4.3 Article

Spinal cord grey matter lesions in multiple sclerosis detected by post-mortem high field MR imaging

期刊

MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 180-188

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1352458508096876

关键词

demyelination; Multiple sclerosis; MRI

资金

  1. MS society of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [801/03]
  2. Dutch MS Research Foundation [05-358c]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Post-mortem studies demonstrate extensive grey matter demyelination in MS, both in the brain and in the spinal cord. However the clinical significance of these plaques is unclear, largely because they are grossly underestimated by MR imaging at conventional field strengths. Indeed post-mortem MR studies suggest the great majority of lesions in the cerebral cortex go undetected, even when performed at high field. Similar studies have not been performed using post-mortem spinal cord material. Aim To assess the sensitivity of high field post-mortem MRI for detecting grey matter lesions in the spinal cord in MS. Methods Autopsy material was obtained from 11 MS cases and 2 controls. Proton Density-weighted images of this formalin-fixed material were acquired at 4.7Tesla before the tissue was sectioned and stained for Myelin Basic Protein. Both the tissue sections and the MR images were scored for grey matter and white matter plaques, with the readers of the MR images being blinded to the histopathology results. Results Our results indicate that post-mortem imaging at 4.7Tesla is highly sensitive for cord lesions, detecting 87% of white matter lesions and 73% of grey matter lesions. The MR changes were highly specific for demyelination, with all lesions scored on MRI corresponding to areas of demyelination. Conclusion Our work suggests that spinal cord grey matter lesions may be detected on MRI more readily than GM lesions in the brain, making the cord a promising site to study the functional consequences of grey matter demyelination in MS. Multiple Sclerosis 2009; 15: 180-188. http://msj.sagepub.com

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据