BACKGROUND: White matter hyperintensities (WMH) on MRI are associated with disorders of gait and balance and with cognitive impairment. The most suitable method to assess WMH in relation to the clinical evaluation of disturbances in these areas has not yet been established. AIM: To compare a simple visual rating scale, a detailed visual rating scale and volumetric assessment of WMH with respect to their associations with clinical measures of physical performance and cognition. METHODS: Data were drawn from the multicentre, multinational LADIS study. Data of 574 subjects were available. MRI analysis included assessment of WMH using the simple Fazekas scale, the more complex Scheltens scale and a semi-automated volumetric method. Disturbances of gait and balance and general cognitive function were assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), respectively. RESULTS: Irrespective of the method of measuring WMH, subjects with disturbances of gait and balance (SPPB < or = 10) had more WMH than subjects with normal physical performance. Subjects with mild cognitive deficits (MMSE < or = 25) had more WMH than subjects with normal cognition. Correlations between clinical measures and WMH were equal across methods of WMH measurement (SPPB: Spearman r = -0.22, -0.25, -0.26, all p < 0.001; MMSE: Spearman r = -0.11, -0.10, -0.09, all p < 0.05, for Fazekas scale, Scheltens scale and volumetry, respectively). These associations remained significant and comparable after correcting for age, gender and education in multivariate linear regression analyses. CONCLUSION: Simple and complex measures of WMH yield comparable associations with measures of physical performance and cognition. This suggests that a simple visual rating scale may be sufficient, when analyzing relationships between clinical parameters and WMH in a clinical setting.
BACKGROUND: White matter hyperintensities (WMH) on MRI are associated with disorders of gait and balance and with cognitive impairment. The most suitable method to assess WMH in relation to the clinical evaluation of disturbances in these areas has not yet been established. AIM: To compare a simple visual rating scale, a detailed visual rating scale and volumetric assessment of WMH with respect to their associations with clinical measures of physical performance and cognition. METHODS: Data were drawn from the multicentre, multinational LADIS study. Data of 574 subjects were available. MRI analysis included assessment of WMH using the simple Fazekas scale, the more complex Scheltens scale and a semi-automated volumetric method. Disturbances of gait and balance and general cognitive function were assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) and the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), respectively. RESULTS: Irrespective of the method of measuring WMH, subjects with disturbances of gait and balance (SPPB < or = 10) had more WMH than subjects with normal physical performance. Subjects with mild cognitive deficits (MMSE < or = 25) had more WMH than subjects with normal cognition. Correlations between clinical measures and WMH were equal across methods of WMH measurement (SPPB: Spearman r = -0.22, -0.25, -0.26, all p < 0.001; MMSE: Spearman r = -0.11, -0.10, -0.09, all p < 0.05, for Fazekas scale, Scheltens scale and volumetry, respectively). These associations remained significant and comparable after correcting for age, gender and education in multivariate linear regression analyses. CONCLUSION: Simple and complex measures of WMH yield comparable associations with measures of physical performance and cognition. This suggests that a simple visual rating scale may be sufficient, when analyzing relationships between clinical parameters and WMH in a clinical setting.
Authors: Franz Fazekas; F Barkhof; L O Wahlund; L Pantoni; T Erkinjuntti; P Scheltens; R Schmidt Journal: Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2002 Impact factor: 2.762
Authors: R Mäntylä; T Erkinjuntti; O Salonen; H J Aronen; T Peltonen; T Pohjasvaara; C G Standertskjöld-Nordenstam Journal: Stroke Date: 1997-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: P Scheltens; T Erkinjunti; D Leys; L O Wahlund; D Inzitari; T del Ser; F Pasquier; F Barkhof; R Mäntylä; J Bowler; A Wallin; J Ghika; F Fazekas; L Pantoni Journal: Eur Neurol Date: 1998 Impact factor: 1.710
Authors: Wiesje M van der Flier; Elizabeth C W van Straaten; Frederik Barkhof; Ana Verdelho; Sofia Madureira; Leonardo Pantoni; Domenico Inzitari; Timo Erkinjuntti; Militta Crisby; Gunhild Waldemar; Reinhold Schmidt; Franz Fazekas; Philip Scheltens Journal: Stroke Date: 2005-09-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: W T Longstreth; T A Manolio; A Arnold; G L Burke; N Bryan; C A Jungreis; P L Enright; D O'Leary; L Fried Journal: Stroke Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 7.914
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: Leonardo Pantoni; Anna Maria Basile; Giovanni Pracucci; Kjell Asplund; Julien Bogousslavsky; Hugues Chabriat; Timo Erkinjuntti; Franz Fazekas; José M Ferro; Michael Hennerici; John O'brien; Philip Scheltens; Marieke C Visser; Lars-Olof Wahlund; Gunhild Waldemar; Anders Wallin; Domenico Inzitari Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2005 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Zukhrofi Muzar; Reymundo Lozano; Andrea Schneider; Patrick E Adams; Sultana M H Faradz; Flora Tassone; Randi J Hagerman Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2015-04-21 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Melissa E Murray; Prashanthi Vemuri; Greg M Preboske; Matthew C Murphy; Katherine J Schweitzer; Joseph E Parisi; Clifford R Jack; Dennis W Dickson Journal: J Neuropathol Exp Neurol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.685
Authors: Y D Reijmer; A P Schultz; A Leemans; M J O'Sullivan; M E Gurol; R Sperling; S M Greenberg; A Viswanathan; T Hedden Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2015-05-27 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Matthew D Macfarlane; Jeffrey C L Looi; Mark Walterfang; Gabriela Spulber; Dennis Velakoulis; Martin Styner; Milita Crisby; Eva Orndahl; Timo Erkinjuntti; Gunhild Waldemar; Ellen Garde; Michael G Hennerici; Hansjörg Bäzner; Christian Blahak; Anders Wallin; Lars-Olof Wahlund Journal: Am J Geriatr Psychiatry Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 4.105