4.3 Article

Focal multiple sclerosis lesions abound in 'normal appearing white matter'

Journal

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL
Volume 17, Issue 11, Pages 1313-1323

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458511415305

Keywords

FLAIR; MRI; multiple sclerosis; 'normal appearing white matter'

Funding

  1. UK Multiple Sclerosis Society [919]
  2. Medical Research Council [G0700584]
  3. Merck-Serono
  4. Bayer-Schering
  5. Novartis
  6. Medical Research Council [G0901321, G0700584] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. MRC [G0901321, G0700584] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The 'normal appearing white matter' (NAWM) in multiple sclerosis (MS) is known to be abnormal using quantitative magnetic resonance (MR) techniques. The aetiology of the changes in NAWM remains debatable. Objective: To investigate whether high-field and ultra high-field T(1)-weighted magnetization prepared rapid acquisition gradient echo (MPRAGE) MRI enables detection of MS white matter lesions in areas defined as NAWM using high-field T(2)-weighted fluid attenuation inversion recovery (FLAIR) MRI; that is, to ascertain whether undetected lesions are likely contributors to the burden of abnormality in similarly defined NAWM. Methods: Fourteen MS patients underwent MRI scans using 3T FLAIR and MPRAGE and 7 Tesla (7T) MPRAGE sequences. Independent observers identified lesions on 3T FLAIR and (7T and 3T) MPRAGE images. The detection of every individual lesion was then compared for each image type. Results: We identified a total of 812 white matter lesions on 3T FLAIR. Using 3T MPRAGE, 186 additional lesions were detected that were not detected using 3T FLAIR. Using 7T MPRAGE, 231 additional lesions were detected that were not detected using 3T FLAIR. Conclusions: MRI with 3T and 7T MPRAGE enables detection of MS lesions in areas defined as NAWM using 3T FLAIR. Focal MS lesions contribute to the abnormalities known to exist in the NAWM.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available