磁共振波谱在遗忘型与非遗忘型轻度认知障碍鉴别诊断中的应用价值

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2015.03.002

目的

探讨磁共振波谱(¹H-MRS)在遗忘型轻度认知障碍(aMCI)与非遗忘型轻度认知障碍(naMCI)鉴别诊断中的应用价值。

方法

对明确诊断的25例aMCI患者(aMCI组)、22例naMCI患者(naMCI组)及20例认知功能正常老年人(NC组)，行多体素¹H-MRS检查，以左侧海马、扣带后回及额叶为兴趣区，检测N-乙酰天门冬氨酸(NAA)、谷氨酸(Glu)、肌醇(mI)及肌酸(Cr)的峰下面积。使用SPSS 17.0软件包对所测定的数据进行分析，3组间NAA/Cr、mI/Cr及Glu/Cr值的比较使用单因素方差分析，组间两两比较用最小差值显著法(LSD)进行统计分析。

结果

aMCI组和naMCI组在左侧海马的NAA/Cr值(分别为1.09±0.11、1.07±0.08)均低于NC组(1.20±0.21)，差异有统计学意义(F＝10.23，P<0.05)；aMCI组和naMCI组在左侧扣带后回的NAA/Cr值(分别为1.02±0.09、1.07±0.10)也低于NC组(1.22±0.18)，差异有统计学意义(F＝8.73，P<0.05)；aMCI组和naMCI组在海马与扣带后回的NAA/Cr值差异无统计学意义(F＝1.54，P>0.05)。aMCI组扣带后回Glu/Cr值(0.35±0.04)低于naMCI组与NC组(0.43±0.02、0.42±0.05)，差异有统计学意义(F＝8.44，P<0.05)；3组间的Glu/Cr值在海马和扣带后回的均差异无统计学意义(F＝0.38，0.36；P>0.05)。aMCI组在海马的mI/Cr值(0.66±0.07)高于naMCI组和NC组(分别为0.39±0.04、0.41±0.04)，差异有统计学意义(F＝11.47，P<0.05)；aMCI组在扣带后回的mI/Cr值(0.62±0.05)高于naMCI组和NC组(分别为0.42±0.03、0.44±0.04)，差异有统计学意义(F＝9.41，P<0.05)；naMCI组在额叶区的mI/Cr值(0.58±0.04)高于aMCI组和NC组(分别为0.43±0.03、0.41±0.03)，差异有统计学意义(F＝7.83，P<0.05)。

结论

aMCI及naMCI组患者脑内mI及Glu代谢存在区域性的差异，¹H-MRS为临床鉴别aMCI及naMCI提供了有效的依据。

关键词: 认知障碍, 痴呆, 磁共振波谱学

Objective

To investigate the value of hydrogen proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (¹H-MRS) in the differential diagnosis of amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment (naMCI).

Methods

Twenty-five cases of aMCI patients were enrolled, twenty-two cases with naMCI and twenty subjects were elderly with normal cognitive function (NC). They all received examination of ¹H-MRS.The regions of interest were examined, including the left hippocampus, the posterior cingulate gyrus, and the frontal lobes.The area under the peak was determined for N-acethyl aspartate (NAA), glutamate (Glu), inositol (mI) and creatine (Cr). The ratios of NAA/Cr, Glu/Cr and mI/Cr were compared in different brain regions among the three groups with SPSS 17.0.

Results

Compared with the NC group, the ratio of NAA/Cr in the left hippocampus group was significantly lower than that in the aMCI and naMCI groups (1.09±0.11, 1.07±0.08, 1.20±0.21; t=0.247, 0.312; all P<0.05), and the ratio of NAA/Cr in the left posterior cingulate gyrus group was also significantly reduced with those in the aMCI and naMCI groups (1.02±0.09, 1.07±0.10, 1.22±0.18; t=0.442, 0.381; all P<0.05). However, no significant difference in the ratio of NAA/Cr in any brain region were observed between aMCI and naMCI groups (t=0.021, 0.036; P>0.05). The Glu/Cr ratio in the posterior cingulate gyrus of the aMCI group decreased significantly compared with that in the naMCI and NC groups (0.35±0.04, 0.43±0.02, 0.42±0.05; t=0.474, 0.405; all P<0.05). No significant difference in the Glu/Cr ratio was observed in other brain regions among the three groups (F=0.382, 0.363; all P>0.05). The mI/Cr ratio in the hippocampus was significantly bigger in the aMCI group than that in the naMCI and NC groups (0.66±0.07, 0.39±0.04, 0.41±0.04; t=0.293, 0.247; all P<0.05), and the mI/Cr ratio in the posterior cingulate gyrus was also significantly higher in the aMCI group than that in the naMCI and NC groups (0.62±0.05, 0.42±0.03, 0.44±0.04; t=0.255, 0.261; all P<0.05). The mI/Cr ratio in the frontal lobes of the naMCI group increased significantly compared with that in the aMCI and NC groups(0.58±0.04, 0.43±0.03, 0.41±0.03; t=0.174, 0.226; all P<0.05).

Conclusions

Regional differences of mI and Glu metabolism are found in brain tissues of patients with aMCI and naMCI.¹H-MRS is an effective method in the differential diagnosis of aMCI and naMCI.

Key words: Cognition impairment, Dementia, Magnetic resonance spectroscopy

表1 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者临床特征比较

组别	例数	性别(例，男/女)	年龄(岁，±s)	教育程度(年，±s)
aMCI组	25	12/13	67.54±6.12	9.2±2.1
naMCI组	22	10/12	69.34±7.01	9.7±3.4
NC组	20	9/11	67.73±5.84	9.1±2.3
统计值	?	χ²＝0.41	F＝0.01	F＝0.12
P值	?	>0.05	>0.05	>0.05

表1 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者临床特征比较

组别	例数	性别(例，男/女)	年龄(岁，±s)	教育程度(年，±s)
aMCI组	25	12/13	67.54±6.12	9.2±2.1
naMCI组	22	10/12	69.34±7.01	9.7±3.4
NC组	20	9/11	67.73±5.84	9.1±2.3
统计值	?	χ²＝0.41	F＝0.01	F＝0.12
P值	?	>0.05	>0.05	>0.05

表2 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者¹H-MRS的NAA/Cr值比较(±s)

组别	例数	左海马	左扣带后回	左额叶
aMCI组	25	1.09±0.11^ab	1.02±0.09^ab	1.19±0.12
naMCI组	22	1.07±0.08^a	1.07±0.10^a	1.18±0.12
NC组	20	1.20±0.21	1.22±0.18	1.19±0.10
F值	?	10.23	8.73	1.54
P值	?	<0.05	<0.05	>0.05

表2 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者¹H-MRS的NAA/Cr值比较(±s)

组别	例数	左海马	左扣带后回	左额叶
aMCI组	25	1.09±0.11^ab	1.02±0.09^ab	1.19±0.12
naMCI组	22	1.07±0.08^a	1.07±0.10^a	1.18±0.12
NC组	20	1.20±0.21	1.22±0.18	1.19±0.10
F值	?	10.23	8.73	1.54
P值	?	<0.05	<0.05	>0.05

表3 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者¹H-MRS的Glu/Cr值比较(±s)

组别	例数	左海马	左扣带后回	左额叶
aMCI组	25	0.47±0.06	0.35±0.04	0.43±0.05
naMCI组	22	0.46±0.05	0.43±0.02	0.42±0.03
NC组	20	0.44±0.06	0.42±0.05	0.45±0.04
F值	?	0.38	8.44	0.36
P值	?	>0.05	<0.05	>0.05

表3 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者¹H-MRS的Glu/Cr值比较(±s)

组别	例数	左海马	左扣带后回	左额叶
aMCI组	25	0.47±0.06	0.35±0.04	0.43±0.05
naMCI组	22	0.46±0.05	0.43±0.02	0.42±0.03
NC组	20	0.44±0.06	0.42±0.05	0.45±0.04
F值	?	0.38	8.44	0.36
P值	?	>0.05	<0.05	>0.05

表4 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者¹H-MRS的mI/Cr值比较(±s)

组别	例数	左海马	左扣带后回	左额叶
aMCI组	25	0.66±0.07	0.62±0.05	0.43±0.03
naMCI组	22	0.39±0.04	0.42±0.03	0.58±0.04
NC组	20	0.41±0.04	0.44±0.04	0.41±0.03
F值	?	11.47	9.41	7.83
P值	?	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05

表4 aMCI组、naMCI组与NC组受试者¹H-MRS的mI/Cr值比较(±s)

组别	例数	左海马	左扣带后回	左额叶
aMCI组	25	0.66±0.07	0.62±0.05	0.43±0.03
naMCI组	22	0.39±0.04	0.42±0.03	0.58±0.04
NC组	20	0.41±0.04	0.44±0.04	0.41±0.03
F值	?	11.47	9.41	7.83
P值	?	<0.05	<0.05	<0.05

[1]	Petersen RC,Negash S. Mild cognitive impairment：an overview [J]. CNS Spectr, 2008, 13(1): 45-53.
[2]	Petersen RC.Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity [J]. J Inter Med, 2004, 256(3): 183-194.
[3]	Yaffe K,Petersen RC,Lindquist K, et al.Subtype of mild cognitive impairment and progression to dementia and death [J]. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord, 2006, 22(4): 312-319.
[4]	Luck T,Luppa M,Briel S, et al.Incidence of mild cognitive impairment：a systematic review [J]. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord, 2010, 29(2): 164-175.
[5]	Morris JC,Storandt M,Miller JP, et al.Mild cognitive impairment represents early-stage Alzheimer disease [J]. Arch Neurol, 2001, 58(3): 397-405.
[6]	沈娜娜,陈卫,赵仁亮. 轻度认知障碍与非痴呆型血管性认知功能障碍[J] .国际脑血管病杂志, 2010, 18(9): 691-695.
[7]	Modrego PJ,Fayed N,Pina MA.Conversion from mild cognitive-impairment to probable Alzheimer’s disease predicted by brain magnetic resonance spectroscopy [J] .Am J of Psychiatry, 2005, 162(4): 667-675.
[8]	Chantal S,Braun CM,Bouchard RW, et al.Similar 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopic metabolic pattern in the medial temporal lobes of patients with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer disease [J]. Brain Res, 2004, 1003(1-2): 26-35.
[9]	Fayed N,Davila J,Oliveros A, et al.Utility of different MR modalities in mild cognitive impairment and its use as a predictor of conversion to probable dementia [J]. Acad Radiol, 2008, 15(9): 1089-1098.
[10]	Kantarci K,Weigand SD,Petersen RC, et al.Longitudinal 1H MRS changes in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease [J]. Neurobiol Aging, 2007, 28(9): 1330-1339.
[11]	陈双庆,蔡庆,沈玉英, 等. 轻度认知功能损害患者扣带后回谷氨酸多体素氢质子磁共振波谱研究[J/CD]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2013, 1(1): 31-34.
[12]	Sailasuta N,Harris K,Tran T, et al.Minimally invasive biomarker confirms glial activation present in Alzheimer’s disease：a preliminary study [J]. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat, 2011, 7(8): 495-499.
[13]	Franczak M,Prost RW,Antuono PG, et al.Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy of the hippocampus in patients with mild cognitive impairment：a pilot study [J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 2007, 31(5): 666-670.
[14]	Walecki J,Barcikowska M,cwikla JB, et al.N-acetylaspartate, choline, myoinositol, glutamin and glutamate (glx) concentration changes in proton MR spectroscopy (¹HMRS) in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) [J]. Med Sci Monit, 2011, 17(12): 105-111.
[15]	Kantarci K,Petersen RC,Przybelski SA, et al.Hippocampal volumes, proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy metabolites, and cerebrovascular disease in mild cognitive impairment subtypes [J] Arch Neurol, 2008, 65(12): 1621-1628.
[16]	Garrard P,Perry R,Hodges JR.Disorders of semantic memory [J]. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 1997, 62(5): 431-435.
[17]	Yi L,Wang J,Jia L, et al.Structural and functional changes in subcortical vascular mild cognitive impairment：a combined voxel-based morphometry and resting-state fMRI study [J]. PLoS One, 2012, 7(9): 44758.

[1]	茹江英, 廖启宇, 温国洪, 潘思华, 刘栋, 张皓琛, 牛云飞. 直接前方入路和后外侧入路半髋关节置换治疗老年痴呆股骨颈骨折的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 287-293.
[2]	吉莉, 苏云楠, 王斌, 沈滔, 刘团结, 毛蕾, 徐玉萍, 张婷, 王博. 急性缺血性脑卒中患者脑白质微结构改变对长期认知功能损伤的预测价值研究[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(04): 193-200.
[3]	李瑞雨, 王新亮, 徐丛丛, 刘严泽, 张雪竹. 国内外血管性认知障碍临床试验注册现状分析[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(01): 14-20.
[4]	马良飞, 尹翎, 方婷, 曾西西, 佟佳璇, 马献昆. 重复经颅磁刺激联合虚拟现实技术对脑卒中后认知障碍的影响[J/OL]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(06): 346-351.
[5]	常文轩, 王婷, 刘伟, 蓝天琦, 彭静, 汪诗瑶, 张晓鹏, 冯晨, 宫雪梅, 朱敏. 脑小血管病所致执行障碍的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(03): 179-182.
[6]	高倩, 李晓芳, 杨亚昭, 张静, 崔蕾, 杨立青, 夏艳敏. 甲状腺激素及Apelin在CSVD致认知障碍的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 201-206.
[7]	杨晨, 王松涛, 郭涛, 邱继文. 针刺辨证治疗血管性痴呆的选穴规律研究[J/OL]. 中华针灸电子杂志, 2024, 13(01): 25-29.
[8]	郑瑶, 仲祎璐, 刘彩霞, 郑慧玲, 李斐斐, 胡镕镕. 养老机构老年痴呆照顾者虐待倾向与护理能力和社会支持的相关性[J/OL]. 中华老年病研究电子杂志, 2024, 11(01): 45-50.
[9]	欧春影, 李晓宾, 郭靖, 许可, 王梦, 安晓雷. hs-CRP、Lp-PLA2和S100β与缺血性脑小血管病患者认知障碍的相关性[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(03): 265-269.
[10]	曾德阳, 董贺千禧, 陶凉, 肖红艳, 曾燕, 鄢华. 中年心血管危险因素增加阿尔茨海默病相关痴呆的流行病学和机制研究进展[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 6-13.
[11]	叶一, 曾勇. 血脂与轻度认知障碍相关性的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 14-18.
[12]	赵晓晓, 邱嘉婷, 张懿姝, 张蓉, 张棚, 刘晓蕾. 丁苯酞在各类型认知障碍治疗中的应用研究进展[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 19-26.
[13]	聂倩倩, 程桂荣, 曾燕, 鄢华. 代谢性心血管疾病共病增加中国社区老年人痴呆风险[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 27-32.
[14]	孙畅, 赵世刚, 白文婷. 脑卒中后认知障碍与内分泌激素变化的关系[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 471-476.
[15]	王道合, 施媛媛. 8-iso-PGF2α及P选择素在评估脑小血管病患者认知功能中的价值[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 364-368.

阅读次数

全文

摘要

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

The value of hydrogen proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the differential diagnosis of amnestic and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

The value of hydrogen proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the differential diagnosis of amnestic and non-amnestic mild cognitive impairment