G Caruana1, C Auger1, L M Pessini1, W Calderon1, A de Barros1, A Salerno1, J Sastre-Garriga2, X Montalban2, À Rovira3. 1. From the Neuroradiology Section (G.C., C.A., L.M.P., W.C., A.d.B., A.S., À.R.). 2. Department of Radiology, and Servei de Neurologia-Neuroimmunologia (J.S.-G., X.M.). Centre d'Esclerosi Múltiple de Catalunya, Institut de Recerca Vall d'Hebron, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 3. From the Neuroradiology Section (G.C., C.A., L.M.P., W.C., A.d.B., A.S., À.R.) alex.rovira.idi@gencat.cat.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Acute inflammatory activity of MS lesions is traditionally assessed through contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR images. The aim of our study was to determine whether a qualitative evaluation of non-contrast-enhanced SWI of new T2-hyperintense lesions might help distinguish acute and chronic lesions and whether it could be considered a possible alternative to gadolinium-based contrast agents for this purpose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serial MR imaging studies from 55 patients with MS were reviewed to identify 169 new T2-hyperintense lesions. Two blinded neuroradiologists determined their signal pattern on SWI, considering 5 categories (hypointense rings, marked hypointensity, mild hypointensity, iso-/hyperintensity, indeterminate). Two different blinded neuroradiologists evaluated the presence or absence of enhancement in postcontrast T1-weighted images of the lesions. The Fisher exact test was used to determine whether each category of signal intensity on SWI was associated with gadolinium enhancement. RESULTS: The presence of hypointense rings or marked hypointensity showed a strong association with the absence of gadolinium enhancement (P < .001), with a sensitivity of 93.0% and a specificity of 82.9%. The presence of mild hypointensity or isohyperintensity showed a strong association with the presence of gadolinium enhancement (P < .001), with a sensitivity of 68.3% and a specificity of 99.2%. CONCLUSIONS: A qualitative analysis of the signal pattern on SWI of new T2-hyperintense MS lesions allows determining the likelihood that the lesions will enhance after administration of a gadolinium contrast agent, with high specificity albeit with a moderate sensitivity. While it cannot substitute for the use of contrast agent, it can be useful in some clinical settings in which the contrast agent cannot be administered.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Acute inflammatory activity of MS lesions is traditionally assessed through contrast-enhanced T1-weighted MR images. The aim of our study was to determine whether a qualitative evaluation of non-contrast-enhanced SWI of new T2-hyperintense lesions might help distinguish acute and chronic lesions and whether it could be considered a possible alternative to gadolinium-based contrast agents for this purpose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Serial MR imaging studies from 55 patients with MS were reviewed to identify 169 new T2-hyperintense lesions. Two blinded neuroradiologists determined their signal pattern on SWI, considering 5 categories (hypointense rings, marked hypointensity, mild hypointensity, iso-/hyperintensity, indeterminate). Two different blinded neuroradiologists evaluated the presence or absence of enhancement in postcontrast T1-weighted images of the lesions. The Fisher exact test was used to determine whether each category of signal intensity on SWI was associated with gadolinium enhancement. RESULTS: The presence of hypointense rings or marked hypointensity showed a strong association with the absence of gadolinium enhancement (P < .001), with a sensitivity of 93.0% and a specificity of 82.9%. The presence of mild hypointensity or isohyperintensity showed a strong association with the presence of gadolinium enhancement (P < .001), with a sensitivity of 68.3% and a specificity of 99.2%. CONCLUSIONS: A qualitative analysis of the signal pattern on SWI of new T2-hyperintense MS lesions allows determining the likelihood that the lesions will enhance after administration of a gadolinium contrast agent, with high specificity albeit with a moderate sensitivity. While it cannot substitute for the use of contrast agent, it can be useful in some clinical settings in which the contrast agent cannot be administered.
Authors: Wei Bian; Kristin Harter; Kathryn E Hammond-Rosenbluth; Janine M Lupo; Duan Xu; Douglas Ac Kelley; Daniel B Vigneron; Sarah J Nelson; Daniel Pelletier Journal: Mult Scler Date: 2012-05-28 Impact factor: 6.312
Authors: Ulrike W Kaunzner; Yeona Kang; Shun Zhang; Eric Morris; Yihao Yao; Sneha Pandya; Sandra M Hurtado Rua; Calvin Park; Kelly M Gillen; Thanh D Nguyen; Yi Wang; David Pitt; Susan A Gauthier Journal: Brain Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Kofi Deh; Gerald D Ponath; Zaki Molvi; Gian-Carlo T Parel; Kelly M Gillen; Shun Zhang; Thanh D Nguyen; Pascal Spincemaille; Yinghua Ma; Ajay Gupta; Susan A Gauthier; David Pitt; Yi Wang Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Martina Absinta; Pascal Sati; María I Gaitán; Pietro Maggi; Irene C M Cortese; Massimo Filippi; Daniel S Reich Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Y Zhang; S A Gauthier; A Gupta; W Chen; J Comunale; G C-Y Chiang; D Zhou; G Askin; W Zhu; D Pitt; Y Wang Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 3.825