Tuokkola Terhi, Koikkalainen Juha, Parkkola Riitta, Karrasch Mira, Lötjönen Jyrki, Rinne Juha O
1 Turku PET Centre, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland.
2 University of Eastern Finland, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kuopio, Finland.
Acta Radiol. 2018 Aug;59(8):973-979. doi: 10.1177/0284185117734418. Epub 2017 Sep 27.
Background Brain atrophy is associated with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and by using volumetric and visual analyzing methods, it is possible to differentiate between individuals with progressive MCI (MCIp) and stable MCI (MCIs). Automated analysis methods detect degenerative changes in the brain earlier and more reliably than visual methods. Purpose To detect and evaluate structural brain changes between and within the MCIs, MCIp, and control groups during a two-year follow-up period. Material and Methods Brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of 11 participants with MCIs, 18 participants with MCIp, and 84 controls were analyzed by the visual rating method (VRM) and tensor-based morphometry (TBM). Results At baseline, both VRM and TBM differentiated the whole MCI group (combined MCIs and MCIp) and the MCIp group from the control group, but they did not differentiate the MCIs group from the control group. At follow-up, both methods differentiated the MCIp group from the control group, but minor differences between the MCIs and control groups were only seen by TBM. Neuropsychological tests did not find differences between the MCIs and control groups at follow-up. Neither method revealed relevant signs of brain atrophy progression within or between MCI subgroups during the follow-up time. Conclusion Both methods are equally good in the evaluation of structural brain changes in MCI if the groups are sufficiently large and the disease progresses to AD. Only TBM disclosed minor atrophic changes in the MCIs group compared to controls at follow-up. The results need to be confirmed with a large patient group and longer follow-up time.
背景 脑萎缩与轻度认知障碍(MCI)相关,通过容积分析和视觉分析方法,可以区分进展性MCI(MCIp)个体和稳定型MCI(MCIs)个体。自动化分析方法比视觉方法能更早、更可靠地检测出大脑的退行性变化。目的 在两年的随访期内,检测和评估MCI、MCIp和对照组之间以及组内的脑结构变化。材料与方法 采用视觉评分法(VRM)和基于张量的形态测量法(TBM),对11例MCIs患者、18例MCIp患者和84例对照者的脑磁共振成像(MRI)扫描进行分析。结果 在基线时,VRM和TBM均能将整个MCI组(合并MCIs和MCIp)和MCIp组与对照组区分开来,但它们不能将MCIs组与对照组区分开来。在随访时,两种方法均能将MCIp组与对照组区分开来,但仅TBM显示出MCIs组与对照组之间存在微小差异。神经心理学测试在随访时未发现MCIs组与对照组之间存在差异。在随访期间,两种方法均未显示MCI亚组内或亚组间脑萎缩进展的相关迹象。结论 如果样本量足够大且疾病进展为阿尔茨海默病(AD),两种方法在评估MCI脑结构变化方面同样有效。在随访时,与对照组相比,只有TBM显示出MCIs组存在微小萎缩变化。结果需要在更大的患者群体和更长的随访时间内得到证实。