OBJECTIVE: White matter hyperintensities (WMH) are common on brain MRI of the elderly. Their size ranges from punctate to early confluent to confluent lesions. While this increase in extension is frequently seen as evidence for a continuum of changes, histological data and clinical follow-up suggest differences in underlying pathology and their progression. METHODS: We tested this hypothesis by exploring the distributions of punctuate and confluent lesions using lesion probability maps (LPM) generated from MRI scans of 189 participants (mean age 60.8+/-6.2 years) in the Austrian Stroke Prevention Study. We dichotomised WMH according to the classification by Fazekas et al. [punctate (n=143) vs. early confluent and confluent (n=33)] to run voxel-based t-tests using permutation-based nonparametric inference. To test alternative hypotheses, we created similar LPM for age and arterial hypertension. RESULTS: We observed significant differences in the spatial distribution of lesions for the two WMH groups (p<0.01). Punctate lesions were more diffusely distributed throughout the cerebral white matter (peak probability approximately 5%) relative to confluent lesions (peak probability 45%). Confluent lesions had greatest likelihood of being found in perfusion "watershed" regions. These differences in distribution could not be explained by differences in age or hypertension only, as both greater age and the diagnosis of hypertension were associated with WMH abutting the occipital horns. CONCLUSIONS: Punctate and early confluent to confluent WMH show distinguishable differences in their spatial distribution within a normal elderly population. The pattern of punctate WMH is probably a consequence of mixed etiologies. Preferential localization of the more confluent WMH with arterial watershed areas implies a stronger ischemic component in their development.
OBJECTIVE: White matter hyperintensities (WMH) are common on brain MRI of the elderly. Their size ranges from punctate to early confluent to confluent lesions. While this increase in extension is frequently seen as evidence for a continuum of changes, histological data and clinical follow-up suggest differences in underlying pathology and their progression. METHODS: We tested this hypothesis by exploring the distributions of punctuate and confluent lesions using lesion probability maps (LPM) generated from MRI scans of 189 participants (mean age 60.8+/-6.2 years) in the Austrian Stroke Prevention Study. We dichotomised WMH according to the classification by Fazekas et al. [punctate (n=143) vs. early confluent and confluent (n=33)] to run voxel-based t-tests using permutation-based nonparametric inference. To test alternative hypotheses, we created similar LPM for age and arterial hypertension. RESULTS: We observed significant differences in the spatial distribution of lesions for the two WMH groups (p<0.01). Punctate lesions were more diffusely distributed throughout the cerebral white matter (peak probability approximately 5%) relative to confluent lesions (peak probability 45%). Confluent lesions had greatest likelihood of being found in perfusion "watershed" regions. These differences in distribution could not be explained by differences in age or hypertension only, as both greater age and the diagnosis of hypertension were associated with WMH abutting the occipital horns. CONCLUSIONS: Punctate and early confluent to confluent WMH show distinguishable differences in their spatial distribution within a normal elderly population. The pattern of punctate WMH is probably a consequence of mixed etiologies. Preferential localization of the more confluent WMH with arterial watershed areas implies a stronger ischemic component in their development.
Authors: Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: S Narayanan; L Fu; E Pioro; N De Stefano; D L Collins; G S Francis; J P Antel; P M Matthews; D L Arnold Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: F E de Leeuw; J C de Groot; E Achten; M Oudkerk; L M Ramos; R Heijboer; A Hofman; J Jolles; J van Gijn; M M Breteler Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: W T Longstreth; Alice M Arnold; Norman J Beauchamp; Teri A Manolio; David Lefkowitz; Charles Jungreis; Calvin H Hirsch; Daniel H O'Leary; Curt D Furberg Journal: Stroke Date: 2004-11-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jan Cees De Groot; Frank-Erik De Leeuw; Matthijs Oudkerk; Jan Van Gijn; Albert Hofman; Jellemer Jolles; Monique M B Breteler Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Paul A Nyquist; Murat S Bilgel; Rebecca Gottesman; Lisa R Yanek; Taryn F Moy; Lewis C Becker; Jennifer Cuzzocreo; Jerry Prince; David M Yousem; Diane M Becker; Brian G Kral; Dhananjay Vaidya Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2014-03-25 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: Cynthia Jongen; Jeroen van der Grond; Petronella Anbeek; Max A Viergever; Geert Jan Biessels; Josien P W Pluim Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2009-07 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Thomas Kau; Manuel Taschwer; Hannes Deutschmann; Martina Schönfelder; Jörg R Weber; Klaus A Hausegger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-02-22 Impact factor: 5.315