4.3 Review

OFSEP, a nationwide cohort of people with multiple sclerosis: Consensus minimal MRI protocol

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 42, 期 3, 页码 133-140

出版社

MASSON EDITEUR
DOI: 10.1016/j.neurad.2014.12.001

关键词

Multiple sclerosis; Magnetic resonance imaging; Cohort studies; Consensus development conferences as topic

资金

  1. French State
  2. Agence nationale de la recherche [ANR-10-COHO-002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is most generally considered as a severe disease with high physical and mental risks of disability. Since the end of the 1990s, several high cost long-term disease-modifying treatments provided some clinical efficiency. However, patient's follow-up was needed for the detection and the assessment of their side-effects. The Observatoire francais de la sclerose en plaques (OFSEP) project aims to improve the clinical, biological and imaging systematic longitudinal follow-up of patients. It should increase the quality, efficiency and safety of patients' care, with a unique opportunity of large scale, about 41,000 patients followed in 62 French centers using the European Database for Multiple Sclerosis (EDMUS) software. OFSEP is divided into three working groups (clinical, biological and imaging). The imaging working group defines standards for routine MRI follow-up in the whole cohort and contains three subgroups: acquisition, workflow, and data processing. A common and feasible brain and spinal cord acquisition protocol has been defined by the acquisition group, and accepted by the OFSEP steering and scientific committees. This protocol can be implemented in all French MRI centers. The major MRI manufacturers have agreed to provide the dedicated collection of sequences as an OFSEP box with every software upgrade or new MRI machine. The new OFSEP protocol will provide a unique opportunity to study a population-based collection of data from people with MS. (C) 2015 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

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