切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (04) : 239 -246. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-1358.2022.04.004

论著

基于动脉自旋标记技术的麻痹性痴呆患者脑血流量特点及其与认知障碍相关性
吴雅丽1, 李晶晶1, 许东梅1,(), 黄宇明1, 寇程1, 崔健1   
  1. 1. 100015 北京,首都医科大学附属北京地坛医院神经内科
  • 收稿日期:2021-10-10 出版日期:2022-08-15
  • 通信作者: 许东梅
  • 基金资助:
    感染病科国家临床重点专科建设项目; 北京市医管局青苗人才计划(No. QML20181806)

Characteristics of cerebral blood flow and its correlation with cognitive impairment in patients with general paralysis of the insane evaluated by arterial spin labeling

Yali Wu1, Jingjing Li1, Dongmei Xu1,(), Yuming Huang1, Cheng Kou1, Jian Cui1   

  1. 1. Department of Neurology, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100015, China
  • Received:2021-10-10 Published:2022-08-15
  • Corresponding author: Dongmei Xu
引用本文:

吴雅丽, 李晶晶, 许东梅, 黄宇明, 寇程, 崔健. 基于动脉自旋标记技术的麻痹性痴呆患者脑血流量特点及其与认知障碍相关性[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 239-246.

Yali Wu, Jingjing Li, Dongmei Xu, Yuming Huang, Cheng Kou, Jian Cui. Characteristics of cerebral blood flow and its correlation with cognitive impairment in patients with general paralysis of the insane evaluated by arterial spin labeling[J]. Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Infectious Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(04): 239-246.

目的

探讨麻痹性痴呆(GPI)患者脑血流量(CBF)特点及其与认知障碍的相关性。

方法

纳入2018年1月至2019年12月于首都医科大学附属北京地坛医院就诊的GPI患者18例和健康体检者18例(健康对照组),采用蒙特利尔认知评估量表评定认知功能。采用磁共振动脉自旋标记技术扫描评估其各个脑区CBF,并进一步应用Spearman相关分析CBF异常区域与认知功能的相关性。

结果

GPI患者蒙特利尔认知评估量表评分低于健康对照组[(16.00 ± 7.19)vs. (27.90 ± 1.21):t =-7.853、P < 0.001)]。18例GPI患者中,头颅MRI正常5例,脑白质病变1例,脑萎缩9例,3例患者同时存在脑萎缩和脑白质病变。健康对照组头颅MRI均未见异常。GPI患者脑13、14、28、37、38、41、42、43、44、46、48、49、50、51、52、69、70、77、78、83、84、88、109、117、165、166、167、168、169、177、178、179、187、188、211、212、213、214、215、216、219、223、227、237和238区CBF显著高于健康对照组(P均< 0.001)。GPI患者认知障碍中的注意力障碍与脑69、70、77、78、166和168区CBF异常有一定的负相关性(r =-0.476、P = 0.046,r =-0.487、P = 0.034,r =-0.604、P = 0.008,r = -0.545、P = 0.019,r =-0.544、P = 0.02,r =-0.522、P = 0.026)。

结论

GPI患者存在全脑血流量升高。GPI患者认知功能障碍中的注意力障碍可能与局部脑区血流量升高有一定相关性。局部CBF越高,注意力障碍越严重。这可能也是GPI发病机制之一。

Objective

To investigate the characteristics and relationship between cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cognitive impairment in patients with general paralysis of the insane (GPI).

Methods

Total of 18 patients with GPI (GPI group) and eighteen healthy controls (HC group) were enrolled from January 2018 to December 2019 in Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University. The cognitive function was assessed by montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). The cerebral blood flow was evaluated by arterial spin labeling, and the relationship between cerebral blood flow and cognitive function was analyzed by Spearman correlation analysis.

Results

The MoCA score of patients with GPI was significantly lower than that of HC group [(16.00 ± 7.19) vs. (27.90 ± 1.21): t = -7.853, P < 0.001]. Among GPI group, 5 cases had normal brain MRI, 1 case had white matter lesions, 9 cases had brain atrophy, and 3 cases had brain atrophy and white matter lesions at the same time. No abnormality head MRI was found in HC group. The cerebral blood flow in 13, 14, 28, 37, 38, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 69, 70, 77, 78, 83, 84, 88, 109, 117, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 177, 178, 179, 187, 188, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 219, 223, 227, 237 and 238 brain regions in the patients with GPI were significantly higher than those of HC group (all P < 0.001). There were negative correlations between lack of concentration and high CBF in 69, 70, 77, 78, 166 and 168 brain regions (r = -0.476, P = 0.046; r =-0.487, P = 0.034; r =-0.604, P = 0.008; r =-0.545, P = 0.019; r =-0.544, P = 0.02; r =-0.522, P = 0.026).

Conclusions

The whole brain blood flow increased in patients with GPI. Concentration may be related to the increase of regional CBF; the higher the regional CBF, the more severe the attention disorder. This may be one of the pathogenesis of GPI.

表1 GPI组和HC组人口学和认知功能
图1 GPI患者头颅MRI注:A和B显示额叶萎缩;C、D和E显示颞叶萎缩,脑白质病变
图2 GPI患者全脑血流量变化注:红色区域显示有明显差异的脑血流量区域,主要分布在脑13、14、28、37、38、41、42、43、44、46、48、49、50、51、52、69、70、77、78、83、84、88、109、117、165、166、167、168、169、177、178、179、187、188、211、212、213、214、215、216、219、223、227、237和238区
图3 GPI组各脑区CBF和认知障碍相关性分析图
表2 GPI组和HC组患者脑血流量(ml/min)
脑区 GPI组(18例) 对照组(18例) Z P
13 9 064.07(8 491.80,9 649.99) 8 118.16 ± 970.65 -3.669 0.005
14 9 249.18(8 613.22,9 913.98) 8 165.06 ± 903.12 -4.092 0.002
28 7 837.01(7 112.80,8 479.31) 6 991.25 ± 610.35 -3.920 0.003
37 7 966.83(7 503.60,8 473.45) 7 153.81 ± 636.42 -4.188 0.002
38 7 610.16(6 976.14,8 318.86) 6 936.82 ± 659.14 -3.339 0.010
41 7 488.41(7 190.61,8 294.95) 7 239.24(6 822.68,7 638.82) -4.745 0.001
42 7 818.38(7 263.19,8 390.20) 6 871.68 ± 761.84 -4.571 0.001
43 7 310.43(6 810.81,7 981.29) 6 868.09(6 032.95,7 119.63) -4.206 0.002
44 7 730.81(7 125.79,8 298.57) 7 044.23(6 461.09,7 302.33) -3.665 0.005
46 7 115.70(6 640.70,7 711.99) 6 714.97(6 353.44,6 940.67) -3.960 0.003
48 6 381.24(6 038.39,6 908.51) 5 558.61 ± 647.00 -3.738 0.004
49 6 778.73(6 126.24,7 410.55) 6 635.09(6 208.05,6 902.18) -4.313 0.002
50 6 653.42(6 146.71,7 342.64) 5 892.41 ± 674.74 -4.091 0.002
51 7 696.34(7 098.76,8 361.64) 6 012.70(5 627.09,6 390.04) -3.944 0.003
52 7 702.64(7 352.05,8 256.19) 5 916.25(5 632.40,6 526.26) -3.870 0.003
69 6 560.87(6 103.92,6 984.77) 5 947.89 ± 382.62 -4.764 0.001
70 6 768.32(6 198.57,6 969.99) 6 278.81(5 782.17,6 519.19) -4.113 0.002
77 7 190.54(6 707.45,7 416.12) 6 388.00 ± 483.46 -4.672 0.001
78 7 075.49(6 492.42,7 504.88) 6 338.73 ± 574.58 -3.841 0.003
83 6 353.43(6 021.06,6 731.86) 5 753.99 ± 466.02 -4.027 0.003
84 6 459.30(5 951.59,6 849.84) 5 900.06 ± 452.15 -3.899 0.003
88 6 525.17(6 029.75,7 073.57) 5 940.50 ± 487.36 -3.345 0.010
109 6 174.88(5 814.81,6 637.44) 5 662.55 ± 412.83 -3.363 0.010
117 6 502.97(6 021.16,6 901.44) 5 904.05 ± 354.79 -3.869 0.003
165 7 377.04(6 866.00,7 799.82) 6 504.13 ± 589.11 -4.797 0.001
166 7 374.62(7 029.69,7 815.46) 6 629.40 ± 559.04 -4.854 0.001
167 7 870.66(7 551.22,8 343.39) 7 080.10 ± 661.57 -4.548 0.001
168 7 640.00(7 064.30,8 419.28) 6 937.51 ± 634.27 -3.948 0.003
169 7 160.47(6 936.86,7 659.08) 6 599.71 ± 375.26 -3.871 0.003
177 8 894.04(8 433.41,9 364.72) 7 742.93 ± 741.59 -4.232 0.002
178 8 698.79(8 432.49,9 251.91) 7 893.45 ± 593.80 -5.011 0.001
179 8 826.29(8 219.88,9 560.20) 7 806.88 ± 818.40 -3.411 0.009
187 7 767.30(7 340.43,8 431.02) 6 733.89 ± 823.94 -4.514 0.001
188 8 288.47(7 925.90,9 083.32) 7 478.22(7 156.59,7 810.21) -4.549 0.001
211 7 013.25(6 745.83,7 341.76) 6 409.92 ± 339.10 -5.069 0.001
212 7 047.13(6 641.97,7 286.65) 6 402.16 ± 423.55 -3.646 0.005
213 6 954.68(6 708.70,7 327.50) 6 405.41 ± 362.07 -3.993 0.003
214 7 035.00(6 681.38,7 286.42) 6 474.11 ± 404.70 -3.597 0.005
215 6 729.83(6 540.93,7 095.84) 6 288.69 ± 338.17 -4.202 0.002
216 6 730.49(6 369.07,7 030.32) 6 241.65 ± 388.33 -3.571 0.006
219 8 374.96(8 084.91,8 850.06) 7 734.34(7 377.76,8 083.10) -4.237 0.002
223 7 405.70(7 093.56,7 735.15) 6 703.02 ± 565.62 -4.093 0.002
227 9 364.50(9 006.09,9 746.76) 8 871.30(8 493.15,9 275.05) -3.616 0.005
237 7 881.82(7 563.10,8 239.13) 7 127.50 ± 711.08 -3.764 0.004
238 7 837.09(7 457.70,8 268.42) 6 963.83 ± 753.81 -3.814 0.003
表3 GPI组各脑区CBF和认知障碍相关性
[1]
Workowski KA,Bolan GA. Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines[J]. MMWR Recomm Rep,2015,64(RR-03):1-137.
[2]
Marks M, Jarvis JN, Howlett W, et al. Neurosyphilis in Africa: A systematic review[J]. PLoS Negl Trop Dis,2017,11(8):1-14.
[3]
Marra CM. Update on neurosyphilis[J]. Curr Infect Dis Rep,2009, 11(2):127-134.
[4]
Wang J, Guo Q, Zhou P, et al. Cognitive impairment in mildgeneral paresis of the insane: AD-like pattern[J]. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord,2011,31(4):284-290.
[5]
Luo X, Shi H, Hou L, et al. Different cerebrospinal fluid levels of alzheimer-type biomarker Aâ42 between general paresis and asymptomatic neurosyphilis[J]. Eur J Neurol,2015,22(5):853-858.
[6]
Brisset M, Chadenat ML, Cordoliani Y, et al. MRI features of neurosyphilis[J]. Revue neurologique,2011,167(4):337-342.
[7]
Duan W, Sehrawat P, Balachandrasekaran A, et al. Cerebral blood flow is associated with diagnostic class and cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease[J]. J Alzheimers Dis,2020,76(3):1103-1120.
[8]
郭瑜,夏爽,马国林. 动脉自旋标记成像技术在脑灌注, 侧支循环评价中的应用进展[J]. 中华医学杂志,2021,101(23):1827-1830.
[9]
樊尚荣,梁丽芬(编译). 2015年美国疾病控制中心性传播疾病诊断和治疗指南(续)-梅毒的诊断和治疗指南[J]. 中国全科医学,2015,18(27):3260-3264.
[10]
Fan LZ, Li H, Zhuo JJ, et al. The human brainnetome atlas: A new brain atlas based on connectional architecture[J]. Cerebral Cortex,2016,26(8):3508-3526.
[11]
Ota M, Noda T, Sato N, et al. Characteristic distributions of regional cerebral blood flow changes in major depressive disorder patients: a pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling (pCASL) study[J]. J Affect Disord,2014,165(8):59-63.
[12]
姜美娟,李务荣,吴雅丽, 等. 50例麻痹性痴呆患者认知障碍特征[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版),2020,14(5):401-405.
[13]
高俊华,李务荣,伍文清, 等. 46例神经梅毒临床特征及影像学特点[J/CD]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版),2016,10(5):570-574.
[14]
Chen B, Shi HS, Hou L, et al. Medial temporal lobe atrophy as a predictor of poor cognitive outcomes in general paresis[J]. Early Interven Psychiatry,2019,13(1):30-38.
[15]
Nieuwenhuys R. The insular cortex: a review[J]. Prog Brain Res,2012,195(6):123-163.
[16]
Augustine JR. Circuitry and functional aspects of the insular lobe in primates including humans[J]. Brain Res Rev,1996,22(3):229-244.
[17]
Alexandra T, Mark H, Bradford CD, et al. Dissociable large-scale networks anchored in the right anterior insula subserve affective experience and attention[J]. Neuro Image,2012,60(4):1947-1958.
[18]
Noguchi T, Yakushiji Y, Nishihara M, et al. Arterial spin-labeling in central nervous system infection[J]. Magn Reason Med Sci,2016,15(4):386-394.
[19]
Fazekas F, Roob G, Payer F, et al. Technetium 99m-ECD SPECT fails to show focal hyperemia of acute herpes encephalitis[J]. J Nucl Med,1998,39(5):790-792.
[20]
Launes J, Hokkanen L, Nikkinen P, et al. Hyperfixation of 99mTc-HMPAO and hypofixation of 123I-iomazenil in acute herpes encephalitis[J]. Neuroreport,1995,6(8):1203-1206.
[21]
Launes J, Sirén J, Valanne L, et al. Unilateral hyperfusion in brain-perfusion SPECT predicts poor prognosis in acute encephalitis[J]. Neurology,1997,48(5):1347-1351.
[22]
Deepak V, Muhammad AN, Rajiv M. Perfusion imaging in autoimmune encephalitis[J]. Case Rep Radiol,2018,2018:3538645.
[23]
Sachs JR, Zapadka ME, Popli GS, et al. Arterial spin labeling perfusion imaging demonstrates cerebral hyperperfusion in anti-NMDAR encephalitis[J]. Radiol Case Rep,2017,12(4):833-837.
[24]
李洁,叶靖,张洪英. 神经梅毒MRI表现及血流灌注研究[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志,2019,27(1):25-28.
[25]
Masayuki I, Katsuyoshi M, Toshiyuki F, et al. A case of neurosyphilis showing a marked improvement of clinical symptoms and cerebral blood flow on single photon emission computed tomography with quantitative penicillin treatment[J]. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry,2004,28(2):417-420.
[26]
Yurinosuke K, Hideki U, Jin N, et al. Cerebral blood flow changes in general paresis following penicillin treatment: a longitudinal single photon emission computed tomography study[J]. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci,2002,56(1):65-70.
[1] 师璐, 黄宇明, 寇程, 秦开宇, 吴雅丽, 马小扬, 许东梅. 夫妻共同感染梅毒螺旋体临床表型及实验室指标差异[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 328-336.
[2] 许东梅, 马小扬, 黄宇明. 神经梅毒诊疗现状及进展[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 300-306.
[3] 张依, 许东梅. 四例首诊误诊为肿瘤的神经梅毒树胶样肿病例[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 280-286.
[4] 魏春波, 万钢, 许东梅, 赵兴云, 袁柳凤, 吴焱, 伦文辉. 60例人类免疫缺陷病毒感染者/获得性免疫缺陷综合征合并神经梅毒患者临床和实验室特征[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(04): 254-260.
[5] 王诗远, 张爱华. 慢性肾脏病相关认知障碍的发生机制研究进展[J]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 163-167.
[6] 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]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(03): 179-182.
[7] 赵金义, 孙正莹, 李洪义, 胡明成, 王晓申, 史晓航, 王煜宁, 孙维洋, 邢健. 基于结构磁共振成像评估皮质下缺血性脑血管病伴认知障碍患者灰质萎缩的影像学研究[J]. 中华消化病与影像杂志(电子版), 2023, 13(01): 10-14.
[8] 黄爱茹, 付婧, 余茜. 多模块3D虚拟现实技术联合重复经颅磁刺激治疗卒中后认知功能障碍的效果[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(11): 1089-1095.
[9] 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]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 471-476.
[10] 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]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 364-368.
[11] 夏禹, 刘寒, 朱瑞. 阿尔茨海默病及相关认知障碍疾病与早老素2基因相关性的研究进展[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 290-293.
[12] 张宇, 蔡玉洁, 林日清, 邱钦杰, 崔理立, 郑东, 周海红. 张力蛋白1对放射性脑损伤小鼠认知功能的影响[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 244-253.
[13] 楚长彪. 卒中后认知障碍的管理[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(02): 0-.
[14] 刘欣, 王丽娟, 刘荧, 王爽, 徐绍红, 李小刚. 缺血性脑卒中后不同程度认知障碍危险因素及认知训练效果分析[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 314-319.
[15] 杨治中, 倪敬年, 魏明清, 李婷, 时晶, 田金洲. 有氧运动在预防血管性认知障碍中的研究进展[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 299-304.
阅读次数
全文


摘要