Nidhi Gupta1, Alexis N Simpkins1, Emi Hitomi1, Christian Dias1, Richard Leigh2. 1. Neuro Vascular Brain Imaging Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. 2. Neuro Vascular Brain Imaging Unit, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland. Electronic address: richard.leigh@nih.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: White matter hyperintensities (WMH), the hallmark of vascular cognitive impairment, are associated with vascular risk factors (VRF). WMH can also be associated with blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption. The purpose of this study was to look for associations between VRF and BBB disruption in stroke patients with WMH. METHODS: Magnetic resonance images of stroke patients were reviewed for the presence of WMH. Blood-brain permeability images were retrospectively generated. The degree of BBB permeability was compared with the presence of VRF using logistic regression. Patterns and extent of WMH were classified using Fazekas scores. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were included in this study. None of the VRF tested were associated with an increase in BBB disruption. Hypertension was significantly associated with less BBB disruption (P = .04). Nonhypertensive patients in our study had a different pattern of WMH than hypertensive patients, with less involvement of the periventricular white matter. CONCLUSIONS: We found that in stroke patients with WMH, those with hypertension had less BBB disruption and greater involvement of the periventricular white matter when compared with patients who did not have a history of hypertension. Further investigation is needed to determine if the development of WMH in stroke patients with a history of hypertension has a different pathophysiology from patients who develop WMH in the absence of hypertension. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND:White matter hyperintensities (WMH), the hallmark of vascular cognitive impairment, are associated with vascular risk factors (VRF). WMH can also be associated with blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption. The purpose of this study was to look for associations between VRF and BBB disruption in strokepatients with WMH. METHODS: Magnetic resonance images of strokepatients were reviewed for the presence of WMH. Blood-brain permeability images were retrospectively generated. The degree of BBB permeability was compared with the presence of VRF using logistic regression. Patterns and extent of WMH were classified using Fazekas scores. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients were included in this study. None of the VRF tested were associated with an increase in BBB disruption. Hypertension was significantly associated with less BBB disruption (P = .04). Nonhypertensive patients in our study had a different pattern of WMH than hypertensivepatients, with less involvement of the periventricular white matter. CONCLUSIONS: We found that in strokepatients with WMH, those with hypertension had less BBB disruption and greater involvement of the periventricular white matter when compared with patients who did not have a history of hypertension. Further investigation is needed to determine if the development of WMH in strokepatients with a history of hypertension has a different pathophysiology from patients who develop WMH in the absence of hypertension. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: A Spilt; R Goekoop; R G J Westendorp; G J Blauw; A J M de Craen; M A van Buchem Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 3.825
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: Rebecca F Gottesman; Josef Coresh; Diane J Catellier; A Richey Sharrett; Kathryn M Rose; Laura H Coker; Dean K Shibata; David S Knopman; Clifford R Jack; Thomas H Mosley Journal: Stroke Date: 2009-11-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Richard Leigh; Søren Christensen; Bruce C V Campbell; Michael P Marks; Gregory W Albers; Maarten G Lansberg Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-06-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: B E Dewey; X Xu; L Knutsson; A Jog; J L Prince; P B Barker; P C M van Zijl; R Leigh; P Nyquist Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 4.966
Authors: Mohani-Preet K Bajaj; Daniel R Burrage; Andrew Tappouni; James W Dodd; Paul W Jones; Emma H Baker Journal: Clin Interv Aging Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 4.458
Authors: Michelle R Caunca; Andres De Leon-Benedetti; Lawrence Latour; Richard Leigh; Clinton B Wright Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Fanny M Elahi; Danielle Harvey; Marie Altendahl; Nivetha Brathaban; Nicole Fernandes; Kaitlin B Casaletto; Adam M Staffaroni; Pauline Maillard; Jason D Hinman; Bruce L Miller; Charles DeCarli; Joel H Kramer; Edward J Goetzl Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Fanny M Elahi; Kaitlin B Casaletto; Marie Altendahl; Adam M Staffaroni; Evan Fletcher; Teresa J Filshtein; Maria M Glymour; Bruce L Miller; Jason D Hinman; Charles DeCarli; Edward J Goetzl; Joel H Kramer Journal: Front Aging Neurosci Date: 2018-11-09 Impact factor: 5.750
Authors: Motaz M Fadul; Paul R Heath; Johnathan Cooper-Knock; Julian M Kurz; Hayder A Al-Azzawi; Zarki Ali; Taylor Smith; Fiona E Matthews; Carol Brayne; Stephen B Wharton; Julie E Simpson Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2020-10-25 Impact factor: 5.923