| Literature DB >> 31505084 |
D Meng1,2,3, A A Hosseini1, R J Simpson1,2,3,4, T Welton1,2, R A Dineen1,2,3, D P Auer1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Keywords: cohort study; functional magnetic resonance imaging; vascular dementia
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31505084 PMCID: PMC6973074 DOI: 10.1111/ene.14084
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Neurol ISSN: 1351-5101 Impact factor: 6.089
Comparison of clinical characteristics between patients with normal and abnormal cognition
| Characteristics | Normal ( | Abnormal ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD) (years) | 72.1 (10.6) | 76.7 (9.1) | 0.05 |
| Female, | 12 (30.0) | 14 (45.2) | 0.22 |
| Atrial fibrillation, | 8 (20.0) | 8 (25.8) | 0.58 |
| Peripheral vascular disease, | 4 (10.0) | 8 (25.8) | 0.11 |
| Ischaemic heart disease, | 10 (25.0) | 11 (35.5) | 0.43 |
| Hypertension, | 30 (75.0) | 26 (83.9) | 0.39 |
| Smoking, | 19 (47.5) | 26 (83.9) | 0.003 |
| Diabetes mellitus, | 8 (20.0) | 9 (29.0) | 0.41 |
| Symptomatic type (stroke), | 20 (50.0) | 16 (51.6) | 0.89 |
| Symptomatic side (left), | 18 (45.0) | 12 (38.7) | 0.63 |
| Ipsilateral degree of carotid stenosis, | |||
| 30%–49% | 20 (50.0) | 17 (54.8) | 0.92 |
| 50%–59% | 9 (22.5) | 5 (16.1) | |
| 60%–69% | 4 (10.0) | 5 (16.1) | |
| 70%–79% | 3 (7.5) | 2 (6.5) | |
| 80%–89% | 1 (2.5) | 1 (3.2) | |
| >90% | 3 (7.5) | 1 (3.2) | |
| Contralateral degree of carotid stenosis, | |||
| 0%–29% | 30 (75.0) | 21 (67.7) | 0.26 |
| 30%–49% | 4 (10.0) | 1 (3.2) | |
| 50%–59% | 4 (10.0) | 5 (16.1) | |
| 60%–69% | 2 (5.0) | 2 (6.5) | |
| 70%–79% | 0 (0) | 1 (3.2) | |
| 80%–89% | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | |
| >90% | 0 (0) | 3 (9.7) | |
| Time from cerebrovascular ischaemic event to MRI, mean (SD) (days) | 35.2 (32.4) | 40.4 (41.3) | 0.56 |
| Medial temporal lobe atrophy | 6 (15.0) | 12 (38.7) | 0.06 |
| Log TILL | −5.3 (1.5) | −5.1 (1.4) | 0.63 |
| Percentage normalized volume of lacunar infarction, ×10−5 (SD) | 1.0 (2.0) | 0.8 (2.0) | 0.722 |
| Percentage normalized volume of DWI hyperintense lesions, ×10−4 (SD) | 3.7 (7.8) | 5.6 (13.2) | 0.475 |
| Percentage normalized volume of white matter hyperintense lesions, ×10−3 (SD) | 11.02 (12.71) | 12.54 (15.09) | 0.653 |
DWI, diffusion weighted imaging.
aSignificant level at P < 0.05.
blog TILL, logarithmic total ischaemic lesion load (DWI hyperintense, FLAIR hyperintense and hypointense lesions) normalized to intracranial volume.
Figure 1Resting‐state network maps and global cognition in patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease. A difference map (blue–light blue) of the CEN (yellow mask overlaid onto the 2 × 2 × 2 mm MNI 152 template) where patients with probable vascular cognitive disorder had decreased functional connectivity compared with patients with normal cognition. The blue–light blue colour bar shows the range of family‐wise error‐corrected P value. The green–light green colour bar shows the variation between the minimum and maximum number of acute lesions on DTI b0 images. All tests were corrected for age and mean relative displacement.
Brain regions showing decreased functional connectivity within resting‐state networks in patients with probable vascular cognitive disorder versus cognitively intact reference group
| Coordinates (mm) |
| Correlation with cognitive performance | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Global cognition | ||||||
| Precuneus | −12 | −56 | 38 | 0.028 | 0.367 | 0.002 |
| PCC | 4 | −38 | 40 | 0.034 | 0.369 | 0.002 |
| Right parietal lobule | 32 | −60 | 46 | 0.037 | 0.251 | 0.037 |
PCC, posterior cingulate cortex.
False discovery rate corrected P = 0.05.
Figure 2Inter‐hemispheric FC and cognition in patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease. (a) Box plots showing network‐averaged heterologous inter‐hemispheric FC in patients with probable VCD and with normal cognition. (b) Scatterplots showing correlation between ACE‐R scores and network‐averaged heterologous inter‐hemispheric FC, adjusted for age.
Figure 3Mediation model of associations between (a) PCC FC within the CEN, cingulum MD and global cognitive performance; (b) precuneus FC within the CEN, cingulum MD and global cognitive performance. The values (a, b, c, c′) presented are unstandardized regression coefficients. Path c represents the total effect. Path c′ represents the direct effect. ab is the indirect effect. *Significant correlation at P < 0.05.