Frisoni Giovanni B, Pievani Michela, Testa Cristina, Sabattoli Francesca, Bresciani Lorena, Bonetti Matteo, Beltramello Alberto, Hayashi Kiralee M, Toga Arthur W, Thompson Paul M
Laboratory of Epidemiology, Neuroimaging and Telemedicine, IRCCS Centro San Giovanni di Dio FBF, The National Centre for Research and Care of Alzheimer's and Mental Diseases, Brescia, Italy.
Brain. 2007 Mar;130(Pt 3):720-30. doi: 10.1093/brain/awl377. Epub 2007 Feb 9.
Clinical observations have suggested that the neuropsychological profile of early and late onset forms of Alzheimer's disease (EOAD and LOAD) differ in that neocortical functions are more affected in the former and learning in the latter, suggesting that they might be different diseases. The aim of this study is to assess the brain structural basis of these observations, and test whether neocortical areas are more heavily affected in EOAD and medial temporal areas in LOAD. Fifteen patients with EOAD and 15 with LOAD (onset before and after age 65; Mini Mental State Examination 19.8, SD 4.0 and 20.7, SD 4.2) were assessed with a neuropsychological battery and high-resolution MRI together with 1:1 age- and sex-matched controls. Cortical atrophy was assessed with cortical pattern matching, and hippocampal atrophy with region-of-interest-based analysis. EOAD patients performed more poorly than LOAD on visuospatial, frontal-executive and learning tests. EOAD patients had the largest atrophy in the occipital [25% grey matter (GM) loss in the left and 24% in the right hemisphere] and parietal lobes (23% loss on both sides), while LOAD patients were remarkably atrophic in the hippocampus (21 and 22% loss). Hippocampal GM loss of EOAD (9 and 16% to the left and right) and occipital (12 and 14%) and parietal (13 and 12%) loss of LOAD patients were less marked. In EOAD, GM loss of 25% or more was mapped to large neocortical areas and affected all lobes, with relative sparing of primary sensory, motor, and visual cortex, and anterior cingulate and orbital cortex. In LOAD, GM loss was diffusely milder (below 15%); losses of 15-20% were confined to temporoparietal and retrosplenial cortex, and reached 25% in restricted areas of the medial temporal lobe and right superior temporal gyrus. These findings indicate that EOAD and LOAD differ in their typical topographic patterns of brain atrophy, suggesting different predisposing or aetiological factors.
临床观察表明,早发型和晚发型阿尔茨海默病(EOAD和LOAD)的神经心理学特征有所不同,前者新皮质功能受影响更大,后者学习功能受影响更大,这表明它们可能是不同的疾病。本研究的目的是评估这些观察结果的脑结构基础,并测试在EOAD中,新皮质区域是否比LOAD中的内侧颞叶区域受影响更严重。对15例EOAD患者和15例LOAD患者(发病年龄在65岁之前和之后;简易精神状态检查表评分分别为19.8,标准差4.0和20.7,标准差4.2)进行了神经心理测试、高分辨率MRI检查,并设置了年龄和性别均匹配的1:1对照。通过皮质模式匹配评估皮质萎缩,通过基于感兴趣区域的分析评估海马萎缩。在视觉空间、额叶执行功能和学习测试中,EOAD患者的表现比LOAD患者更差。EOAD患者枕叶萎缩最严重(左半球灰质损失25%,右半球24%)和顶叶(双侧损失23%),而LOAD患者海马明显萎缩(损失21%和22%)。EOAD患者海马灰质损失(左右分别为9%和16%)以及LOAD患者枕叶(12%和14%)和顶叶(13%和12%)损失则不太明显。在EOAD中,25%或更多的灰质损失映射到较大的新皮质区域,影响所有脑叶,初级感觉、运动和视觉皮质以及前扣带回和眶皮质相对保留。在LOAD中,灰质损失普遍较轻(低于15%);15%-20%的损失局限于颞顶叶和压后皮质,在内侧颞叶和右侧颞上回的受限区域达到25%。这些发现表明,EOAD和LOAD在典型的脑萎缩地形模式上存在差异,提示存在不同的易感因素或病因。