4.5 Article

Effects of Age on the Glucose Metabolic Changes in Mild Cognitive Impairment

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 31, 期 7, 页码 1247-1253

出版社

AMER SOC NEURORADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A2070

关键词

-

资金

  1. Paul Beeson Career Development Awards in Aging [K23-AG030935]
  2. NIH/NCRR [KL2 RR024151]
  3. NIH/NIA [AG11378, AG06786, AG16574]
  4. Alexander Family
  5. Robert H. and Clarince Smith and Abigail Van Buren Alzheimer's Disease Research Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Decreased glucose metabolism in the temporal and parietal lobes on FDG-PET is recognized as an early imaging marker for the AD pathology. Our objective was to investigate the effects of age on FDG-PET findings in aMCI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five patients with aMCI at 55-86 years of age (median = 73 years) and 25 age- and sex-matched CN subjects underwent FDG-PET. SPM5 was used to compare the FDG uptake in patients in aMCI-old (>73 years) and aMCI-young (<= 73 years) groups with CN subjects. The findings in the aMCI-old patients were independently validated in a separate cohort of 10 aMCI and 13 CN subjects older than 73 years of age. RESULTS: The pattern of decreased glucose metabolism and gray matter atrophy in the medial temporal, posterior cingulate, precuneus, lateral parietal, and temporal lobes in aMCI-young subjects was consistent with the typical pattern observed in AD. The pattern of glucose metabolic changes in aMCI-old subjects was different, predominantly involving the frontal lobes and the left parietal lobe. Gray matter atrophy in aMCI-old subjects was less pronounced than that in the aMCI-young subjects, involving the hippocampus and the basal forebrain in both hemispheres CONCLUSIONS: Pathologic heterogeneity may be underlying the absence of AD-like glucose metabolic changes in older compared with younger patients with aMCI. This may be an important consideration for the clinical use of temporoparietal hypometabolism on FDG-PET as a marker for early diagnosis of AD in aMCI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据