Lesion size and shape in central vein sign assessment for multiple sclerosis diagnosis: An in vivo and postmortem MRI study

Abstract

Background:

The “central vein sign” (CVS), a linear hypointensity on T2*-weighted imaging corresponding to a central vein/venule, is associated with multiple sclerosis (MS) lesions. The effect of lesion-size exclusion criteria on MS diagnostic accuracy has not been extensively studied.

Objective:

Investigate the optimal lesion-size exclusion criteria for CVS use in MS diagnosis.

Methods:

Cross-sectional study of 163 MS and 51 non-MS, and radiological/histopathological correlation of 5 MS and 1 control autopsy cases. The effects of lesion-size exclusion on MS diagnosis using the CVS, and intralesional vein detection on histopathology were evaluated.

Results:

CVS+ lesions were larger compared to CVS− lesions, with effect modification by MS diagnosis (mean difference +7.7 mm³, p = 0.004). CVS percentage-based criteria with no lesion-size exclusion showed the highest diagnostic accuracy in differentiating MS cases. However, a simple count of three or more CVS+ lesions greater than 3.5 mm is highly accurate and can be rapidly implemented (sensitivity 93%; specificity 88%). On magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-histopathological correlation, the CVS had high specificity for identifying intralesional veins (0/7 false positives).

Conclusion:

Lesion-size measures add important information when using CVS+ lesion counts for MS diagnosis. The CVS is a specific biomarker corresponding to intralesional veins on histopathology.

Keywords

Biomarkers multiple sclerosis magnetic resonance imaging post mortem T2 lesions central vein sign

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

McDonald

Compston

Edan

, et al. Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: Guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001; 50(1): 121–127, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11456302

Kaisey

Solomon

Luu

, et al. Incidence of multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis in referrals to two academic centers. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2019; 30: 51–56.

Solomon

Naismith

Cross

. Misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis: Impact of the 2017 McDonald criteria on clinical practice. Neurology 2019; 92(1): 26–33.

Polman

Reingold

Banwell

, et al. Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria. Ann Neurol 2011; 69(2): 292–302.

Thompson

Banwell

Barkhof

, et al. Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17(2): 162–173.

Filippi

Rocca

Ciccarelli

, et al. MRI criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines. Lancet Neurol 2016; 15(3): 292–303.

Filippi

Preziosa

Meani

, et al. Prediction of a multiple sclerosis diagnosis in patients with clinically isolated syndrome using the 2016 MAGNIMS and 2010 McDonald criteria: A retrospective study. Lancet Neurol 2018; 17(2): 133–142.

Hyun

Huh

Kim

, et al. Evaluation of 2016 MAGNIMS MRI criteria for dissemination in space in patients with a clinically isolated syndrome. Mult Scler 2018; 24(6): 758–766.

Tan

Van Schijndel

Pouwels

PJW

, et al. MR venography of multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000; 21(6): 1039.

10.

Tallantyre

Dixon

Donaldson

, et al. Ultra-high-field imaging distinguishes MS lesions from asymptomatic white matter lesions. Neurology 2011; 76(6): 534–539.

11.

Solomon

Schindler

Howard

, et al. “Central vessel sign” on 3T FLAIR* MRI for the differentiation of multiple sclerosis from migraine. Ann Clin Transl Neurol 2016; 3(2): 82–87.

12.

Kilsdonk

Wattjes

Lopez-Soriano

, et al. Improved differentiation between MS and vascular brain lesions using FLAIR* at 7 Tesla. Eur Radiol 2014; 24(4): 841–849.

13.

Solomon

Watts

Ontaneda

, et al. Diagnostic performance of central vein sign for multiple sclerosis with a simplified three-lesion algorithm. Mult Scler 2018; 24(6): 750–757.

14.

Mistry

Abdel-Fahim

Samaraweera

, et al. Imaging central veins in brain lesions with 3-T T2*-weighted magnetic resonance imaging differentiates multiple sclerosis from microangiopathic brain lesions. Mult Scler 2016; 22(10): 1289–1296.

15.

Sati

Constable

, et al. 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. Nat Rev Neurol 2016; 12(12): 714–722.

16.

Lublin

Reingold

. Defining the clinical course of multiple sclerosis: Results of an international survey. Neurology 1996; 46(4): 907–911.

17.

Sati

Thomasson

, et al. Rapid, high-resolution, whole-brain, susceptibility-based MRI of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2014; 20(11): 1464–1470.

18.

Absinta

Sati

Masuzzo

, et al. Association of Chronic Active Multiple Sclerosis Lesions with Disability in Vivo. JAMA Neurol 2019; 76(12): 1474–1483.

19.

Absinta

Vuolo

Rao

, et al. Gadolinium-based MRI characterization of leptomeningeal inflammation in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2015; 85(1): 18–28.

20.

Al-Louzi

Letchuman

Manukyan

, et al. Central vein sign profile of newly developing lesions in multiple sclerosis. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm 2022; 9(2): e1120.

21.

Basser

Pierpaoli

Microstructural and physiological features of tissues elucidated by quantitative-diffusion-tensor MRI. J Magn Reson B 1996; 111(3): 209–219, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8661285 (accessed 2 November 2014).

22.

Sastre-Garriga

Pareto

Battaglini

, et al. MAGNIMS consensus recommendations on the use of brain and spinal cord atrophy measures in clinical practice. Nat Rev Neurol 2020; 16(3): 171–182.

23.

Filippi

Preziosa

Banwell

, et al. Assessment of lesions on magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis: Practical guidelines. Brain 2019; 142(7): 1858.

24.

Tallantyre

Brookes

Dixon

, et al. Demonstrating the perivascular distribution of MS lesions in vivo with 7-Tesla MRI. Neurology 2008; 70(22): 2076–2078.

25.

Kaisey

Solomon

Guerrero

, et al. Preventing multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis using the “central vein sign”: A real-world study. Mult Scler Relat Disord 2021; 48: 102671.

26.

Castellaro

Tamanti

Pisani

, et al. The use of the central vein sign in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Diagnostics 2020; 10(12): 1025.

27.

Okuda

Moog

McCreary

, et al. Utility of shape evolution and displacement in the classification of chronic multiple sclerosis lesions. Sci Rep 2020; 10(1): 1–8.

28.

Horowitz

Kaplan

Grewe

, et al. The ovoid lesion: A new MR observation in patients with multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1989; 10(2): 303–305.

29.

Maggi

Absinta

Grammatico

, et al. Central vein sign differentiates multiple sclerosis from central nervous system inflammatory vasculopathies. Ann Neurol 2018; 83(2): 283–294.

30.

Dworkin

Sati

Solomon

, et al. Automated integration of multimodal MRI for the probabilistic detection of the central vein sign in white matter lesions. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2018; 39(10): 1806–1813.

31.

Maggi

Fartaria

Jorge

, et al. CVSnet: A machine learning approach for automated central vein sign assessment in multiple sclerosis. NMR Biomed 2020; 33(5): e4283.

32.

Absinta

Nair

Filippi

, et al. Postmortem magnetic resonance imaging to guide the pathologic cut individualized, 3-dimensionally printed cutting boxes for fixed brains. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 2014; 73(8): 780–788.

33.

Chavhan

Babyn

Thomas

, et al. Principles, techniques, and applications of T2*-based MR imaging and its special applications. Radiographics 2009; 29(5): 1433–1449.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.21 MB