Neurofibromatosis bright objects (NBOs) are poorly understood. This article aimed to investigate: 1) differences in fractional anisotropy (FA) between NBOs based in gray matter (GM) and white matter (WM), and 2) the relationship between NBOs and the affected white matter tracts. Fourteen NF1 patients were included in this study. Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), FA, radial diffusivity (RD) and eigenvalues were used to compare NBOs and matching contralateral normal-appearing sites (NAS). Diffusion tensor imaging scalars were also compared with age-matched healthy controls. Fiber tractography was performed to assess NBO-induced changes in WM trajectories. ADC values were higher for GM and WM NBOs than for NAS and controls. FA values were lower in GM and WM NBOs compared with controls. In all regions, eigenvalues were higher in NBOs than in NAS and controls. Only three out of 18 NOBs appeared to disrupt WM tracts. ADC, Λ2 and RD values of WM NBOs were higher in symptomatic compared to asymptomatic patients. Increased ADC, RD and eigenvalues and decreased FA values in NBOs can be explained by myelin and axonal damage. Increased ADC values and RD in WM NBOs correlated with the presence of symptoms. Tract integrity predominated in our study.
HymanSLShoresANorthKN. The nature and frequency of cognitive deficits in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Neurology. 2005; 65 (7): 1037–1044. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000179303.72345.ce.
3.
RogriguezFJPerryAGutmannDH. Gliomas in neurofibromatosis type 1: a clinicopathologic study of 100 patients. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2008; 67 (3): 240–249. doi: 10.1097/NEN0b013e318165eb75.
4.
GhoshPSRothnerADEmchTM. Cerebral vasculopathy in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. J Child Neurol. 2013; 28 (1): 95–101. doi.: 10.1177/0883073812441059.
5.
DeBellaKPoskittKSzudekJ. Use of “unidentified bright objects” on MRI for diagnosis of neurofibromatosis 1 in children. Neurology. 2000; 54 (8): 1646–1650. doi: 10.1212/WNL.54.8.1646.
6.
SzudekJFriedmanJM. Unidentified bright objects associated with features of neurofibromatosis 1. Pediatr Neurol. 2002; 27 (2): 123–127. doi: 10.1016/S0887-8994(02)00403-4.
7.
GillDSHymanSLSteinbergA. Age-related findings on MRI in neurofibromatosis type 1. Pediatr Radiol. 2006;36(10): 1048–1056. doi: 10.1007/s00247-006-0267-2.
8.
Lopes Ferraz FilhoJRMunisMPSoares SouzaA. Unidentified bright objects on brain MRI in children as a diagnostic criterion for neurofibromatosis type 1. Pediatr Radiol. 2008; 38 (3): 305–310. doi: 10.1007/s00247-007-0712-x.
9.
DiPaoloDPZimmermanRARorkeLB. Neurofibromatosis type 1: pathologic substrate of high-signal-intensity foci in the brain. Radiology. 1995; 195(3): 721–724.
10.
KrautMAGerringJPCooperKL. Longitudinal evolution of unidentified bright objects in children with neurofibromatosis-1. Am J Med Genet A.2004; 129A (2): 113–119. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.20656.
11.
EastwoodJDFiorellaDJMacFallJF. Increased brain apparent diffusion coefficient in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. Radiology. 2001; 219 (2): 354–358. doi: 10.1148/radiology.219.2.r01ap25354.
12.
SheikhSFKubalWSAndersonAW. Longitudinal evaluation of apparent diffusion coefficient in children with neurofibromatosis type 1. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003; 27 (5): 681–686. doi: 10.1097/00004728-200309000-00004.
13.
AlkanASigirciAKutluR. Neurofibromatosis type 1: diffusion weighted imaging findings of brain. Eur J Radiol. 2005; 56 (2): 229–234. doi 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.05.008.
14.
TogniniGFerrozziFGarlaschiG. Brain apparent diffusion coefficient evaluation in pediatric patients with neurofibromatosis type 1. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005; 29 (3): 298–304. doi: 10.1097/01.rct.0000162406.71300.b7.
15.
MentzelHJKaradagDGüllmarD. Unidentified bright objects in neurofibromatosis type 1: Results of diffusion tensor imaging in children and adolescents. J Pediatr Neurol. 2006; 4 (1): 27–31.
16.
ZamboniSLLoennekerTBoltshauserE. Contribution of diffusion tensor MR imaging in detecting cerebral microstructural changes in adults with neurofibromatosis type 1. Am J Neuroradiol. 2007; 28 (4): 773–776.
17.
van EngelenSJKrabLCMollHA. Quantitative differentiation between healthy and disordered brain matter in patients with neurofibromatosis type I using diffusion tensor imaging. Am J Neuroradiol. 2008; 29 (4): 816–822. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A0921.
18.
Ferraz-FilhoJRda RochaAJMunizMP. Diffusion tensor MR imaging in neurofibromatosis type 1: expanding the knowledge of microstructural brain abnormalities. Pediatr Radiol. 2012; 42 (4): 449–454. doi: 10.1007/s00247-011-2274-1.
19.
Ferraz-FilhoJRJose da RochaAMunizMP. Unidentified bright objects in neurofibromatosis type 1: conventional MRI in the follow-up and correlation of microstructural lesions on diffusion tensor images. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2012; 16 (1): 42–47. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpn.2011.10.002.
20.
WoodsRPGraftonSTHolmesCJ. Automated image registration: I. General methods and intrasubject, intramodality validation. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998; 22 (1): 139–152. doi: 10.1097/00004728-199801000-00027.
21.
BegMFMillerMITrouvéA. Computing large deformation metric mapping via geodesic flows of diffeomorphisms. Int J Comput Vision. 2005; 61 (2): 139–157. doi: 10.1023/B:VISI.0000043755.93987.aa.
22.
HuangHCeritogluCLiX. Correction of B0 susceptibility induced distortion in diffusion-weighted images using large-deformation diffeomorphic metric mapping. Magn Reson Imaging. 2008; 26 (9): 1294–1302. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2008.03.005.
23.
MoriSCrainBJChackoVP. Three-dimensional tracking of axonal projections in the brain by magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Neurol. 1999; 45 (2): 265–269.
24.
XueRvan ZijlPCCrainBJ. In vivo three-dimensional reconstruction of rat brain axonal projections by diffusion tensor imaging. Magn Reson Med.1999; 42 (6): 1123–1127.
25.
HuangHZhangJvan ZijlPC. Analysis of noise effects on DTI-based tractography using the brute-force and multi-ROI approach. Magn Reson Med.2004; 52 (3): 559–565. doi: 10.1002/mrm.20147.
26.
WakanaSCaprihanAPanzenboeckMM. Reproducibility of quantitative tractography methods applied to cerebral white matter. Neuroimage. 2007; 36 (3): 630–644. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.02.049.
27.
BasserPJJonesDK. Diffusion-tensor MRI: theory, experimental design and data analysis - a technical review. NMR Biomed. 2002; 15 (7–8): 456–467. doi: 10.1002/nbm.783.
28.
SongSKSunSWRamsbottomMJ. Dysmyelination revealed through MRI as increased radial (but unchanged axial) diffusion of water. Neuroimage. 2002: 17(3): 1429–1436. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2002.1267.
29.
NairGTanahashiYLowHP. Myelination and long diffusion times alter diffusion-tensor-imaging contrast in myelin-deficient shiverer mice. Neuroimage. 2005; 28 (1): 165–174. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.05.049.
30.
PierpaoliCBarnettAPajevicS. Water diffusion changes in Wallerian degeneration and their dependence on white matter architecture. Neuroimage. 2001: 13 (6 Pt 1): 1174–1185. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0765.
31.
LoweMJHorensteinCHirschJG. Functional pathway-defined MRI diffusion measures reveal increased transverse diffusivity of water in multiple sclerosis. Neuroimage. 2006; 32 (3): 1127–1133. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.04.208.
