterns between common dementia subtypes.
Authors: H J Rosen; M L Gorno-Tempini; W P Goldman; R J Perry; N Schuff; M Weiner; R Feiwell; J H Kramer; B L Miller Journal: Neurology Date: 2002-01-22 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Kejal Kantarci; Val J Lowe; Bradley F Boeve; Stephen D Weigand; Matthew L Senjem; Scott A Przybelski; Dennis W Dickson; Joseph E Parisi; David S Knopman; Glenn E Smith; Tanis J Ferman; Ronald C Petersen; Clifford R Jack Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2011-10-21 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Zuzana Nedelska; Tanis J Ferman; Bradley F Boeve; Scott A Przybelski; Timothy G Lesnick; Melissa E Murray; Jeffrey L Gunter; Matthew L Senjem; Prashanti Vemuri; Glenn E Smith; Yonas E Geda; Jonathan Graff-Radford; David S Knopman; Ronald C Petersen; Joseph E Parisi; Dennis W Dickson; Clifford R Jack; Kejal Kantarci Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2014-07-15 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: A Manduca; T E Oliphant; M A Dresner; J L Mahowald; S A Kruse; E Amromin; J P Felmlee; J F Greenleaf; R L Ehman Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Arvin Arani; Matthew C Murphy; Kevin J Glaser; Armando Manduca; David S Lake; Scott A Kruse; Clifford R Jack; Richard L Ehman; John Huston Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2015-02-17 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Matthew C Murphy; John Huston; Clifford R Jack; Kevin J Glaser; Matthew L Senjem; Jun Chen; Armando Manduca; Joel P Felmlee; Richard L Ehman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jonathan M Scott; Arvin Arani; Armando Manduca; Kiaran P McGee; Joshua D Trzasko; John Huston; Richard L Ehman; Matthew C Murphy Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2020-04-22 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Ziying Yin; Yi Sui; Joshua D Trzasko; Phillip J Rossman; Armando Manduca; Richard L Ehman; John Huston Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Matthew C Murphy; Armando Manduca; Joshua D Trzasko; Kevin J Glaser; John Huston; Richard L Ehman Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: T Takamura; U Motosugi; M Ogiwara; Y Sasaki; K J Glaser; R L Ehman; H Kinouchi; H Onishi Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 4.966