Mio Nakamura1, Mark Morris1, Mirela Cerghet1, Lonni Schultz1, Stanton Elias1. 1. Department of Neurology (MN, MM, MC, LS, SE) and Department of Public Health Sciences (LS), Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA; and Wayne State University, School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, USA (MN, MM).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used in clinical practice, and "abnormal brain MRI" findings often prompt assessment for multiple sclerosis (MS), even when there are no symptoms suggestive of the disease. Despite several studies involving individuals with "radiologically isolated syndrome" (RIS), little is known about what factors might predict future development of MS. The objective of this study was to longitudinally evaluate clinical and MRI characteristics of people who presented to an MS clinic because of incidental abnormal MRI findings but did not have typical symptoms of MS, in order to assess risk factors for developing MS. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients presenting to an MS clinic for evaluation of abnormal MRI findings were enrolled in the study. Clinical and paraclinical data, including MRI results, were reviewed. Magnetic resonance imaging findings of T2 hyperintensities measuring more than 3 mm in diameter and fulfilling at least three out of four Barkhof criteria, with or without gadolinium-enhancing lesions, were considered to be suggestive of MS. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 5.5 years. No participants without MRI findings suggestive of MS were diagnosed with MS (P = .005). Fifteen participants had MRI findings suggestive of MS. Seven of the 15 (47%) were diagnosed with MS on follow-up. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing results were available for 15 participants. Abnormal results were found in six participants, of whom five (83%) also had MRI findings suggestive of MS. Only two of the nine (22%) participants with normal CSF results (P = .04) had MRI findings suggestive of MS. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, none of the participants without MRI findings suggestive of MS developed MS. The participants with MRI findings suggestive of MS were more likely to develop symptoms and MRI changes typical of MS on follow-up.
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is widely used in clinical practice, and "abnormal brain MRI" findings often prompt assessment for multiple sclerosis (MS), even when there are no symptoms suggestive of the disease. Despite several studies involving individuals with "radiologically isolated syndrome" (RIS), little is known about what factors might predict future development of MS. The objective of this study was to longitudinally evaluate clinical and MRI characteristics of people who presented to an MS clinic because of incidental abnormal MRI findings but did not have typical symptoms of MS, in order to assess risk factors for developing MS. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients presenting to an MS clinic for evaluation of abnormal MRI findings were enrolled in the study. Clinical and paraclinical data, including MRI results, were reviewed. Magnetic resonance imaging findings of T2 hyperintensities measuring more than 3 mm in diameter and fulfilling at least three out of four Barkhof criteria, with or without gadolinium-enhancing lesions, were considered to be suggestive of MS. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 5.5 years. No participants without MRI findings suggestive of MS were diagnosed with MS (P = .005). Fifteen participants had MRI findings suggestive of MS. Seven of the 15 (47%) were diagnosed with MS on follow-up. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) testing results were available for 15 participants. Abnormal results were found in six participants, of whom five (83%) also had MRI findings suggestive of MS. Only two of the nine (22%) participants with normal CSF results (P = .04) had MRI findings suggestive of MS. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort, none of the participants without MRI findings suggestive of MS developed MS. The participants with MRI findings suggestive of MS were more likely to develop symptoms and MRI changes typical of MS on follow-up.
Authors: Tobias Granberg; Juha Martola; Maria Kristoffersen-Wiberg; Peter Aspelin; Sten Fredrikson Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 6.312
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: Mark C Kruit; Mark A van Buchem; Paul A M Hofman; Jacobus T N Bakkers; Gisela M Terwindt; Michel D Ferrari; Lenore J Launer Journal: JAMA Date: 2004-01-28 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Chris H Polman; Stephen C Reingold; Brenda Banwell; Michel Clanet; Jeffrey A Cohen; Massimo Filippi; Kazuo Fujihara; Eva Havrdova; Michael Hutchinson; Ludwig Kappos; Fred D Lublin; Xavier Montalban; Paul O'Connor; Magnhild Sandberg-Wollheim; Alan J Thompson; Emmanuelle Waubant; Brian Weinshenker; Jerry S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: W I McDonald; A Compston; G Edan; D Goodkin; H P Hartung; F D Lublin; H F McFarland; D W Paty; C H Polman; S C Reingold; M Sandberg-Wollheim; W Sibley; A Thompson; S van den Noort; B Y Weinshenker; J S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 10.422