Y Ota1, D Leung2, E Lin3, E Liao4, R Kurokawa4, M Kurokawa4, A Baba4, H Yokota5, G Bathla6, T Moritani4, A Srinivasan4, A A Capizzano4. 1. From the Division of Neuroradiology (Y.O., E. Liao, R.K., M.K., A.B., T.M., A.S., A.A.C.) yoshiako@med.umich.edu. 2. Department of Radiology and Division of Neuro-Oncology (D.L.), Department of Neurology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 3. Division of Neuroradiology (E. Lin), Department of Radiology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York. 4. From the Division of Neuroradiology (Y.O., E. Liao, R.K., M.K., A.B., T.M., A.S., A.A.C.). 5. Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology (H.Y.), Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan. 6. Division of Neuroradiology (G.B.), Department of Radiology, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, Iowa.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Prognostic factors of stroke-like migraine attacks after radiation therapy (SMART) syndrome have not been fully explored. This study aimed to assess clinical and imaging features to predict the clinical outcome of SMART syndrome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical manifestations and imaging findings of 20 patients with SMART syndrome (median age, 48 years; 5 women) from January 2016 to January 2020 at 4 medical centers. Patient demographics and MR imaging features at the time of diagnosis were reviewed. This cohort was divided into 2 groups based on the degree of clinical improvement (completely versus incompletely recovered). The numeric and categoric variables were compared as appropriate. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between the completely recovered group (n = 11; median age, 44 years; 2 women) and the incompletely recovered group (n = 9; median age, 55 years; 3 women) in age, months of follow-up, and the presence of steroid treatment at diagnosis (P = .028, .002, and .01, respectively). Regarding MR imaging features, there were statistically significant differences in the presence of linear subcortical WM susceptibility abnormality, restricted diffusion, and subcortical WM edematous changes in the acute SMART region (3/11 versus 8/9, P = .01; 0/11 versus 4/9, P = .026; and 2/11 versus 7/9, P = .022, respectively). Follow-up MRIs showed persistent susceptibility abnormality (11/11) and subcortical WM edematous changes (9/9), with resolution of restricted diffusion (4/4). CONCLUSIONS: Age, use of steroid treatment at the diagnosis of SMART syndrome, and MR imaging findings of abnormal susceptibility signal, restricted diffusion, and subcortical WM change in the acute SMART region can be prognostic factors in SMART syndrome.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Prognostic factors of stroke-like migraine attacks after radiation therapy (SMART) syndrome have not been fully explored. This study aimed to assess clinical and imaging features to predict the clinical outcome of SMART syndrome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical manifestations and imaging findings of 20 patients with SMART syndrome (median age, 48 years; 5 women) from January 2016 to January 2020 at 4 medical centers. Patient demographics and MR imaging features at the time of diagnosis were reviewed. This cohort was divided into 2 groups based on the degree of clinical improvement (completely versus incompletely recovered). The numeric and categoric variables were compared as appropriate. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between the completely recovered group (n = 11; median age, 44 years; 2 women) and the incompletely recovered group (n = 9; median age, 55 years; 3 women) in age, months of follow-up, and the presence of steroid treatment at diagnosis (P = .028, .002, and .01, respectively). Regarding MR imaging features, there were statistically significant differences in the presence of linear subcortical WM susceptibility abnormality, restricted diffusion, and subcortical WM edematous changes in the acute SMART region (3/11 versus 8/9, P = .01; 0/11 versus 4/9, P = .026; and 2/11 versus 7/9, P = .022, respectively). Follow-up MRIs showed persistent susceptibility abnormality (11/11) and subcortical WM edematous changes (9/9), with resolution of restricted diffusion (4/4). CONCLUSIONS: Age, use of steroid treatment at the diagnosis of SMART syndrome, and MR imaging findings of abnormal susceptibility signal, restricted diffusion, and subcortical WM change in the acute SMART region can be prognostic factors in SMART syndrome.
Authors: Emilio Gómez-Cibeira; Patricia Calleja-Castaño; Jesus Gonzalez de la Aleja; Fernando Sierra-Hidalgo; Juan Ruiz Morales; Elena Salvador-Alvarez; Ana Ramos-Gonzalez Journal: J Neuroimaging Date: 2015-02-19 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: Tarun D Singh; Mania Hajeb; Alejandro A Rabinstein; Amy C Kunchok; Sean J Pittock; Karl N Krecke; John D Bartleson; David F Black Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2020-11-07 Impact factor: 6.089
Authors: A L Di Stefano; G Berzero; F Ducray; M Eoli; A Pichiecchio; L M Farina; V Cuccarini; M C Brunelli; L Diamanti; S Condette Auliac; A Salmaggi; A Silvani; B Giometto; A Pace; A Vidiri; F Bourdain; S Bastianello; M Ceroni; E Marchioni Journal: Eur J Neurol Date: 2019-01-10 Impact factor: 6.089
Authors: Salah Dajani; Virginia B Hill; John A Kalapurakal; Craig M Horbinski; Eric G Nesbit; Sean Sachdev; Amulya Yalamanchili; Tarita O Thomas Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 4.964