4.5 Article

Decreased T1 Contrast between Gray Matter and Normal- Appearing White Matter in CADASIL

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 35, 期 1, 页码 72-76

出版社

AMER SOC NEURORADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3639

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fondation Planiol
  2. Fondation NRJ-Institut de France
  3. FP6 ERANET NEURON [01 EW1207]
  4. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [I 904] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: CADASIL is the most frequent hereditary small-vessel disease of the brain. The clinical impact of various MR imaging markers has been repeatedly studied in this disorder, but alterations of contrast between gray matter and normal-appearing white matter remain unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contrast alterations between gray matter and normal-appearing white matter on T1-weighted images in patients with CADASIL compared with healthy subjects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Contrast between gray matter and normal-appearing white matter was assessed by using histogram analyses of 3D T1 high-resolution MR imaging in 23 patients with CADASIL at the initial stage of the disease (Mini-Mental State Examination score > 24 and modified Rankin scale score 1; mean age, 53.5 11.1 years) and 30 age- and sex-matched controls. RESULTS: T1 contrast between gray matter and normal-appearing white matter was significantly reduced in patients compared with age- and sex-matched controls (patients: 1.35 +/- 0.08 versus controls: 1.43 +/- 0.04, P < 10(-5)). This reduction was mainly driven by a signal decrease in normal-appearing white matter. Contrast loss was strongly related to the volume of white matter hyperintensities. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional 3D T1 imaging shows significant loss of contrast between gray matter and normal-appearing white matter in CADASIL. This probably reflects tissue changes in normal-appearing white matter outside signal abnormalities on T2 or FLAIR sequences. These contrast alterations should be taken into account for image interpretation and postprocessing.

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

4.5
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