Serial cranial and spinal cord magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis
S. Wiebe MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorD. H. Lee MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorS. J. Karlik PhD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorM. Hopkins RN
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorM. K. Vandervoort MSc
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorC. J. Wong MSc
Robarts Research Institute, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorL. Hewitt RT
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorG. P. A. Rice MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorG. C. Ebers MD
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Dr. J. H. Noseworthy MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 411 Guggenheim Building, 200 First St, SW, Rochester, MN 55905Search for more papers by this authorS. Wiebe MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorD. H. Lee MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorS. J. Karlik PhD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorM. Hopkins RN
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorM. K. Vandervoort MSc
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorC. J. Wong MSc
Robarts Research Institute, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorL. Hewitt RT
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorG. P. A. Rice MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorG. C. Ebers MD
Department of Radiology, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Dr. J. H. Noseworthy MD
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada
Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, 411 Guggenheim Building, 200 First St, SW, Rochester, MN 55905Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Twenty-nine mildly disabled patients with multiple sclerosis underwent serial clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) evaluations (pre- and postgadolinium cranial and spinal cord MRI) on at least 3 occasions at 13-week intervals and during periods of suspected relapse. Using clinical judgment of the presence of recent active disease as the gold standard, combined MRI studies confirmed the clinical impression of active disease in 93% of follow-up visits (sensitivity) and the absence of active MS in 63% of follow-up visits (specificity). None of the cranial and spinal MRI-detected abnormalities disappeared. Gadolinium administration particularly increased the yield of spinal MRI. Cranial MRI alone detected 80% of the MRI-active visits. Clinical and MRI concordance was significantly better for the presence of recent disease activity than for the anatomical localization of the presumed site of activity. MRI evidence of apparent ongoing disease activity was seen more frequently in patients believed to have active multiple sclerosis in the preceding year (13 of 21) than in patients who had been in clinical remission for at least the 2 preceding years (2 of 8). Although clinical evidence of new disease activity was much less common in patients with active, chronic-progressive disease (1 of 8) than in patients with active, relapsing disease (9 of 13), the proportion of patients with either infrequent relapses, frequent relapses, or slow chronic-progressive disease in the preceding year in whom MRI activity developed and the pattern of this new MRI activity was similar between these types of active patients. This finding suggests that although there are differences in the clinical expression of disease, there may not be a fundamental difference between mild, active relapsing and mild, active progressive multiple sclerosis as defined by MRI.
References
- 1 Paty DW, Oger JJ, Kastrukoff LF, et al. MRI in the diagnosis of MS: a prospective study with comparison of clinical evaluation, evoked potentials, oligodonal banding, and CT. Neurology 1988; 38: 180–185
- 2 Koopmans RA, Li DKB, Oger JJF, et al. Chronic progressive multiple sclerosis: serial magnetic resonance brain imaging over six months. Ann Neurol 1989; 26: 248–256
- 3 Isaac C, Li DK, Genton M, et al. Multiple sclerosis: a serial study using MRI in relapsing patients. Neurology 1988; 38: 1511–1515
- 4 Paty DW. Magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of disease activity in multiple sclerosis. Can J Neurol Sci 1988; 15: 266–272
- 5 Thompson AJ, Kermode AG, MacManus DG, et al. Pathogenesis of progressive multiple sclerosis. Lancet 1989; 1: 1322–1323
- 6 Thompson AJ, Kermode AG, MacManus DG, et al. Patterns of disease activity in multiple sclerosis: clinical and magnetic resonance imaging study. Br Med J 1990; 300: 631–634
- 7 Thompson AJ, Kermode AG, Wicks D, et al. Major differences in the dynamics of primary and secondary progressive multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1991; 29: 53–62
- 8 Johnson MA, Li DKB, Bryant DJ, Payne JA. Magnetic resonance imaging: serial observations in multiple sclerosis. AJNR 1984; 5: 495–499
- 9
Grossman RI,
Gonzalez-Scarano F,
Atlas SW, et al.
Multiple sclerosis: gadolinium enhancement in MR imaging.
Radiology
1986;
16l:
721–725
10.1148/radiology.161.3.3786722 Google Scholar
- 10 Grossman RI, Braffman BH, Brorson JR, et al. Multiple sclerosis: serial study of gadolinium-enhanced MRI imaging. Radiology 1988: 169: 117–122
- 11 Miller DH, Rudge P, Johnson G, et al. Serial gadolinium enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis. Brain 1988; 111: 927–939
- 12 Larsson EM, Holtas S, Nilsson O. Gd-DTPA-enhanced MR of suspected spinal multiple sclerosis. AJNR 1989; 10: 1071–1076
- 13 Koopmans RA, Li DKB, Grochowski E, et al. Benign versus chronic progressive multiple sclerosis: magnetic resonance imaging features. Ann Neurol 1989; 25: 74–81
- 14 Koopmans RA, Li DKB, Oger JJF, et al. The lesion of multiple sclerosis: imaging of acute and chronic stages. Neurology 1989; 39: 959–963
- 15 Harris JO, Frank JA, Patronas N, et al. Serial gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging scans in patients with early, relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: implications for clinical trials and natural history. Ann Neurol 1991; 29: 548–555
- 16 Phadke JG, Best PV. Atypical and clinically silent multiple sclerosis: a report of 12 cases discovered unexpectedly at autopsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1983; 46: 414–420
- 17 Gilbert JJ, Sadler RM. Unsuspected multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1983; 40: 533–536
- 18 Paty DW. Multiple sclerosis: assessment of disease progression and effects of treatment. Can J Neurol Sci 1987; 14: 518–520
- 19 Kappos L, Stadt D, Keil W, et al. An attempt to quantify magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis–correlation with clinical parameters. Neurosurg Rev 1987; 10: 133–135
- 20 Kappos L, Stadt D, Ratzka M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of treatment in multiple sclerosis. Neuroradiology 1988; 30: 299–302
- 21 Paty DW, McFarlin DE, McDonald WI. Magnetic resonance imaging and laboratory aids in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1991; 29: 3–5
- 22 Kastrukoff LF, Oger JJ, Hashimoto SA, et al. Systemic lymphoblastoid interferon therapy in chronic progressive multiple sclerosis. I. Clinical and MRI evaluation. Neurology 1990; 40: 479–486
- 23 Miller DH, Barkhof F, Berry I, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in monitoring the treatment of multiple sclerosis: concerted action guidelines. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1991; 54: 683–688
- 24 Willoughby EW, Grochowski E, Li DKB, et al. Serial magnetic resonance scanning in multiple sclerosis: a prospective study in relapsing patients. Ann Neurol 1989; 25: 43–49
- 25
Poser CM,
Paty DW,
Scheinberg L, et al.
New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols.
Ann Neurol
1983;
13:
228–231
10.1002/ana.410130302 Google Scholar
- 26 Kurtzke JF. Rating neurological impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983; 33: 1444–1452
- 27 Miller DH, Newton MR, Van der Poel JC, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the optic nerve in optic neuritis. Neurology 1988; 38: 175–179
- 28 Lee DH, Simon JH, Szumowski J, et al. Optic neuritis and orbital lesions: lipid-suppressed chemical shift MR imaging. Radiology 1991; 179: 543–546
- 29 Palo J, Ketonen L, Wikstrom J. A follow-up study of very low field MRI findings and clinical course in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 1988; 84: 177–187
- 30 Noseworthy JH, Lee D, Penman M, et al. A phase 11 evaluation of mitoxantrone HCl in the treatment of progressive multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1991; 41 (suppl 1): 146
- 31 Gonzalez-Scarano F, Grossman RI, Galetta S, et al. Multiple sclerosis disease activity correlates with gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol 1987; 21: 300–306
- 32 Kermode AG, Tofts PS, MacManus DG, et al. Early lesion of multiple sclerosis. Lancet 1988; 2. 1203–1204
- 33 Kermode AG, Thompson AJ, Tofts PS, et al. Onset and duration of blood brain barrier breakdown in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 1990; 40 (suppl 1): 377
- 34 Kermode AG, Tofts PS, Thompson AJ, et al. Heterogeneity of blood brain barrier changes in multiple sclerosis: an MRI study with gadolinium-DTPA enhancement. Neurology 1990; 40: 229–235
- 35 Miller DH, Johnson G, Tofts PS, et al. Precise relaxation time measurements of normal-appearing white matter in inflammatory central nervous system disease. Magn Reson Med 1989; 11: 331–336
- 36 Huber SJ, Paulson GW, Chakeres D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and clinical correlations in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Scl 1988; 86: 1–12
- 37 Lyrer P, Radu EW, Groebke-Lorenz W, Benz UF. Multiple sclerosis: correlation between clinically suspected locations and ascertained lesions in MRI. Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax 1989; 78: 956–959
- 38 Noakes JB, Herkes GK, Frith JA, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in clinically-definite multiple sclerosis. Med J Aust 1990; 152: 136–140
- 39 Ebers GC, Vinuela FV, Feasby TE, et al. Multifocal CT enhancement in MS. Neurology 1984; 34: 341–346
- 40 Goodkin DE, Hertsgaard D, Rudick RA. Exacerbation rates and adherence to disease type in a prospectively followed-up population with multiple sclerosis. Implications for clinical trials. Arch Neurol 1989; 46: 1107–1112
- 41 McDonald WI, Barnes D. Lessons from magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis. Trends Neurosci 1989; 12: 376–379