In Vivo Dentate Nucleus Gamma-aminobutyric Acid Concentration in Essential Tremor vs. Controls

dc.contributor.authorLouis, Elan D.
dc.contributor.authorHernandez, Nora
dc.contributor.authorDyke, Jonathan P.
dc.contributor.authorMa, Ruoyun E.
dc.contributor.authorDydak, Ulrike
dc.contributor.departmentRadiology and Imaging Sciences, School of Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-02T12:52:47Z
dc.date.available2019-08-02T12:52:47Z
dc.date.issued2018-04
dc.description.abstractDespite its high prevalence, essential tremor (ET) is among the most poorly understood neurological diseases. The presence and extent of Purkinje cell (PC) loss in ET is the subject of controversy. PCs are a major storehouse of central nervous system gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), releasing GABA at the level of the dentate nucleus. It is therefore conceivable that cerebellar dentate nucleus GABA concentration could be an in vivo marker of PC number. We used in vivo 1H magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) to quantify GABA concentrations in two cerebellar volumes of interest, left and right, which included the dentate nucleus, comparing 45 ET cases to 35 age-matched controls. 1H MRS was performed using a 3.0-T Siemens Tim Trio scanner. The MEGA-PRESS J-editing sequence was used for GABA detection in two cerebellar volumes of interest (left and right) that included the dentate nucleus. The two groups did not differ with respect to our primary outcome of GABA concentration (given in institutional units). For the right dentate nucleus, [GABA] in ET cases = 2.01 ± 0.45 and [GABA] in controls = 1.86 ± 0.53, p = 0.17. For the left dentate nucleus, [GABA] in ET cases = 1.68 ± 0.49 and [GABA] controls = 1.80 ± 0.53, p = 0.33. The controls had similar dentate nucleus [GABA] in the right vs. left dentate nucleus (p = 0.52); however, in ET cases, the value on the right was considerably higher than that on the left (p = 0.001). We did not detect a reduction in dentate nucleus GABA concentration in ET cases vs. CONTROLS: One interpretation of the finding is that it does not support the existence of PC loss in ET; however, an alternative interpretation is the observed pattern could be due to the effects of terminal sprouting in ET (i.e., collateral sprouting from surviving PCs making up for the loss of GABA-ergic terminals from PC degeneration). Further research is needed.en_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.citationLouis, E. D., Hernandez, N., Dyke, J. P., Ma, R. E., & Dydak, U. (2018). In Vivo Dentate Nucleus Gamma-aminobutyric Acid Concentration in Essential Tremor vs. Controls. Cerebellum (London, England), 17(2), 165–172. doi:10.1007/s12311-017-0891-4en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/20138
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherSpringer Natureen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1007/s12311-017-0891-4en_US
dc.relation.journalCerebellumen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourcePMCen_US
dc.subjectEssential tremoren_US
dc.subjectMagnetic resonance spectroscopyen_US
dc.subjectGamma-aminobutyric aciden_US
dc.subjectDentate nucleusen_US
dc.subjectPurkinje cellen_US
dc.subjectCerebellumen_US
dc.subjectNeurodegenerationen_US
dc.titleIn Vivo Dentate Nucleus Gamma-aminobutyric Acid Concentration in Essential Tremor vs. Controlsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
nihms913525.pdf
Size:
282.23 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: