MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis in patients presenting with clinically isolated syndromes: a multicentre retrospective study

Swanton, JK; Rovira, Àlex; Tintoré, Mar; Altmann, Daniel R.; Barkhof, Frederik; Filippi, Massimo; Huerga, Elena Charro; Miszkiel, Katherine; Plant, Gordon T.; Polman, Chris H.; Rovaris, Marco; Thompson, Alan J.; Montalbán, Xavier; Miller, David H.

doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(07)70176-x

Cited by 295 publications

(249 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

230

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The current 2010 McDonald criteria have enabled earlier diagnosis 5,6 and initiation of disease-modifying treatment, with substantial benefits for disease outcome 7,8 , but they still have imperfect sensitivity and specificity 9,10 . The limited accuracy of the criteria results in challenging cases and misdiagnosis, which are prevalent problems in MS 11,12 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The central vein sign and its clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At present, the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) relies heavily on the use of MRI, which can demonstrate disease dissemination in space and time [1][2][3][4] . The current 2010 McDonald criteria have enabled earlier diagnosis 5,6 and initiation of disease-modifying treatment, with substantial benefits for disease outcome 7,8 , but they still have imperfect sensitivity and specificity 9,10 . The limited accuracy of the criteria results in challenging cases and misdiagnosis, which are prevalent problems in MS 11,12 . Therefore, more-accurate and pathologically specific MRI criteria are still needed to exclude other disorders that can mimic MS 13,14 .The MRI-detectable central vein inside white matter lesions has recently been proposed as a biomarker of inflammatory demyelination and, thus, may aid the diagnosis of MS 15 . The 'central vein sign' (CVS) has been investigated in various neurological conditions by several groups, and evidence has accumulated that the CVS may have the ability to accurately differentiate MS from its mimics [15][16][17][18][19][20][21] . As a consequence, recent guidelines from the Magnetic Resonance Imaging in MS (MAGNIMS) group 1,4 and the Consortium of MS Centers (CMSC) task force 22 have acknowledged the potential of the CVS and its dedicated MRI acquisitions for the differential diagnosis of MS, while calling for further research before considering a possible modification of the diagnostic criteria. However, the lack of standardization for the definition and imaging of the CVS, as well as a dearth of large-scale prospective studies evaluating the CVS for MS diagnosis, are currently preventing the clinical validation of this potential biomarker 1,23 .This Consensus Statement aims to provide recommendations for the definition, standardization and clinical evaluation of the CVS in the diagnosis of MS. These statements are based on a thorough review of the existing literature on the CVS and the consensus opinion of the members of the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis (NAIMS) Cooperative. E X P E RT C O N S E N S U S D O C U M E N T on behalf of the NAIMS CooperativeAbstract | Over the past few years, MRI has become an indispensable tool for diagnosing multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the current MRI criteria for MS diagnosis have imperfect sensitivity and specificity. The central vein sign (CVS) has recently been proposed as a novel MRI biomarker to improve the accuracy and speed of MS diagnosis. Evidence indicates that the presence of the CVS in individual lesions can accurately differentiate MS from other diseases that mimic this condition. However, the predictive value of the CVS for the development of clinical MS in patients with suspected demyelinating disease is still unknown. Moreover, the lack of standardization for the definition and imaging of the CVS currently limits its clinical implementation and validation. On the basis of a thorough review of the existing literature on the CVS and the consensus opinion of the members of the North American Imaging in Mult...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The central vein sign and its clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Early treatment is important to avoid permanent damage and might slow or delay progression (Jacobs et al, 2000;Kappos et al, 2007). However, due to the variety of clinical presentations and its large differential diagnosis, early identification of the disease is especially problematic (Rolak and Fleming, 2007;Swanton et al, 2007). In its most common relapsing-remitting form (RRMS), patients present attacks alternating with episodes of clinical improvements, following an unpredictable rhythm (Noseworthy et al, 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Classifying minimally disabled multiple sclerosis patients from resting state functional connectivity

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The analysis of the MRI images should be meticulous and include the presence of specific characteristics, such as periventricular location with ovoid shape and perpendicular to the corpus callosum, dissemination in space and time 8 , and the correlation with the patient's clinical symptoms 13,20,21 . This last item is very important, since only MRI abnormalities are, up to date, no sufficient to establish one's diagnosis of MS, as neither Barkhof-Tintoré nor Swanton Criteria are 100% specific 21,22 . For instance, patient six had a compatible MRI, but when analyzed together with her clinical aspects, the diagnosis of MS was doubted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why this is not multiple sclerosis: a case based approach

Nicolau

Oliveira

Bichuetti

2015

Arq. Neuro-Psiquiatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To present a case series of patients previously diagnosed as multiple sclerosis (MS) which were later confirmed as an alternative diagnosis, and describe the clinical and paraclinical signs that led to this change. Method Nine patients are described. We reviewed the patient’s clinical chart, magnetic resonance images (MRI) and cerebrospinal fluid. Results There was a mean of three typical symptoms of MS and four clinical red flags per patient. MRI red flags were found in 88,9% of all referrals, with a mean of 3 encountered per patient. Conclusion We identified that, not only the misdiagnosed patients did not fulfill MS diagnosis criteria, but also how the described red flags are a useful tool in the differentiation of MS from other diseases. This data is important for guiding future diagnosis, especially for general clinicians and neurologists, which directly interfere with the patient’s management, treatment, prognosis and quality of life.

show abstract

MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis in patients presenting with clinically isolated syndromes: a multicentre retrospective study

Cited by 295 publications

References 30 publications

The central vein sign and its clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative

The central vein sign and its clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative

Classifying minimally disabled multiple sclerosis patients from resting state functional connectivity

Why this is not multiple sclerosis: a case based approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About