Cerebral small vessel disease (SVD) is commonly observed on neuroimaging among elderly individuals and is recognized as a major vascular contributor to dementia, cognitive decline, gait impairment, mood disturbance and stroke. However, clinical symptoms are often highly inconsistent in nature and severity among patients with similar degrees of SVD on brain imaging. Here, we provide a new framework based on new advances in structural and functional neuroimaging that aims to explain the remarkable clinical variation in SVD. First, we discuss the heterogeneous pathology present in SVD lesions despite an identical appearance on imaging and the perilesional and remote effects of these lesions. We review effects of SVD on structural and functional connectivity in the brain, and we discuss how network disruption by SVD can lead to clinical deficits. We address reserve and compensatory mechanisms in SVD and discuss the part played by other age-related pathologies. Finally, we conclude that SVD should be considered a global rather than a focal disease, as the classically recognized focal lesions affect remote brain structures and structural and functional network connections. The large variability in clinical symptoms among patients with SVD can probably be understood by taking into account the heterogeneity of SVD lesions, the effects of SVD beyond the focal lesions, the contribution of neurodegenerative pathologies other than SVD, and the interaction with reserve mechanisms and compensatory mechanisms.

Objective:To investigate the temporal dynamics of cerebral small vessel disease (SVD) by 3 consecutive assessments over a period of 9 years, distinguishing progression from regression.Methods:Changes in SVD markers of 276 participants of the Radboud University Nijmegen Diffusion Tensor and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cohort (RUN DMC) cohort were assessed at 3 time points over 9 years. We assessed white matter hyperintensities (WMH) volume by semiautomatic segmentation and rated lacunes and microbleeds manually. We categorized baseline WMH severity as mild, moderate, or severe according to the modified Fazekas scale. We performed mixed-effects regression analysis including a quadratic term for increasing age.Results:Mean WMH progression over 9 years was 4.7 mL (0.54 mL/y; interquartile range 0.95–5.5 mL), 20.3% of patients had incident lacunes (2.3%/y), and 18.9% had incident microbleeds (2.2%/y). WMH volume declined in 9.4% of the participants during the first follow-up interval, but only for 1 participant (0.4%) throughout the whole follow-up. Lacunes disappeared in 3.6% and microbleeds in 5.7% of the participants. WMH progression accelerated over time: including a quadratic term for increasing age during follow-up significantly improved the model (p < 0.001). SVD progression was predominantly seen in participants with moderate to severe WMH at baseline compared to those with mild WMH (odds ratio [OR] 35.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.8–80.0, p < 0.001 for WMH progression; OR 5.7, 95% CI 2.8–11.2, p < 0.001 for incident lacunes; and OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.4–5.9, p = 0.003 for incident microbleeds).Conclusions:SVD progression is nonlinear, accelerating over time, and a highly dynamic process, with progression interrupted by reduction in some, in a population that on average shows progression.

ObjectiveTo determine whether a simple small vessel disease (SVD) score, which uses information available on rapid visual assessment of clinical MRI scans, predicts risk of cognitive decline and dementia, above that provided by simple clinical measures. Methods Three prospective longitudinal cohort studies (SCANS [St George's Cognition and Neuroimaging in Stroke], RUN DMC [Radboud University Nijmegen Diffusion Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cohort], and the ASPS [Austrian StrokePrevention Study]), which covered a range of SVD severity from mild and asymptomatic to severe and symptomatic, were included. In all studies, MRI was performed at baseline, cognitive tests repeated during follow-up, and progression to dementia recorded prospectively. Outcome measures were cognitive decline and onset of dementia during follow-up. We determined whether the SVD score predicted risk of cognitive decline and future dementia. We also determined whether using the score to select a group of patients with more severe disease would reduce sample sizes for clinical intervention trials. ResultsIn a pooled analysis of all 3 cohorts, the score improved prediction of dementia (area under the curve [AUC], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.89) compared with that from clinical risk factors alone (AUC, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.71-0.81). Predictive performance was higher in patients with more severe SVD. Power calculations showed selecting patients with a higher score reduced sample sizes required for hypothetical clinical trials by 40%-66% depending on the outcome measure used. ConclusionsA simple SVD score, easily obtainable from clinical MRI scans and therefore applicable in routine clinical practice, aided prediction of future dementia risk.