View
213
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Diffusion-Tensor Imaging: Diffusion-Tensor Imaging: Executive Function in Executive Function in
Subcortical Ischemic Vascular Subcortical Ischemic Vascular Disease and Mild Cognitive Disease and Mild Cognitive
ImpairmentImpairment Stephen Correia, Ph.D.Stephen Correia, Ph.D.
Dementia Research Fellow,Dementia Research Fellow,NeuropsychologyNeuropsychology
3 February 2005
Diffusion-Tensor Imaging Diffusion-Tensor Imaging MRI technique for MRI technique for in-vivoin-vivo characterization characterization
of 3D white matter microstructure. of 3D white matter microstructure. Measures magnitude and direction of water Measures magnitude and direction of water
diffusion in biological tissue in 3D.diffusion in biological tissue in 3D.More sensitive to white matter changes More sensitive to white matter changes
than conventional MRI sequences.than conventional MRI sequences.
DTI Basics – Water DiffusionDTI Basics – Water Diffusion
Isotropic Anisotropic
Adapted from: Beaulieu (2002). NMR in Biomed; 15:435-455
DTI Scalar ParametersDTI Scalar ParametersTraceTrace: The magnitude of diffusion in a : The magnitude of diffusion in a
voxel.voxel.
Fractional Anisotropy (FA)Fractional Anisotropy (FA): The extent to : The extent to which diffusion is directionally restricted.which diffusion is directionally restricted.
DTI Scalar MapsDTI Scalar Maps
T2-weighted
T2* & FA: Moseley et al. (2002) Brain & Cognition; 50;396-413.Trace: Molko et al. (2001) Stroke: 32(9) 2049-54
FA map Trace map
DTI Basics – White Matter IntegrityDTI Basics – White Matter Integrity
Lesioned white matter:Lesioned white matter: Increased diffusion (increased Trace)Increased diffusion (increased Trace)Decreased anisotropy (decreased FA)Decreased anisotropy (decreased FA)
Etiology of DTI changes unclearEtiology of DTI changes unclearAxon loss & membrane breakdownAxon loss & membrane breakdownDemyelinationDemyelinationGliosis/inflammationGliosis/inflammation
Why study frontal systems in SIVD Why study frontal systems in SIVD & MCI?& MCI?
Frontal-subcortical circuit disruption in SIVDFrontal-subcortical circuit disruption in SIVD Executive and behavioral impairment Executive and behavioral impairment Functional decline and dementia.Functional decline and dementia.
Executive impairment in MCI Executive impairment in MCI (CDR=0.5)(CDR=0.5) may may hasten conversion to dementia.hasten conversion to dementia.
Use DTI and cognitive testing as independent Use DTI and cognitive testing as independent probes of frontal systems integrity and function probes of frontal systems integrity and function to identify a subset of SIVD and MCI patients at to identify a subset of SIVD and MCI patients at greater risk for conversion to dementia.greater risk for conversion to dementia.
Almkvist (2000), The matter of white matter, 81-95.Albert et al. (2001), JINS 7(5) 631-5.Chen et al (2000), Neurology 55(12) 1847-53.
Patient GroupsPatient Groups SIVD: Subcortical ischemic vascular disease SIVD: Subcortical ischemic vascular disease
Subcortical hyperintensities (SH) on T2-weighted Subcortical hyperintensities (SH) on T2-weighted MRI; lacunar infarction on T1MRI; lacunar infarction on T1
Gliosis and demyelination due to underlying small Gliosis and demyelination due to underlying small vessel disease.vessel disease.
70-year-old normal
52-year-old CADASIL
65-year-old CADASIL
Patient GroupsPatient GroupsCADASIL: CADASIL: CCerebral erebral aautosomal utosomal ddominant ominant
aarteriopathy with rteriopathy with ssubcortical ubcortical iinfarction and nfarction and lleukoencephalopathyeukoencephalopathy..Inherited form of SIVD.Inherited form of SIVD.
Effect on brain parenchyma same as in SIVD.Effect on brain parenchyma same as in SIVD.Relatively pure form of SIVD, excellent model.Relatively pure form of SIVD, excellent model.
MCIMCIPetersen criteria for Petersen criteria for amnestic amnestic MCIMCI
Normal controlsNormal controls
Prior Studies of DTIPrior Studies of DTI DTI in Aging: DTI in Aging:
Anterior – posterior gradient of DTI changes. Anterior – posterior gradient of DTI changes. (e.g., Pfefferbaum, (e.g., Pfefferbaum, 2000)2000)
Correlations w/executive function. Correlations w/executive function. (e.g.; O’Sullivan, 2001, Madden 2004)(e.g.; O’Sullivan, 2001, Madden 2004)
DTI in SIVD: DTI in SIVD: DTI abnormalities in normal appearing white matter (NAWM)DTI abnormalities in normal appearing white matter (NAWM) DTI in NAWM more strongly correlated w/executive function than DTI in NAWM more strongly correlated w/executive function than
DTI in SH. DTI in SH. (O’Sullivan 2004)(O’Sullivan 2004)
DTI in MCI:DTI in MCI: Little progression of anterior-posterior gradient found in normal Little progression of anterior-posterior gradient found in normal
aging aging (Head, 2004)(Head, 2004) DTI changes in regions expected for AD (left CSO, temporal DTI changes in regions expected for AD (left CSO, temporal
lobes, left HC) lobes, left HC) (Fellgeibel, 2004)(Fellgeibel, 2004) Association of DTI w/cognitive function not well studied.Association of DTI w/cognitive function not well studied.
ObjectivesObjectives
1. To assess white matter integrity in patients with SIVD vs. MCI vs. normal controls using DTI.
2. To determine the association between DTI parameters in white matter and attention/executive function and processing speed.
HypothesesHypotheses
1. Increased FA and decreased Trace in SIVD & MCI vs. NC.
2. FA and Trace in NAWM will correlate significantly with performance on tests of attention/executive function and psychomotor processing speed.
MethodMethodSubjects recruited from Butler Hospital Subjects recruited from Butler Hospital
Memory & Aging Program @ BrownMemory & Aging Program @ BrownNC recruited from family members of NC recruited from family members of
patientspatientsMRI done generally within 2 months of MRI done generally within 2 months of
cognitive testing.cognitive testing.
Key inclusion criteria – SIVD Key inclusion criteria – SIVD n = 9 (4 CADASIL) n = 9 (4 CADASIL) Identified mainly on radiological grounds for protocol Identified mainly on radiological grounds for protocol
different than that of the MCI subjects.different than that of the MCI subjects. Greater than expected SH for age on a visual rating scale Greater than expected SH for age on a visual rating scale
((Vataja et al., 2003 Vataja et al., 2003 Eur J Neurol Eur J Neurol 10, 625-31)10, 625-31) Cognitive complaintCognitive complaint Consensus diagnosis of SIVD or genetically confirmed Consensus diagnosis of SIVD or genetically confirmed
CADASIL CADASIL MMSE ≥ 24MMSE ≥ 24 Global CDR ≥ 0.5Global CDR ≥ 0.5 ADL normal or only slightly impairedADL normal or only slightly impaired ExcludedExcluded: diagnosis of probable or possible AD: diagnosis of probable or possible AD
Key inclusion criteria – MCI Key inclusion criteria – MCI n = 9 n = 9 Documented memory complaintDocumented memory complaint MMSE ≥ 24MMSE ≥ 24 Global CDR = 0.5Global CDR = 0.5 ADL normal or only slightly impairedADL normal or only slightly impaired 1.5 SD below age-corrected mean on 1.5 SD below age-corrected mean on
HVLT-R delayed recall or % retainedHVLT-R delayed recall or % retained ExcludedExcluded: diagnosis of probable or possible : diagnosis of probable or possible
ADAD
Key inclusion criteria – NC Key inclusion criteria – NC Absence of significant memory complaintAbsence of significant memory complaint MMSE within normal limitsMMSE within normal limits CDR = 0CDR = 0 ADL normalADL normal Normal memory function for ageNormal memory function for age
DTI AcquisitionDTI Acquisition Siemens Symphony 1.5TSiemens Symphony 1.5T 3 acquisitions with offset in slice direction by 0.0mm, 1.7 3 acquisitions with offset in slice direction by 0.0mm, 1.7
mm and 3.4 mm, 5mm thick slicesmm and 3.4 mm, 5mm thick slices 0.1mm inter-slice spacing, 30 slices per acquisition0.1mm inter-slice spacing, 30 slices per acquisition matrix = 128 mm x128 mm; FOV = 21.7cm x 21.7cm, in-matrix = 128 mm x128 mm; FOV = 21.7cm x 21.7cm, in-
plane sample spacing was 0.85 mmplane sample spacing was 0.85 mm TR=7200, TE=156TR=7200, TE=156 b values: (0, 500, 1000 b values: (0, 500, 1000 mmmm22/s/s) or (0, 1000 mm) or (0, 1000 mm22/s) /s) 12 non-collinear directions, 12 non-collinear directions, The first three datasets were interleaved and zero-filled The first three datasets were interleaved and zero-filled
in the slice direction to form a fourth dataset with in the slice direction to form a fourth dataset with resulting inter-slice distance of 0.85 mm. resulting inter-slice distance of 0.85 mm.
FA and Trace maps derived.FA and Trace maps derived.
Additional MRI AcquisitionsAdditional MRI Acquisitions3D T1 volume (MPRAGE) for volumetric 3D T1 volume (MPRAGE) for volumetric
analysisanalysis3 interleaved FLAIR acquisitions 3 interleaved FLAIR acquisitions
concatenated into a concatenated into a pseudopseudo 3D volume for 3D volume for assessment of SH volumeassessment of SH volume
Voxel dimensions on MPRAGE & Voxel dimensions on MPRAGE & pseudo pseudo FLAIR match DTI.FLAIR match DTI.
Image AnalysisImage Analysis Describing DTI parameters in NAWM, SH, and in
anterior and posterior white matter. Analyze AVW 5.0, 6.0 (Mayo Clinic) ROI: 5 x 5 square voxels Periventricular white matter Centrum semiovale ROIs were placed on T2-weighted images (b=0)
images and transferred to FA and Trace maps for measurement
Recorded location as NAWM vs. SH; anterior vs. posterior
DTI in SIVD – ROI PlacementDTI in SIVD – ROI Placement
Image AnalysisImage Analysis Parenchymal volume estimation:
Performed on MPRAGE sequences Voxel estimation tool in Analyze following skull
stripping. SH volume:
Performed on pseudo-3D FLAIR images SH thresholding following skull stripping
w/operator correction Sum of all voxels with intensity levels within SH
threshold range
Cognitive TestsCognitive Tests
DRS I/PDRS I/P SDMTSDMT TMT A & BTMT A & B COWAT (FAS)COWAT (FAS)
Results – Demographics Results – Demographics
VariableVariable NCNC(n=8)(n=8)
SIVDSIVD(n=9)(n=9)
MCIMCI(n=9)(n=9)
OverallOverallpp
Age @ scan (yrs)Age @ scan (yrs) 68.0±14.868.0±14.8 58.6±10.758.6±10.7aa 76.7±8.476.7±8.4aa .011.011
Education (yrs)Education (yrs) 12.6±3.412.6±3.4 14.0±3.314.0±3.3 13.7±2.913.7±2.9 nsns
MMSEMMSE 29.0±1.629.0±1.6 28.6±1.228.6±1.2 27.3±1.527.3±1.5 nsns
% Female% Female 50.0% 50.0% 66.7%66.7% 55.6%55.6% nsns
SIVD group younger than MCI
All subsequent group analyses covaried for age @ scan
Results – Parenchymal & SH volumesResults – Parenchymal & SH volumes
VariableVariable NCNC(n=8)(n=8)
SIVDSIVD(n=9)(n=9)
MCIMCI(n=9)(n=9)
OverallOverallpp
Parenchymal Parenchymal (cm(cm33))
1099.9±96.281099.9±96.28 1184.2 ±191.1 1184.2 ±191.1 1103.7±153.81103.7±153.8 nsns
SH/parenchSH/parench .002±.002.002±.002aa .033±.025.033±.025a,ba,b .009±.009.009±.009bb .003.003
No significant differences across groups on estimated parenchymal volume.
SIVD had higher ratio of SH to parenchymal volume than NC or MCI
Results: SH FA & TraceResults: SH FA & TraceFA & Trace in SH
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
FA Trace
NC
SIVDMCI
No group differences in SH or Trace in regions of SH
(mm2/s x 10-3)
Results: NAWM FA & TraceResults: NAWM FA & Trace
NAWM FA & Trace (periventricular & centrum semiovale)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
NAWM FA NAWM Trace
NC
SIVD
MCI
* *
* *
p=.126
(mm2/s x 10-3)
SIVD had lower FA vs. NC and higher trace vs. MCI
Results – NAWM Anterior/PosteriorResults – NAWM Anterior/Posterior
Estimated Marginal Means of A
AP_FA
21
Estim
ated
Mar
gina
l Mea
ns
.5
.4
.3
.2
1=NEC; 2=VCI; 3=MCI
1
2
3
Estimated Marginal Means of MEASURE_1
AP_TRACE
21
Estim
ated
Mar
gina
l Mea
ns
.0012
.0011
.0010
.0009
.0008
.0007
1=NEC; 2=VCI; 3=MCI
1
2
3
Results – DTI & Cognition Results – DTI & Cognition SH:
SDMT with SH/parenchymal ratio (r = .45, p = .02)SDMT with FA in SH (r = -.61, p = .01)
NAWMSDMT with NAWM FA (r = -.42, p < .04)SDMT with anterior NAWM FA (r = -.46, p < .02)SDMT with NAWM Trace (r = .40, p < .05)
No other significant correlations between tests/DTI variables
Conclusions Conclusions Consistent w/previous results showing DTI changes in Consistent w/previous results showing DTI changes in
NAWM in SIVD. NAWM in SIVD. NC and MCI were similar on DTINC and MCI were similar on DTI SIVD may alter the age-related gradient of anterior to SIVD may alter the age-related gradient of anterior to
posterior DTI changes. posterior DTI changes. Processing speed associated with DTI parameters in Processing speed associated with DTI parameters in
both NAWM and SH. both NAWM and SH. DTI may provide method for describing differential effect DTI may provide method for describing differential effect
of disorders on white matter and detect associations of disorders on white matter and detect associations between NAWM and cognitive function.between NAWM and cognitive function.
LimitationsLimitationsSmall nSmall nSIVD group younger than MCI SIVD group younger than MCI SIVD group radiographically SIVD group radiographically
characterized.characterized.Limited range of cognitive deficitsLimited range of cognitive deficitsCorrelation analyses exploratoryCorrelation analyses exploratoryROI analysis not capture DTI differences ROI analysis not capture DTI differences
in other regionsin other regions
Future DirectionsFuture DirectionsAdditional data collection underwayAssess differential impact of CADASIL vs.
SIVDDifferential contribution of SH volume vs.
DTI in these groups.Assess DTI correlation with experimental
working memory measures.
TractographyTractography
Zhang & Laidlaw: http://csdl.computer.org/comp/proceedings/vis/2004/8788/00/87880028p.pdf.
Superior view color fiber maps Lateral view color fiber maps
AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments
Stephen SallowayStephen SallowayPaul MalloyPaul Malloy
David LaidlawDavid LaidlawSong ZhangSong Zhang
Thea Brennan-KrohnThea Brennan-KrohnErin SchlictingErin SchlictingJerome SanesJerome SanesLynn FanellaLynn Fanella
SupportSupportNIA AG020498-02
Alzheimer’s Association NIRG-03-6195Start-MH Grant
NIMH K08MH01487WThe Human Brain Project (NIBIB & NIMH)
Ittleson Fund at BrownP20 NCRR15578-01
Center for Translational Brain Research at Brown.
THANK YOUTHANK YOU
Results – DTI & CognitionResults – DTI & Cognition NC
SDMT with FA in NAWM FA (r = .-760, p < .03) SDMT with FA in ant. NAWM FA (r = .-750, p < .03)
Research FocusResearch Focus
Frontal Systems Disruption Frontal Systems Disruption ↓↓
Changes in Executive Cognition and BehaviorChanges in Executive Cognition and Behavior↓↓
Functional Disability/Conversion to DementiaFunctional Disability/Conversion to Dementia
Results: FA & Trace in Genu & SpleniumResults: FA & Trace in Genu & Splenium
FA: Genu & Splenium
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
FA genu FA splenium
NC
SIVD
MCI
No group differences in SH or Trace in regions of SH
Trace: Genu & Splenium
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Trace genu Trace splenium
NCSIVDMCI
(mm2/s x 10-3)
Results: FA & Trace in Temporal Lobe Results: FA & Trace in Temporal Lobe White MatterWhite Matter
Trace: Temporal Lobe White Matter
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
TLWM-R TLWM-L
NC
SIVD
MCI
FA: Temporal Lobe White Matter
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
TLWM-R TLWM-L
NC
SIVD
MCI
(mm2/s x 10-3)
FA: Lower in SIVD and MCI groups vs. NC bilaterally. Trace: Higher in SIVD vs. NC on right; and higher in SIVD than both NC and MCI on left.
Image AnalysisImage Analysis
Image AnalysisImage Analysis Temporal lobe white matter: rectangular ROI
(6 x 3) in left & right temporal stem 10 consecutive coronal slices starting at the
mamillary bodies and proceeding posteriorly. Corpus callosum: square (3 x 3) ROI in left &
right genu and splenium on 5 consecutive slices.
Placed directly on FA or Trace maps No classification of SH vs. NAWM
Image AnalysisImage Analysis Analyze AVW 5.0, 6.0 (Mayo Clinic) Periventricular white matter: 3 ROIs (5 x 5) around
each horn, 2 axial slices. Centrum semiovale: Up to 5 ROIs (5 x 5) in each
hemisphere in NAWM and SH, 2 axial slices ROIs were placed on b=0 images and transferred to
FA and Trace maps for measurement FLAIR and MPRAGE used for guidance. Recorded location as NAWM vs. SH; anterior vs.
posterior
Results – Corpus CallosumResults – Corpus Callosum VariableVariable ControlsControls
(n=8)(n=8)SIVDSIVD(n=9)(n=9)
MCIMCI(n=9)(n=9)
OverallOverallpp
FAFAGenuGenu .813±.041.813±.041 .720±.170 .720±.170 .769±.067.769±.067 nsns
SpleniumSplenium .811±.085.811±.085 .807±.097.807±.097 .815±.082.815±.082 nsns
TraceTrace (mm(mm22/s x 10/s x 10-3-3))
GenuGenu .730±.043.730±.043 .893±.259 .893±.259 .935±.517.935±.517 nsns
SpleniumSplenium .675±.046.675±.046 .747±.053.747±.053 .692±.076.692±.076 nsns
No group differences in FA or Trace in genu or splenium.
Results – Temporal Lobe White MatterResults – Temporal Lobe White Matter VariableVariable ControlsControls
(n=8)(n=8)SIVDSIVD(n=9)(n=9)
MCIMCI(n=9)(n=9)
OverallOverallpp
FAFATLWM – R TLWM – R .574±.052.574±.052a,ba,b .502±.053.502±.053aa .527±.039.527±.039bb .027.027
TLWM – L TLWM – L .551±.056.551±.056c,dc,d .445±.051.445±.051cc .487±.039.487±.039dd .001.001
TraceTrace (mm(mm22/s x 10/s x 10-3-3))
TLWM – R TLWM – R .768±.061.768±.061ee .855±.062.855±.062ee .796±.050.796±.050 .034.034
TLWM – L TLWM – L .785±.070.785±.070ff .920±.076.920±.076f,gf,g .823±.070.823±.070gg .001.001
FA: Lower in SIVD and MCI groups vs. NC bilaterally. Trace: Higher in SIVD vs. NC on right; and higher in SIVD than both NC and MCI on left.
Results: Attention/ExecutiveResults: Attention/Executive
* *
* *
p=.126
(mm2/s x 10-
3)
Attention/Executive Measures (T scores)
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
SDMT TMT-A TMT-B COWA DRS I/P
NC
SIVD
MCI
SIVD intermediate on all measures except DRS I/P TMT-A: NC better than SIVD and MCI; MCI and SIVD not different. TMT-B: NC better than MCI; no other pair-wise differences
Results: MemoryResults: Memory
* *
* *
p=.126
(mm2/s x 10-3)
Memory Measure (T scores)
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
HVLT TL HVLTDelay
HVLT %ret
HVLTDiscrim
DRSmem
NCSIVDMCI
SIVD intermediate on all measures MCI significantly worse than NC on all measures MCI significantly worse than SIVD on all measures except HVLT-R Total Learning
Results – MemoryResults – MemoryVariableVariable ControlsControls
(n=8)(n=8)SIVDSIVD(n=9)(n=9)
MCIMCI(n=9)(n=9)
OverallOverallpp
HVLT-RHVLT-R
TotalTotal 24.88±4.6424.88±4.64aa 24.63±3.2524.63±3.25 14.44±4.5014.44±4.50aa .003.003
DelayDelay 9.50±2.079.50±2.07bb 7.50±3.127.50±3.12bb 2.33±2.182.33±2.18bb ..031031
% retn% retn 97.38±17.8297.38±17.82 74.13±24.3674.13±24.36 34.44±30.5434.44±30.54 nsns
DiscrmDiscrm 10.38±1.6910.38±1.69 9.88±2.649.88±2.64 6.22±2.196.22±2.19 nsns
DRS-MemDRS-Mem 24.00±1.3124.00±1.31 23.50±1.3123.50±1.31 21.89±2.8021.89±2.80 nsns
HVLT-R Total Learning: MCI lower than NC or SIVD HVLT-R Delayed Recall: Significant differences between all pairs
Results: Overall FA & TraceResults: Overall FA & Trace
Overall FA & Trace (all ROIs)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Overall FA Overall Trace
NC
SIVD
MCI
* *
* *
(mm2/s x 10-3)
Recommended