| Literature DB >> 30927600 |
Antonio Giorgio1, Ilaria Di Donato2, Alessandro De Leucio2, Jian Zhang2, Emilia Salvadori3, Anna Poggesi4, Stefano Diciotti5, Mirco Cosottini6, Stefano Ciulli7, Domenico Inzitari8, Leonardo Pantoni9, Mario Mascalchi10, Antonio Federico11, Maria Teresa Dotti12, Nicola De Stefano13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vascular mild cognitive impairment (VMCI) is a potentially transitional state between normal aging and vascular dementia. The presence of macroscopic white matter lesions (WML) of moderate or severe extension on brain MRI is the hallmark of the VMCI.Entities:
Keywords: Dementia; Lesion probability map; Lesions; Mild cognitive impairment; Small vessel disease; White matter
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30927600 PMCID: PMC6439281 DOI: 10.1016/j.nicl.2019.101789
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neuroimage Clin ISSN: 2213-1582 Impact factor: 4.881
Demographic, clinical and MRI characteristics of the whole VMCI patient study sample and of the four cognitive phenotypes.
| Age, years | 74.3 ± 6.6 | 74.2 ± 6.5 | 74.4 ± 6.7 | 72 ± 7.2 | 75.5 ± 6.2 | 0.63 |
| Sex (male/female) | 60/50 | 7/2 | 39/37 | 6/4 | 8/7 | 0.48 |
| Education, years | 8.3 ± 4.2 | 7.8 ± 3.3 | 8.4 ± 4.4 | 8.9 ± 4.5 | 7.6 ± 4.05 | 0.85 |
| Vascular risk factors | ||||||
| Hypertension (y/n) | 87/23 | 4/5 | 64/12 | 7/3 | 12/3 | 0.04 |
| Hypercholesterolemia (y/n) | 66/44 | 6/3 | 45/31 | 6/4 | 9/6 | 0.98 |
| Hypertrigliceridemia (y/n) | 25/85 | 1/8 | 17/59 | 4/6 | 3/12 | 0.48 |
| Diabetes (y/n) | 17/93 | 0/9 | 17/59 | 0/10 | 0/15 | 0.03 |
| Smoking (y/n) | 52/58 | 4/5 | 34/42 | 6/4 | 8/7 | 0.77 |
| History of stroke (y/n) | 33/77 | 3/6 | 21/55 | 5/5 | 4/11 | 0.52 |
| Alcohol consumption (y/n) | 33/77 | 3/6 | 22/54 | 1/9 | 7/8 | 0.26 |
| Physical activity (y/n) | 30/80 | 3/6 | 20/56 | 4/6 | 3/12 | 0.70 |
| Global cognition | ||||||
| MMSE (range 0–30) | 27.2 ± 2.7 | 27.8 ± 2.2 | 27.1 ± 2.8 | 27.2 ± 2.8 | 27.5 ± 2.8 | 0.86 |
| MoCA (range 0–30) | 21.2 ± 4.4 | 21 ± 2.1 | 21.4 ± 4.6 | 20 ± 4.4 | 21.3 ± 4.2 | 0.85 |
| Memory | ||||||
| RAVL immediate recall (range 0–75) | 32.4 ± 8.6 | 35.5 ± 6.6 | 32.2 ± 8.7 | 30.5 ± 7.5 | 32.9 ± 10.4 | 0.63 |
| RAVL delayed recall (range 0–15) | 6.1 ± 2.8 | 6.8 ± 2.7 | 6 ± 2.9 | 6 ± 1.9 | 6.2 ± 3 | 0.90 |
| Short Story (range 0–28) | 11.7 ± 4.1 | 10.8 ± 3 | 11.8 ± 4 | 10.7 ± 3.9 | 12.4 ± 5.5 | 0.70 |
| ROCF recall (range 0–36) | 12 ± 5.6 | 12.5 ± 3.7 | 12.3 ± 6 | 9.6 ± 3.7 | 11.6 ± 4.7 | 0.58 |
| Attention and executive functions | ||||||
| TMT-A (time to complete, secs) | 67.3 ± 50.1 | 62.3 ± 32 | 67.2 ± 53.9 | 81.4 ± 45.5 | 63.5 ± 44.8 | 0.85 |
| Visual Search (range 0–50) | 31.8 ± 9 | 40.3 ± 5.6 | 30.3 ± 8.8 | 33.4 ± 12.8 | 32.8 ± 5.4 | 0.01 (AMD < ASD, |
| SDMT (correct answers in 90 s) | 34.4 ± 10.4 | 33.3 ± 6.3 | 34.8 ± 10.4 | 30 ± 8.7 | 35.4 ± 13.5 | 0.56 |
| Stroop test (time to complete, secs) | 36.6 ± 31.2 | 17.3 ± 7 | 40.2 ± 35 | 25.2 ± 11 | 37 ± 23.3 | 0.12 |
| TMT-B (time to complete, secs) | 104.4 ± 60 | 114.8 ± 71 | 104.4 ± 60 | 121 ± 82.3 | 88.3 ± 41 | 0.84 |
| Language | ||||||
| Phonemic verbal fluency (words in 3 mins) | 28.1 ± 9.6 | 35.5 ± 9.3 | 26.4 ± 9.4 | 35 ± 7.6 | 27.8 ± 8.16 | 0.004 (ASD > AMD, |
| Semantic verbal fluency (words in 3 mins) | 34.3 ± 7.7 | 38.3 ± 6.1 | 33 ± 8 | 39 ± 6.6 | 35 ± 6.4 | 0.03 (no sign. at post-hoc analysis) |
| Constructional praxis | ||||||
| ROCF copy (range 0–36) | 23.8 ± 9.1 | 26.7 ± 4.5 | 23.7 ± 9.3 | 19 ± 12.4 | 25.1 ± 7.6 | 0.28 |
| MRI source | ||||||
| Centers | 0.24 | |||||
| 1 | 75 | 7 | 55 | 3 | 10 | |
| 2 | 19 | 1 | 11 | 4 | 3 | |
| 3 | 16 | 1 | 10 | 3 | 2 | |
| Field strength | 0.22 | |||||
| 1.5 T | 91 | 8 | 65 | 6 | 12 | |
| 3.0 T | 19 | 1 | 11 | 4 | 3 | |
| LV (median [interquartile range]), | 25.3 [15.9–39 cm3] | 19 [15.7–32.3 cm3] | 25.3 [16.2–38.8 cm3] | 26.4 [20.7–32.3 cm3] | 31.49 [14.5–59 cm3] | 0.87 |
All cognitive test were corrected by age and education.
Higher scores correspond to better performance.
Lower scores correspond to a better performance.
in native space.
Fig. 1Lesion probability map (LPM) in our sample of VMCI patients is shown. The color overlay created on top of the MNI152 standard brain represents the probability of WML occurrence, with the light-blu to yellow color range representing the frequency of lesions in specific anatomical locations. Lower slices (i.e., brainstem, cerebellum) are not shown due to the presence of very few WML. Images are shown in radiological orientation (i.e., right side is left hemisphere). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
Significant correlations between total LV and cognitive scores in the whole VMCI study sample.
| MOCA | −0.24 | 0.014 |
| RAVL immediate | −0.22 | 0.02 |
| ROCF (recall) | −0.27 | 0.006 |
| TMT-A | 0.25 | 0.012 |
| ROCF (copy) | −0.28 | 0.02 |
See text for abbreviations.
WM regions where a higher frequency of WML was associated with worst scores of cognitive tests in our sample of VMCI patients (p < .01, corrected for multiple comparisons across space). Correlation analyses were controlled for age, sex, FLAIR slice thickness, center, magnetic field strength, total LV (in native space) and head size.
| TMT-A (psychomotor speed) | ILF | Association | Occipital | R | 36, −62, 9 | 1110 | <0.001 |
| IFOF | Association | Occipital | R | 25,-92,4 | 326 | 0.003 | |
| SLF (angular gyrus) | Association | Occipital | L | −40,-61,21 | 262 | 0.006 | |
| SLF (superior parietal lobule) | Association | Parietal | L | −24,-50,59 | 148 | 0.007 | |
| ILF | Association | Occipital | L | −25,-70,20 | 104 | 0.005 | |
| ILF | Association | Occipital | L | −37,-63,9 | 57 | 0.006 | |
| SLF | Association | Parietal | R | 50,-53,36 | 45 | 0.006 | |
| ROCF-copy (constructional praxis) | IFOF | Association | Temporal | L | −35,-51,-2 | 28 | 0.009 |
| IFOF | Association | Temporal | L | −38,-39,-4 | 12 | 0.009 |
Local maxima of significant cluster.
Fig. 2Red-yellow shows the clusters of voxels where a higher frequency of WML was associated (p < .01, corrected fro multiple comparisons across space) with worst cognitive scores at the TMT part A (a, b) and ROCF (copy) (c) in our sample of patients with VMCI. Correlation analyses were controlled for age, sex, FLAIR slice thickness, center, magnetic field strength, total LV (in native space) and head size. The most informative slices are shown. Background image is MNI152 standard brain, in radiological orientation (i.e., right side is left hemisphere).
Fig. 3Red-yellow shows the clusters of voxels where a higher frequency of WML (p < .01, corrected fro multiple comparisons across space) was present in non-amnestic (NA) vs amnestic (A) group (upper panel, top left), in non-amnestic multi-domain (NAMD) vs non-amnestic single-domain (NASD) group (upper panel, top right) and in non-amnestic multi-domain (NAMD) vs amnestic multi-domain (AMD) group (lower panel). Comparison analyses were controlled for age, sex, FLAIR slice thickness, center, magnetic field strength, total LV (in native space) and head size. The most informative slices are shown. Background image is MNI152 standard brain, in radiological orientation (i.e., right side is left hemisphere). (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)
WM regions with differences in lesion frequency among the cognitive groups of VMCI (p < .01, corrected): amnestic single-domain (ASD), amnestic multi-domain (AMD), non-amnestic single-domain (NASD) and non-amnestic multi-domain (NAMD). Comparison analyses were controlled for age, sex, FLAIR slice thickness, center, magnetic field strength, total LV (in native space) and head size.
| NA (SD + MD) > A (SD + MD) | Cg | Association | Frontal | R | 13,14,43 | 18 | 0.001 |
| NAMD > NASD | SLF (IFG) | Association | Frontal | R | 31,4,27 | 23 | 0.002 |
| NAMD > AMD | Cg | Association | Frontal | R | 13,14,43 | 27 | <0.001 |
| SLF (MFG) | Association | Frontal | R | 38,5,31 | 24 | 0.001 |
Local maxima of significant cluster.
| Name | Location | Role | Contribution |
| Antonio Giorgio, MD PhD | University of Siena | Author | Study concept and design, acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting manuscript |
| Ilaria Di Donato, MD | University of Siena | Author | Acquisition of data |
| Alessandro De Leucio, MD | University of Siena | Author | Analysis of data |
| Jian Zhang, MD | University of Siena | Author | Analysis of data |
| Emilia Salvadori, PhD | University of Florence | Author | Acquisition of data |
| Anna Poggesi, MD PhD | University of Florence | Author | Acquisition of data |
| Stefano Diciotti, PhD | University of Bologna | Author | Interpretation of data, critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |
| Mirco Cosottini, MD PhD | University of Pisa | Author | Acquisition of data |
| Stefano Ciulli, PhD | University of Florence | Author | Acquisition of data |
| Domenico Inzitari, MD PhD | University of Florence | Author | Critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |
| Leonardo Pantoni, MD PhD | University of Milano | Author | Critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |
| Mario Mascalchi, MD PhD | University of Florence | Author | Critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |
| Antonio Federico, MD PhD | University of Siena | Author | Critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |
| Maria Teresa Dotti, MD PhD | University of Siena | Author | Study concept and design, critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |
| Nicola De Stefano, MD PhD | University of Siena | Author | Study concept and design, interpretation of data, critical revision of manuscript for intellectual content |