| Literature DB >> 33343334 |
Patcharaporn Srisaikaew1,2, Nahathai Wongpakaran3, Nicole D Anderson4,5, J Jean Chen4,6, Suchart Kothan7, Pairada Varnado3, Kittisak Unsrisong8, Pasuk Mahakkanukrauh2,9.
Abstract
Damage to the fornix leads to significant memory impairment and executive dysfunction and is associated with dementia risk. We sought to identify if fornix integrity and fiber length are disrupted in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and how they associate with cognition. Data from 14 healthy older adult controls (HCs) and 17 subjects with non-amnestic MCI (n-aMCI) were analyzed. Diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) at 1.5 Tesla MRI was performed to enable manual tracing of the fornix and calculation of DTI parameters. Higher fractional anisotropy of body and column of the fornix was associated with better executive functioning and memory, more strongly in the HC than in the n-aMCI group. Fornix fiber tract length (FTL) was associated with better executive function, more strongly in the n-aMCI than in the HC group, and with better memory, more strongly in the HC than in the n-aMCI group. These results highlight a decline in the contributions of the fornix to cognition in n-aMCI and suggest that maintenance of fornix FTL is essential for sustaining executive functioning in people with n-aMCI.Entities:
Keywords: cognitive performance; diffusion tensor imaging (DTI); executive function; fiber tract length (FTL); fornix; fractional anisotropy (FA); non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (n-aMCI); vascular dementia (VaD)
Year: 2020 PMID: 33343334 PMCID: PMC7745667 DOI: 10.3389/fnagi.2020.594002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Aging Neurosci ISSN: 1663-4365 Impact factor: 5.750
Figure 1The binary mask of the body and column of the fornix is represented in red, the 3D rendered by using MRIcroGL (https://www.mccauslandcenter.sc.edu/mricrogl/) in the sagittal plane (A), coronal plane (B), and right oblique plane (C).
Figure 2The deterministic tractography of the complete projection of the fornix tract (yellow tract) consists of fimbriae, crura, body, and column. The manual tracing region of interest (ROI) draws on the 2D first eigenvector fractional anisotropy (FEFA) map on the axial plane of the fornix (A). The fornix fiber tract in the axial plane (B), sagittal plane (C), axial plane (D), and left oblique view (E). The conventional red-green-blue color-coding was used for display purposes (red for right–left, blue for dorsal–ventral, and green for anterior–posterior) (Müller and Kassubek, 2007).
Descriptive statistics of participants' demographics.
| Subjects ( | 14 | 17 | – | – |
| Age (years) | 64.36 ± 3.93 | 71.24 ± 8.15 | 4.868 | |
| Education level (years) | 15.79 ± 2.61 | 12.18 ± 5.71 | 1.713 | |
| Gender (M:F) | 0:14 | 3:14 | 4.278 | 0.098 |
Age and education level were compared using an independent t-test and a chi-square test, respectively. HCs, healthy older adult controls, n-aMCI, non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group. Significant values are bolded.
Figure 3Seven classes of the fornix projection are classified by using a single region of interest (ROI) (n = 41). Ten cases (24.4%) of Type 1, the complete typical projection; four cases (9.8%) of Type 2, complete typical projection with short fimbria (one side, Lt/Rt); seven cases (17.1%) of Type 3, complete typical projection with short fimbriae (both sides, Lt. and Rt.); four cases (9.7%) of Type 4, atypical projection with missing crus and/or fimbria (one side, Lt/Rt); 10 cases (24.4%) of Type 5, atypical projection with missing both crura and fimbriae (both sides, Lt. and Rt.); four cases (9.8%) of Type 6, complete typical projection with addition atypical projection; and two cases (4.9%) of Type 7, the atypical projection of fimbriae (both sides, Lt. and Rt.). Six cases (14.6%) of Type 6 and Type 7 were excluded due to the atypical projection of the fornix tract. Note: Healthy control (HC) group is shown in blue, and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group (n-aMCI) group is shown in yellow.
The internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the manual tracing of the fornix, both intra-observer and among three levels of inter-observer including professional, intermediate, and novice levels.
| FTL (mm) | 0.972 | 0.733 | 0.990 | 0.950 | 0.993 | 0.966 |
HCs, healthy older adult controls; n-aMCI, non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group; FA, fractional anisotropy; ADC, apparent diffusion coefficient; FTL, fiber tract length.
Descriptive statistics of participants' MoCA score, cognitive composites, and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters.
| MoCA | 26.07 ± 3.10 | 19.88 ± 4.06 | 7.804 | |
| Attention (z) | 0.05 ± 0.46 | −0.10 ± 0.44 | 0.000 | 0.988 |
| Executive Function (z) | 0.46 ± 0.39 | −0.46 ± 0.44 | 19.703 | |
| Memory (z) | 0.24 ± 0.37 | −0.19 ± 0.46 | 5.680 | |
| FAwhole | 0.43 ± 0.03 | 0.42 ± 0.03 | 0.167 | 0.686 |
| ADCwhole | 1.11 ± 0.09 | 1.15 ± 0.12 | 0.683 | 0.416 |
| FABC | 0.33 ± 0.07 | 0.29 ± 0.08 | 2.366 | 0.136 |
| ADCBC | 1.71 ± 0.24 | 1.84 ± 0.30 | 1.722 | 0.200 |
| FTL (mm) | 44.25 ± 9.66 | 37.59 ± 10.89 | 0.326 | 0.573 |
The group comparisons were made using univariate ANOVA, controlling for age and education. HCs, healthy older adult controls; n-aMCI, non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group; MoCA, Montreal Cognitive Assessment; FA, fractional anisotropy; ADC, apparent diffusion coefficient; FTL, fornix fiber tract length; FA.
Hierarchical linear regression analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) of the body and column of the fornix and cognition among HC and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group (n-aMCI) groups, with attention, executive function, and memory domains as dependent variables, adjusted for age and education.
| Age | −0.005 | 0.013 | −0.086 | −0.413 | 0.683 | ||||
| Edu | 0.031 | 0.019 | 0.343 | 1.685 | 0.104 | ||||
| FABC | 0.615 | 1.214 | 0.107 | 0.507 | 0.617 | ||||
| FABC*Group | 0.057 | 0.598 | 0.023 | 0.095 | 0.925 | 1.244 | 0.401 | 0.161 | <0.001 |
| Age | −0.013 | 0.010 | −0.159 | −1.299 | 0.205 | ||||
| Edu | 0.042 | 0.015 | 0.330 | 2.770 | |||||
| FABC | 3.199 | 0.990 | 0.401 | 3.230 | |||||
| FABC*Group | −2.097 | 0.488 | −0.596 | −4.298 | 16.169 | 0.845 | 0.713 | 0.204 | |
| Age | 0.013 | 0.012 | 0.210 | 1.136 | 0.266 | ||||
| Edu | 0.029 | 0.017 | 0.299 | 1.663 | 0.108 | ||||
| FABC | 2.513 | 1.131 | 0.416 | 2.221 | |||||
| FABC*Group | −1.295 | 0.558 | −0.487 | −2.323 | 3.419 | 0.587 | 0.345 | 0.136 | |
Edu, education level; FA.
Hierarchical linear regression analysis of fornix fiber length and cognition among HC and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI) group (n-aMCI) groups, with attention, executive function, and memory domains as dependent variables, adjusted for age and education.
| Age | −0.007 | 0.048 | −0.108 | −0.135 | 0.894 | ||||
| Edu | −0.136 | 0.072 | −1.495 | −1.892 | 0.071 | ||||
| Age * FTL | 0.000 | 0.001 | −0.509 | −0.335 | 0.741 | ||||
| Edu * FTL | 0.005 | 0.002 | 3.052 | 2.443 | |||||
| FTL | −0.53 | 0.100 | −1.275 | −0.530 | 0.601 | ||||
| FTL * Group | 0.002 | 0.004 | 0.116 | 0.571 | 0.573 | 2.323 | 0.606 | 0.367 | 0.209 |
| Age | −0.022 | 0.042 | −2.55 | −0.515 | 0.612 | ||||
| Edu | 0.065 | 0.063 | 0.508 | 1.035 | 0.311 | ||||
| Age * FTL | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.703 | 0.744 | 0.464 | ||||
| Edu * FTL | −0.001 | 0.002 | −0.353 | −0.455 | 0.653 | ||||
| FTL | 0.005 | 0.086 | 0.086 | 0.057 | 0.955 | ||||
| FTL * Group | −0.015 | 0.003 | −0.569 | −4.491 | 12.374 | 0.869 | 0.756 | 0.695 | |
| Age | 0.012 | 0.049 | 0.194 | 0.252 | 0.803 | ||||
| Edu | 0.082 | 0.073 | 0.855 | 1.123 | 0.273 | ||||
| Age * FTL | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.704 | 0.480 | 0.636 | ||||
| Edu * FTL | −0.02 | 0.002 | −0.999 | −0.830 | 0.415 | ||||
| FTL | 0.020 | 0.101 | 0.465 | 0.200 | 0.843 | ||||
| FTL * Group | −0.011 | 0.004 | −0.540 | −2.750 | 2.799 | 0.642 | 0.412 | 0.265 | |
Edu, education level; FTL, fornix fiber tract length; Age * FTL, age by FTL interaction; Edu * FTL, education by FTL interaction; FTL * Group, group difference in FTL. Significant values are bolded.