Literature DB >> 31077248

Segmentation of medial temporal subregions reveals early right-sided involvement in semantic variant PPA.

Martina Bocchetta1, Juan Eugenio Iglesias2, Lucy L Russell1, Caroline V Greaves1, Charles R Marshall1, Marzia A Scelsi2, David M Cash1,2, Sebastien Ourselin3, Jason D Warren1, Jonathan D Rohrer4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA) is a subtype of frontotemporal dementia characterized by asymmetric temporal atrophy.
METHODS: We investigated the pattern of medial temporal lobe atrophy in 24 svPPA patients compared to 72 controls using novel approaches to segment the hippocampal and amygdalar subregions on MRIs. Based on semantic knowledge scores, we split the svPPA group into 3 subgroups of early, middle and late disease stage.
RESULTS: Early stage: all left amygdalar and hippocampal subregions (except the tail) were affected in svPPA (21-35% smaller than controls), together with the following amygdalar nuclei in the right hemisphere: lateral, accessory basal and superficial (15-23%). On the right, only the temporal pole was affected among the cortical regions. Middle stage: the left hippocampal tail became affected (28%), together with the other amygdalar nuclei (22-26%), and CA4 (15%) on the right, with orbitofrontal cortex and subcortical structures involvement on the left, and more posterior temporal lobe on the right. Late stage: the remaining right hippocampal regions (except the tail) (19-24%) became affected, with more posterior left cortical and right extra-temporal anterior cortical involvement.
CONCLUSIONS: With advanced subregions segmentation, it is possible to detect early involvement of the right medial temporal lobe in svPPA that is not detectable by measuring the amygdala or hippocampus as a whole.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Magnetic resonance imaging; Medial temporal subregions; Semantic variant PPA

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31077248      PMCID: PMC6511178          DOI: 10.1186/s13195-019-0489-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Alzheimers Res Ther            Impact factor:   6.982


Introduction

Semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia (svPPA) is a subtype of frontotemporal dementia (FTD), characterized clinically by anomia and impaired single-word comprehension. It is associated with a characteristic pattern of asymmetrical antero-inferior temporal lobe atrophy [1-3]. Previous studies of svPPA have shown early left medial temporal lobe involvement, with both hippocampal and amygdalar atrophy [4-6]. However, these studies have investigated the whole hippocampus or amygdala and no previous studies have looked at the subregions of the medial temporal lobe. In this study, we therefore aimed to investigate the pattern of atrophy of the subregions of the hippocampus and the amygdala in svPPA, focusing on the involvement at different stages in order to understand the areas involved early in the disease process.

Methods

We reviewed the UCL Dementia Research Centre FTD MRI database to identify patients with a diagnosis of svPPA [7] and a usable 3 T T1-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) scan. Twenty-four patients were identified, all with left-temporal predominant disease. Seventy-two cognitively normal subjects with a usable volumetric 3 T T1-weighted MRI were identified as controls. The study was approved by the local ethics committee, and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The study was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975. Based on their scores on a test of semantic knowledge (the British Picture Vocabulary Scale, BPVS, a word-picture matching task) [8], we split the svPPA patients into three equal subgroups (n = 8 per group) of early (BPVS > 110/150), middle (BPVS = 55–110/150) and late disease stage (BPVS < 55/150). Patients were negative for mutations in all FTD-related genes. Two patients received post-mortem confirmation of the underlying neuropathology, both TDP-43 type C. All patients underwent a detailed neuropsychological examination including tests of fluid intelligence (WASI Matrices), single-word comprehension (WASI Vocabulary), naming (Graded Naming Test), reading (National Adult Reading Test), verbal memory (Recognition Memory Test for Words), visual memory (Recognition Memory Test for Faces), short-term memory (forwards digit span), working memory (backwards digit span), calculation (Graded Difficulty Calculation Test), visuoperceptual function (Visual Object and Space Perception battery Object Decision subtest) and executive function (inhibition—D-KEFS Color-Word Ink Naming Test; abstract reasoning—WASI Similarities). A percentile score based on standard norms was generated for each patient, with a mean percentile score created for the early, middle and late stage groups. Assessment of behavioural symptoms was performed using the revised version of the Cambridge Behavioural Inventory (CBI-R) [9]: six subscores were used (difficulties with self-care, abnormal sleep, hallucinations/delusions, disinhibition, abnormal eating behaviour, obsessive-compulsive behaviour, apathy and loss of empathy) with a percentage of the total possible subscore generated for every patient; for each stage, a mean percentage score was created. We report the cognitive and behavioural profiles at each stage for illustrative purposes (Fig. 1 and Additional file 1: Table S1).
Fig. 1

Pattern of atrophy in amygdalar subnuclei, hippocampal subfields, cortical regions and subcortical structures across early, middle and late stages of svPPA. Colour bar denotes the percent difference in volume from controls that remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons. For illustrative purposes, we have included the changes in cognition [mean percentile scores] and behavioural changes [mean percentage score in each Cambridge Behavioural Inventory subscore] that occur at these stages. The length of the segment indicates the severity of the profile. Specifically, for the cognitive performance, the smaller the segment, the worse the performance, whilst for the behavioural symptoms, the bigger the segments, the worse the symptoms

Pattern of atrophy in amygdalar subnuclei, hippocampal subfields, cortical regions and subcortical structures across early, middle and late stages of svPPA. Colour bar denotes the percent difference in volume from controls that remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons. For illustrative purposes, we have included the changes in cognition [mean percentile scores] and behavioural changes [mean percentage score in each Cambridge Behavioural Inventory subscore] that occur at these stages. The length of the segment indicates the severity of the profile. Specifically, for the cognitive performance, the smaller the segment, the worse the performance, whilst for the behavioural symptoms, the bigger the segments, the worse the symptoms T1-weighted MRIs were acquired using a 3-T scanner, either a Trio (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany, TR = 2200 ms, TI = 900 ms, TE = 2.9 ms, acquisition matrix = 256 × 256, spatial resolution = 1.1 mm) or a Prisma (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany, TR = 2000 ms, TI = 850 ms, TE = 2.93 ms, acquisition matrix = 256 × 256, spatial resolution = 1.1 mm). Individuals with moderate to severe vascular disease or space-occupying lesions were excluded. Volumetric MRI scans were first bias field corrected and whole-brain parcellated using the geodesic information flow (GIF) algorithm [10], which is based on atlas propagation and label fusion. The hippocampal subfields and amygdalar subregions were subsequently segmented using a customized version of the module available in FreeSurfer 6.0 [11, 12], to adapt the output of GIF to the FreeSurfer format. For the hippocampal subfields, we focused on seven areas: CA1, CA2/CA3, CA4, dentate gyrus, subiculum, presubiculum and the tail. We excluded from the analysis the hippocampus-amygdala transition area, the parasubiculum, the molecular layer of the hippocampus, the fimbria and the hippocampal fissure, as they were too small, or not reliably delineated on T1-weighted images. For the amygdalar subnuclei, we focused the analysis on five regions, by combining the smallest subnuclei, based on an anatomical subdivision [13]: lateral nucleus, basal and paralaminar nucleus, accessory basal nucleus, cortico-amygdaloid transition area and the superficial nuclei (central nucleus, cortical nucleus, medial nucleus, anterior amygdaloid area). For comparison with the medial temporal subregions, we extracted volumes of the following cortical regions from GIF: temporal (medial, lateral, supratemporal, temporal pole), frontal (orbitofrontal, prefrontal), parietal, occipital, insular and cingulate (anterior and posterior). We also extracted volumes of subcortical structures for the pallidum, putamen, caudate, nucleus accumbens and thalamus. Left and right volumes were corrected for total intracranial volume (TIV), computed with SPM12 v6470 (Statistical Parametric Mapping, Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging, London, UK) running under Matlab R2014b (Math Works, Natick, MA, USA) [14]. All segmentations were visually checked for quality. Statistical analyses were performed on brain volumes (as a percentage of TIV) in STATA v14 (Stata-Corp, College Station, TX), between control and patients (early, middle and late stage groups), using a linear regression test adjusting for scanner type, TIV, gender and age. The results were corrected for multiple comparisons (Bonferroni correction): p < 0.006 for amygdalar subnuclei and subcortical structures, p < 0.005 for hippocampal subfields and p < 0.0035 for cortical regions.

Results

No significant age difference was seen between any of the svPPA groups and controls [Early: 66.9 (5.5) years, Middle: 64.5 (9.5), Late: 64.2 (5.5); Controls: 61.0 (12.1)], p = 0.112, t test. However, there was a significant difference in gender distribution across stages [Early: 88% male, Middle: 63% male, Late: 25% male; Controls: 40% male], p = 0.032, Chi-square test. Amygdalar subnuclei, hippocampal subfields, cortical regions, subcortical structures, neuropsychology performance and behavioural symptoms at each stage are shown in Fig. 1.

Early stage

All the left amygdalar and hippocampal subregions (except for the tail) were affected (24–35% and 21–27% smaller than controls, p < 0.0005) at this stage, together with the right lateral, accessory basal and superficial nuclei of the amygdala (15–23%, p < 0.004) (Table 1).
Table 1

Volumetry of amygdalar subnuclei, hippocampal subfields, cortical regions and subcortical structures

ControlsEarlyMiddleControlsEarlyMiddle
LeftRight
MeanSD%p-value%p-value%p-valueMeanSD%p-value%p-value%p-value
Amygdalar Subnuclei
 Lateral nucleus
  Controls0.0450.0050.0470.004
  Early0.0330.010 27 < 0.0005 0.0400.006 15 0.003
  Middle0.0260.003 43 < 0.0005 23 < 0.0005 0.0350.005 25 < 0.0005 12 0.005
  Late0.0250.003 44 < 0.0005 24 < 0.0005 20.7230.0300.005 36 < 0.0005 25 < 0.0005 140.017
 Basal and paralaminar nucleus
  Controls0.0330.0040.0340.003
  Early0.0240.006 29 < 0.0005 0.0290.006150.012
  Middle0.0180.003 46 < 0.0005 24 < 0.0005 0.0260.004 22 < 0.0005 80.092
  Late0.0170.002 48 < 0.0005 27 < 0.0005 40.4830.0210.003 39 < 0.0005 29 < 0.0005 22 < 0.0005
 Accessory basal nucleus
  Controls0.0180.0020.0180.002
  Early0.0120.004 32 < 0.0005 0.0150.004 21 < 0.0005
  Middle0.0100.002 46 < 0.0005 20 0.002 0.0140.002 24 < 0.0005 40.373
  Late0.0090.001 49 < 0.0005 25 < 0.0005 60.4820.0110.002 42 < 0.0005 27 < 0.0005 24 0.002
 Cortico-amygdaloid transition area
  Controls0.0120.0020.0120.001
  Early0.0090.002 24 < 0.0005 0.0110.003120.157
  Middle0.0070.001 44 < 0.0005 27 < 0.0005 0.0090.002 24 < 0.0005 140.025
  Late0.0060.001 48 < 0.0005 32 < 0.0005 70.3390.0080.002 36 < 0.0005 28 < 0.0005 160.049
 Superficial nuclei (Ce, Co, Me, AAA)
  Controls0.0110.0020.0120.002
  Early0.0070.002 35 < 0.0005 0.0090.002 23 0.004
  Middle0.0060.001 47 < 0.0005 18 0.005 0.0090.001 26 < 0.0005 40.341
  Late0.0050.001 51 < 0.0005 25 < 0.0005 90.2750.0070.002 41 < 0.0005 24 0.002 210.024
Hippocampal Subfields
 CA1
  Controls0.0440.0050.0470.006
  Early0.0350.005 22 < 0.0005 0.0450.00850.995
  Middle0.0310.007 31 < 0.0005 110.0200.0430.00780.13830.267
  Late0.0290.004 36 < 0.0005 18 0.001 70.2680.0360.006 24 < 0.0005 19 < 0.0005 17 0.003
 CA2/CA3
  Controls0.0160.0020.0170.002
  Early0.0120.002 24 < 0.0005 0.0160.00460.931
  Middle0.0110.002 27 < 0.0005 30.4600.0150.003120.06470.184
  Late0.0120.002 26 < 0.0005 20.518−10.9450.0130.002 24 < 0.0005 19 0.002 130.054
 CA4
  Controls0.0180.0020.0190.002
  Early0.0130.002 27 < 0.0005 0.0170.004100.281
  Middle0.0130.001 27 < 0.0005 10.3420.0160.002 15 0.003 50.156
  Late0.0120.001 34 < 0.0005 90.00790.0660.0150.002 21 < 0.0005 13 0.004 80.111
 Dentate gyrus
  Controls0.0210.0020.0210.002
  Early0.0160.002 25 < 0.0005 0.0200.00570.759
  Middle0.0150.002 27 < 0.0005 40.1830.0190.003130.02160.132
  Late0.0140.002 32 < 0.0005 100.01160.1850.0170.003 19 < 0.0005 14 0.003 80.117
 Subiculum
  Controls0.0280.0030.0290.003
  Early0.0220.002 21 < 0.0005 0.0280.00610.425
  Middle0.0200.003 28 < 0.0005 100.0480.0260.00580.11680.074
  Late0.0200.004 31 < 0.0005 13 0.005 40.3380.0220.005 23 < 0.0005 23 < 0.0005 16 0.004
 Presubiculum
  Controls0.0230.0030.0220.003
  Early0.0170.002 27 < 0.0005 0.0230.006−20.173
  Middle0.0160.002 30 < 0.0005 50.3620.0210.00750.94260.267
  Late0.0160.003 33 < 0.0005 80.04530.2450.0180.005 19 0.001 20 0.001 150.015
 Hippocampal tail
  Controls0.0410.0050.0410.005
  Early0.0340.006180.0190.0430.010−40.055
  Middle0.0300.005 28 < 0.0005 120.0260.0420.010−20.37120.41
  Late0.0290.006 29 < 0.0005 130.00920.6240.0370.00880.084120.008100.054
Cortical Regions
 Orbitofrontal
  Controls0.6970.0470.7160.048
  Early0.6820.04520.9340.7270.057 −2 0.158
  Middle0.6290.089 10 0.001 80.0150.7160.046 0 0.806 1 0.362
  Late0.6370.06390.00970.062−10.6120.6970.078 3 0.647 4 0.166 3 0.604
 Prefrontal cortex
  Controls4.2160.2304.3220.224
  Early4.0870.33730.6914.2990.37910.545
  Middle4.0450.52940.11210.3734.3800.369−10.506−20.977
  Late3.8060.250 10 0.002 70.04760.2454.1190.26950.20140.16860.153
 Anterior cingulate
  Controls0.3820.0390.2830.042
  Early0.3150.041 18 0.001 0.2890.046−20.339
  Middle0.3000.068 22 < 0.0005 50.3110.3180.069−130.008−100.204
  Late0.2550.026 33 < 0.0005 19 0.002 150.0230.2880.058−20.96800.45790.047
 Posterior cingulate
  Controls0.3590.0380.3430.035
  Early0.3500.02030.6090.3680.019−70.009
  Middle0.3320.02570.06550.3200.3650.028−60.02210.747
  Late0.3370.02860.16940.535−10.7280.3610.047−50.15020.34810.523
 Parietal
  Controls3.2240.2113.1860.229
  Early3.1430.22930.5383.2160.248−10.049
  Middle3.1470.24920.70900.4503.2720.200−30.053−20.944
  Late2.9930.234 7 0.003 50.00850.0463.1420.21310.79320.09640.105
 Occipital
  Controls2.4730.2072.5640.205
  Early2.3930.22730.8352.5380.19510.575
  Middle2.3950.15530.55200.7762.5520.17500.697−10.887
  Late2.4320.14820.733−20.926−20.8532.5720.14700.796−10.817−10.924
 Insula
  Controls0.3700.0350.3810.039
  Early0.2810.032 24 < 0.0005 0.3430.049100.110
  Middle0.2600.036 30 < 0.0005 70.0640.3370.038120.00720.425
  Late0.2290.021 38 < 0.0005 18 < 0.0005 120.0130.2670.039 30 < 0.0005 22 < 0.0005 21 < 0.0005
 Medial temporal
  Controls1.0120.0621.0410.067
  Early0.7850.057 22 < 0.0005 0.9810.07060.076
  Middle0.7300.056 28 < 0.0005 70.0420.9150.070 12 < 0.0005 70.044
  Late0.7430.058 27 < 0.0005 50.088−20.7870.7910.074 24 < 0.0005 19 < 0.0005 14 < 0.0005
 Lateral temporal
  Controls2.3040.1532.3450.143
  Early1.6520.201 28 < 0.0005 2.2310.13450.133
  Middle1.5540.150 33 < 0.0005 60.0842.1370.099 9 < 0.0005 40.105
  Late1.3840.159 40 < 0.0005 16 < 0.0005 110.0261.8640.217 21 < 0.0005 16 < 0.0005 13 < 0.0005
 Temporal pole
  Controls0.4880.0560.4770.055
  Early0.2610.066 47 < 0.0005 0.4130.071 13 0.006
  Middle0.2310.035 53 < 0.0005 120.1870.3520.049 26 < 0.0005 150.019
  Late0.2280.029 53 < 0.0005 130.32410.7660.2870.038 40 < 0.0005 30 < 0.0005 180.048
 Supratemporal
  Controls0.4300.0500.3690.039
  Early0.3480.037 19 < 0.0005 0.3570.04530.910
  Middle0.3360.046 22 < 0.0005 40.3590.3680.04000.718−30.855
  Late0.3010.056 30 <0.0005 140.017100.1220.3220.054 13 0.004 100.028120.016
Subcortical Structures
 Nucleus accumbens
  Controls0.0400.0030.0380.003
  Early0.0350.003 13 <0.0005 0.0350.00390.048
  Middle0.0340.005 15 <0.0005 30.2350.0360.00450.155−40.638
  Late0.0300.003 24 <0.0005 13 0.001 100.0190.0320.004 15 <0.0005 70.026110.007
 Caudate
  Controls0.2370.0260.2480.024
  Early0.2210.02070.5080.2350.02650.598
  Middle0.2220.02660.35000.8510.2370.02440.507−10.929
  Late0.2070.030 12 0.001 60.03770.0530.2170.036 12 0.001 80.04480.050
 Pallidum
  Controls0.1290.0140.1300.013
  Early0.1140.007120.0100.1190.00780.123
  Middle0.1130.008 12 <0.0005 10.1600.1190.00880.00400.303
  Late0.1040.009 19 <0.0005 90.01680.2700.1110.011 14 <0.0005 60.05470.336
 Putamen
  Controls0.3070.0310.3050.031
  Early0.2680.018130.0110.2890.01650.981
  Middle0.2550.023 17 <0.0005 50.0440.2770.02390.01940.081
  Late0.2370.018 23 <0.0005 11 0.001 70.1440.2610.022 14 <0.0005 10 0.002 60.142
 Thalamus
  Controls0.4000.0350.3920.039
  Early0.3570.024110.0240.3800.03230.279
  Middle0.3620.02990.008−20.7910.3870.03610.258−20.992
  Late0.3640.027 9 <0.0005 −20.169−10.2550.3880.02710.226−20.09300.086

Values denote mean and standard deviation (SD) volumes as the percentage of the total intracranial volume (TIV) or difference (%). p values denote significance on linear regression test. Bold represents a significant difference between the groups after correcting for multiple comparisons

Volumetry of amygdalar subnuclei, hippocampal subfields, cortical regions and subcortical structures Values denote mean and standard deviation (SD) volumes as the percentage of the total intracranial volume (TIV) or difference (%). p values denote significance on linear regression test. Bold represents a significant difference between the groups after correcting for multiple comparisons Outside of the medial temporal lobe, on the left, all the temporal cortical regions (19–47%, p < 0.0005) were affected as well as the anterior cingulate (18%, p = 0.001) and insula (24%, p < 0.0005). The left nucleus accumbens was the only other subcortical structure affected (13%, p < 0.0005). Apart from the affected amygdalar subnuclei, the only other right hemisphere structure affected at this stage was the temporal pole (13%, p = 0.006). Cognitively, patients showed severely impaired naming already, with relatively preserved working memory, abstract reasoning and fluid intelligence. Behavioural symptoms were mild and mainly related to abnormal eating behaviour, apathy and abnormal sleep.

Middle stage

At this stage, the left hippocampal tail became affected (28%, p < 0.0005), together with the other right amygdalar nuclei (22–26%, p < 0.0005) and the right CA4 region of the hippocampus (15%, p = 0.003). Cortically, the left orbitofrontal lobe was affected at this stage along with more posterior temporal structures on the right: lateral and medial temporal cortices (9–12%, p < 0.0005). Subcortically, the left pallidum and putamen were affected (12–17%, p < 0.0005) and the right pallidum (8%). Cognitively, single-word comprehension and reading became increasingly impaired, but working memory, short-term memory and abstract reasoning remained relatively intact. Behavioural symptoms increased with the presence of obsessive-compulsive behaviour and loss of empathy as well as abnormal eating behaviour, apathy and disinhibition.

Late stage

In the late stage, the remaining right hippocampal regions (except the tail) (19–24%, p < 0.001) became affected. Cortically, spread to the left prefrontal and parietal cortices was seen whilst on the right, the insula (30%) and supratemporal cortex (13%, p < 0.004) were affected. Subcortically, the left caudate, thalamus and right nucleus accumbens, caudate and putamen were affected (12–15%). At this stage, all cognitive domains were severely impaired except for short-term and working memory, abstract reasoning and fluid intelligence. Severe behavioural symptoms were seen.

Discussion

Using advanced subregional segmentation, we were able to detect early involvement in the right hemisphere in svPPA, with progression of atrophy through the medial temporal lobes as the disease moves from early to middle to late stage. Extensive medial temporal atrophy is seen on the left in most amygdalar and hippocampal subregions at the earliest stage of svPPA, co-incidental with the involvement of all of the temporal cortices on the left. This is consistent with previous studies showing that even at first clinical presentation, significant left temporal lobe atrophy is present [1, 15]. Previous studies have not shown early involvement of the right medial temporal structures. In this study, the earliest subnuclei affected on the right were the accessory basal, lateral and superficial nuclei of the amygdala. These subnuclei are interconnected and receive input from the temporal pole and the hippocampus (also affected on the right in the early stage) as well as other parts of the temporal and frontal cortices and the nucleus accumbens [13, 16]. The ability to use advanced subregional segmentation techniques in this study allows early detection of right medial temporal atrophy. The cognitive and behavioural correlates of the individual right amygdalar subnuclei are poorly studied, but prior studies of the whole amygdala implicate the right side as being important in the processing of emotional information [17, 18]. In our study, loss of empathy is mildly affected at the earliest stage (Fig. 1): this is likely to represent an impairment of self-knowledge, a process that requires the linking of emotions with semantics, and has previously been shown to be associated with right temporal lobe atrophy including the amygdala [19]. The particular amygdalar subnuclei affected early are part of the limbic network and therefore likely to be intrinsically involved in emotion processing [16]. Of all the medial temporal subregions, the hippocampal tail is preserved until the later stages of svPPA. This is in line with previous studies, where the posterior temporal lobe is spared and an antero-posterior gradient is present [20, 21]. Indeed, svPPA patients typically show intact episodic memory and spatial navigation, functions typically linked to the hippocampal tail. Consistent with the theory of svPPA as a network-opathy [22], the first hippocampal region to become affected on the right is CA4, an area highly connected to the temporal cortex and amygdala [23]. Limitations of the study include using cross-sectional data with staging of the disease by impairment on a task of semantic knowledge and the small number of svPPA cases. Further studies would benefit from the analysis of longitudinal data from a larger sample to see whether the same pattern is seen. Despite the gold standard still being manual segmentation of dedicated MRIs or on brain tissue post-mortem, these automated methods included in this study have been previously validated and proven reliable to delineate the subregions on T1-MRI (Dice coefficients > 0.86; ICC 0.88–0.93) [10–12, 24, 25]. Moreover, in this study, we carefully excluded small subregions and combined together groups of nuclei to improve the anatomical validity. Automated segmentations will play a key role in the future, as manual segmentations are likely to be unfeasible for large cohorts of patients. Table S1. Cognitive and behavioural variables for the svPPA patients. p values denote significance on Kruskal-Wallis test among the three groups. (DOCX 17 kb)
  24 in total

Review 1.  Towards a nosology for frontotemporal lobar degenerations-a meta-analysis involving 267 subjects.

Authors:  Matthias L Schroeter; Karolina Raczka; Jane Neumann; D Yves von Cramon
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  A computational atlas of the hippocampal formation using ex vivo, ultra-high resolution MRI: Application to adaptive segmentation of in vivo MRI.

Authors:  Juan Eugenio Iglesias; Jean C Augustinack; Khoa Nguyen; Christopher M Player; Allison Player; Michelle Wright; Nicole Roy; Matthew P Frosch; Ann C McKee; Lawrence L Wald; Bruce Fischl; Koen Van Leemput
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Atrophy patterns in Alzheimer's disease and semantic dementia: a comparison of FreeSurfer and manual volumetric measurements.

Authors:  Manja Lehmann; Abdel Douiri; Lois G Kim; Marc Modat; Dennis Chan; Sebastien Ourselin; Josephine Barnes; Nick C Fox
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2009-10-27       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Classification of primary progressive aphasia and its variants.

Authors:  M L Gorno-Tempini; A E Hillis; S Weintraub; A Kertesz; M Mendez; S F Cappa; J M Ogar; J D Rohrer; S Black; B F Boeve; F Manes; N F Dronkers; R Vandenberghe; K Rascovsky; K Patterson; B L Miller; D S Knopman; J R Hodges; M M Mesulam; M Grossman
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 9.910

5.  Beyond the temporal pole: limbic memory circuit in the semantic variant of primary progressive aphasia.

Authors:  Rachel H Tan; Stephanie Wong; Jillian J Kril; Olivier Piguet; Michael Hornberger; John R Hodges; Glenda M Halliday
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging reveals nuclei of the human amygdala: manual segmentation to automatic atlas.

Authors:  Z M Saygin; D Kliemann; J E Iglesias; A J W van der Kouwe; E Boyd; M Reuter; A Stevens; K Van Leemput; A McKee; M P Frosch; B Fischl; J C Augustinack
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 6.556

7.  Semantic dementia and the left and right temporal lobes.

Authors:  Julie S Snowden; Jennifer M Harris; Jennifer C Thompson; Christopher Kobylecki; Matthew Jones; Anna M Richardson; David Neary
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2017-08-31       Impact factor: 4.027

8.  Very early semantic dementia with progressive temporal lobe atrophy: an 8-year longitudinal study.

Authors:  Kathrin Czarnecki; Joseph R Duffy; Carissa R Nehl; Shelley A Cross; Jennifer R Molano; Clifford R Jack; Maria M Shiung; Keith A Josephs; Bradley F Boeve
Journal:  Arch Neurol       Date:  2008-12

9.  Neural substrates of socioemotional self-awareness in neurodegenerative disease.

Authors:  Marc Sollberger; Howard J Rosen; Tal Shany-Ur; Jerin Ullah; Christine M Stanley; Victor Laluz; Michael W Weiner; Stephen M Wilson; Bruce L Miller; Katherine P Rankin
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2014-01-13       Impact factor: 2.708

10.  Declarative memory impairments in Alzheimer's disease and semantic dementia.

Authors:  Peter J Nestor; Tim D Fryer; John R Hodges
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2005-11-21       Impact factor: 6.556

View more
  8 in total

1.  Radiomics Model for Frontotemporal Dementia Diagnosis Using T1-Weighted MRI.

Authors:  Benedetta Tafuri; Marco Filardi; Daniele Urso; Roberto De Blasi; Giovanni Rizzo; Salvatore Nigro; Giancarlo Logroscino
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 5.152

Review 2.  Looking beneath the surface: the importance of subcortical structures in frontotemporal dementia.

Authors:  Martina Bocchetta; Maura Malpetti; Emily G Todd; James B Rowe; Jonathan D Rohrer
Journal:  Brain Commun       Date:  2021-07-16

3.  Cross-sectional and longitudinal medial temporal lobe subregional atrophy patterns in semantic variant primary progressive aphasia.

Authors:  Laura E M Wisse; Molly B Ungrady; Ranjit Ittyerah; Sydney A Lim; Paul A Yushkevich; David A Wolk; David J Irwin; Sandhitsu R Das; Murray Grossman
Journal:  Neurobiol Aging       Date:  2020-11-23       Impact factor: 4.673

Review 4.  Neuroimaging in Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration: Research and Clinical Utility.

Authors:  Sheena I Dev; Bradford C Dickerson; Alexandra Touroutoglou
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2021       Impact factor: 2.622

5.  Anterior temporal lobe is necessary for efficient lateralised processing of spoken word identity.

Authors:  Thomas E Cope; Yury Shtyrov; Lucy J MacGregor; Rachel Holland; Friedemann Pulvermüller; James B Rowe; Karalyn Patterson
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 4.027

6.  Regional and hemispheric susceptibility of the temporal lobe to FTLD-TDP type C pathology.

Authors:  V Borghesani; G Battistella; M L Mandelli; A Welch; E Weis; K Younes; J Neuhaus; L T Grinberg; W M Seeley; S Spina; B Miller; Z Miller; M L Gorno-Tempini
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2020-08-06       Impact factor: 4.881

7.  In vivo staging of frontotemporal lobar degeneration TDP-43 type C pathology.

Authors:  Martina Bocchetta; Maria Del Mar Iglesias Espinosa; Tammaryn Lashley; Jason D Warren; Jonathan D Rohrer
Journal:  Alzheimers Res Ther       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 6.982

Review 8.  Technical and clinical validation of commercial automated volumetric MRI tools for dementia diagnosis-a systematic review.

Authors:  Hugh G Pemberton; Lara A M Zaki; Olivia Goodkin; Ravi K Das; Rebecca M E Steketee; Frederik Barkhof; Meike W Vernooij
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 2.804

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.