Home › Research › Hippocampus size on brain scans
Hippocampal atrophy on MRI in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and Alzheimer's disease
van de Pol LA, Hensel A, van der Flier WM, Visser PJ, Pijnenburg YA, Barkhof F, Gertz HJ, Scheltens P.. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2005-11-23
Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis
Background Hippocampal atrophy on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an early characteristic of Alzheimer's disease. However, hippocampal atrophy may also occur in other dementias, such as frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). Objective To investigate hippocampal atrophy on MRI in FTLD and its three clinical subtypes, in comparison with Alzheimer's disease, using volumetry and a visual rating scale. Methods 42 patients with FTLD (17 frontotemporal dementia, 13 semantic dementia, and 12 progressive non-fluent aphasia), 103 patients with Alzheimer's disease, and 73 controls were included. Hippocampal volumetry and the easily applicable medial temporal lobe atrophy (MTA) rating scale were applied to assess hippocampal atrophy. Results Multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures showed an effect of diagnostic group on hippocampal volume. There was a significant diagnosis by side (left v right) interaction. Both FTLD and Alzheimer's disease showed hippocampal atrophy compared with controls. Results of the visual MTA rating scale confirmed these findings. Within the FTLD subtypes there were marked differences in hippocampal atrophy. Frontotemporal dementia and semantic dementia showed bilateral hippocampal atrophy, and in semantic dementia the left hippocampus was smaller than in Alzheimer's disease. No significant hippocampal atrophy was detected in non-fluent progressive aphasia. Conclusions Hippocampal atrophy is not only a characteristic of Alzheimer's disease but also occurs in FTLD. The three clinical subtypes of FTLD show different patterns of hippocampal atrophy.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
van de Pol, L. A., Hensel, A., van der Flier, W. M., Visser, P. J., Pijnenburg, Y. A., Barkhof, F., et al. (2006). Hippocampal atrophy on MRI in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and Alzheimer's disease. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2005.075341
Vancouver
van de Pol LA, Hensel A, van der Flier WM, Visser PJ, Pijnenburg YA, Barkhof F, et al. Hippocampal atrophy on MRI in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and Alzheimer's disease. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. 2006. doi:10.1136/jnnp.2005.075341. PMID: 16306153.
BibTeX
@article{vandepol2006-16306153,
author = {van de Pol, L. A. and Hensel, A. and van der Flier, W. M. and Visser, P. J. and Pijnenburg, Y. A. and Barkhof, F. and Gertz, H. J. and Scheltens, P.},
title = {{Hippocampal atrophy on MRI in frontotemporal lobar degeneration and Alzheimer's disease}},
journal = {Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry},
year = {2006},
doi = {10.1136/jnnp.2005.075341},
pmid = {16306153},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2005.075341}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Results Multivariate analysis of variance for repeated measures showed an effect of diagnostic group on hippocampal volume.
- There was a significant diagnosis by side (left v right) interaction.
- Both FTLD and Alzheimer's disease showed hippocampal atrophy compared with controls.
- Results of the visual MTA rating scale confirmed these findings.
- No significant hippocampal atrophy was detected in non-fluent progressive aphasia.
Study details
- Participants42
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 43/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 43 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2006 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 42 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16306153) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 25 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 25 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 43 out of 100. |
| Total | 43 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Hippocampus size on brain scans
Also tagged “disorder”
492 studies in the library carry the topic tag “disorder”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 492 tagged studies.