Table 4.
Studies of local white matter lesions.
| Author | N | Mean age | % female | Design | PFA assessment | MRI outcome | Significant results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cross-sectional MRI | |||||||
| Tseng et al. (2013a) | 20 | 73.4 ± 4.8 | 25.0 | T1: PA, MRI | Q — divided into masters athletes and sedentary | VOL-P, VOL-D | ↓ VOL-D |
| Longitudinal MRI | |||||||
| Podewils et al. (2007) | 60 | 77.3 ± 5.8 | 61.7 | T1: PA, MRI; T2: MRI; T1–T2: 5 y | Q — kcal/week over 2 weeks | RAT-P, RAT-D | ↑ RAT-P, ↑ RAT-D a |
Abbreviations — C: control; E: exercise; FT: fitness test; I: intervention; Q: questionnaire; RAT-D: rating — deep white matter; RAT-P: rating — periventricular white matter; T1: time-point 1; T2: time-point 2; T1–T2: interval between time-point 1 and time-point 2; VOL-D: volume — deep white matter; VOL-P: volume — periventricular white matter; y: years; ↓ indicates a significant negative relationship between PFA and MRI measures; ↑ indicates a significant positive relationship between PFA and MRI measures.
Model adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, education, APOE genotype and corresponding baseline WM lesion score. Additional adjustment for other cardiovascular risk factors and follow-up time did not affect the results.