Original Research Article
Comparative Diagnostic Utility of Different MR Modalities in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer’s DiseaseKantarci K.a · Xu Y.a · Shiung M.M.a · O’Brien P.C.b · Cha R.H.b · Smith G.E.c · Ivnik R.J.c · Boeve B.F.d · Edland S.D.e · Kokmen E.d,† · Tangalos E.G.f · Petersen R.C.b, d · Jack Jr. C.R.a
Departments of aDiagnostic Radiology, bHealth Sciences Research, cPsychiatry and Psychology, dNeurology, eClinical Epidemiology and fInternal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., USA
Do you have an account?
- Rent for 48h to view
- Buy Cloud Access for unlimited viewing via different devices
- Synchronizing in the ReadCube Cloud
- Printing and saving restrictions apply
Rental: USD 8.50
Cloud: USD 20.00
This study compares the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance (MR)-based hippocampal volumetry, single voxel 1H MR spectroscopy (1H MRS) and MR diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) measurements in discriminating patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and normally aging elderly. Sixty-one normally aging elderly, 24 MCI and 22 AD patients underwent MR-based hippocampal volumetry, 1H MRS and DWI. 1H MRS voxels were placed over both of the posterior cingulate gyri, and N-acetyl aspartate (NAA)/creatine (Cr), myoinositol (MI)/Cr and NAA/MI ratios were obtained. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) maps were derived from DWI, and hippocampal borders were traced to measure hippocampal ADC. At 80% specificity, the most sensitive single measurement to discriminate MCI (79%) and AD (86%) from controls was hippocampal volumes. The most sensitive single measurement to discriminate AD from MCI was posterior cingulate gyrus NAA/Cr (67%). At high specificity (>85–90%), combinations of MR measures had superior diagnostic sensitivity compared with any single MR measurement for the AD vs. control and control vs. MCI comparisons. The MR measures that best discriminate more from less affected individuals along the cognitive continuum from normal to AD vary with disease severity. Selection of imaging measures used for clinical assessment or monitoring efficiency of therapeutic intervention should be tailored to the clinical stage of the disease.
© 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / DisclaimerCopyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.