MR Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis: Review and Recommendations for Current Practice

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Bydder GM,
   2. Steiner RE,
   3. Young IR,
   4. et al

   . Clinical NMR imaging of the brain: 140 cases. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1982;139:215–36

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Polman CH,
   2. Reingold SC,
   3. Edan G,
   4. et al

   . Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2005 revisions to the “McDonald Criteria.” Ann Neurol 2005;58:840–46

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Bakshi R,
   2. Thompson AJ,
   3. Rocca MA,
   4. et al

   . MRI in multiple sclerosis: current status and future prospects. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:615–25

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Li DK,
   2. Paty DW

   . Magnetic resonance imaging results of the PRISMS trial: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of interferon-beta1a in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: Prevention of Relapses and Disability by Interferon-beta1a Subcutaneously in Multiple Sclerosis. Ann Neurol 1999;46:197–206

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   1. Kappos L,
   2. Polman CH,
   3. Freedman MS,
   4. et al

   . Treatment with interferon beta-1b delays conversion to clinically definite and McDonald MS in patients with clinically isolated syndromes. Neurology 2006;67:1242–49

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Simon JH,
   2. Li D,
   3. Traboulsee A,
   4. et al

   . Standardized MR imaging protocol for multiple sclerosis: Consortium of MS Centers consensus guidelines. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:455–61

   FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. McDonald WI,
   2. Compston A,
   3. Edan G,
   4. et al

   . Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the International Panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2001;50:121–27

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Barkhof F,
   2. Filippi M,
   3. Miller DH,
   4. et al

   . Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain 1997;120:2059–69

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Poser CM,
   2. Paty DW,
   3. Scheinberg L,
   4. et al

   . New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines for research protocols. Ann Neurol 1983;13:227–31

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Swanton JK,
    2. Rovira A,
    3. Tintoré M,
    4. et al

    . MRI criteria for multiple sclerosis in patients presenting with clinically isolated syndromes: a multicentre retrospective study. Lancet Neurol 2007;6:677–86

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Rovira A,
    2. Swanton J,
    3. Tintoré M,
    4. et al

    . A single, early magnetic resonance imaging study in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2009;66:587–92

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Fujihara K,
    2. Ong BK

    . MS Across Continents: challenging our knowledge of MS in Asia and the Middle East—Report from the 2nd MS Forum Pan-Asian Conference, 19–20 November 2004, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Int MS J 2005;12:34–35

    PubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Chan LL,
    2. Sitoh YY,
    3. Chong J,
    4. et al

    . Application of the McDonald MRI criteria in multiple sclerosis. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2007;36:647–54

    PubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Grigoriadis N,
    2. Grigoriadis S,
    3. Polyzoidou E,
    4. et al

    . Neuroinflammation in multiple sclerosis: evidence for autoimmune dysregulation, not simple autoimmune reaction. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2006;108:241–44

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Soon D,
    2. Tozer DJ,
    3. Altmann DR,
    4. et al

    . Quantification of subtle blood-brain barrier disruption in non-enhancing lesions in multiple sclerosis: a study of disease and lesion subtypes. Mult Scler 2007;13:884–94

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
16. 16.↵
    1. Yong VW

    . Differential mechanisms of action of interferon-beta and glatiramer acetate in MS. Neurology 2002;59:802–08

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    1. Filippi M,
    2. Rovaris M,
    3. Rocca M,
    4. et al

    . Glatiramer acetate reduces the proportion of new MS lesions evolving into “black holes.” Neurology 2001;57:731–33

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    1. Brex PA,
    2. Ciccarelli O,
    3. O'Riordan JI,
    4. et al

    . A longitudinal study of abnormalities on MRI and disability from multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2002;346:158–64

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
19. 19.↵
    1. Fisniku LK,
    2. Brex PA,
    3. Altmann DR,
    4. et al

    . Disability and T2 MRI lesions: a 20-year follow-up of patients with relapse onset of multiple sclerosis. Brain 2008;131:808–17

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Kremenchutzky M,
    2. Rice GP,
    3. Baskerville J,
    4. et al

    . The natural history of multiple sclerosis: a geographically based study 9—observations on the progressive phase of the disease. Brain 2006 129 (pt 3):584–94. Epub 2006 Jan 9

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Sawcer S

    . The complex genetics of multiple sclerosis: pitfalls and prospects. Brain 2008;131:3118–31

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Daumer M,
    2. Neuhaus A,
    3. Morrissey S,
    4. et al

    . MRI as an outcome in multiple sclerosis clinical trials. Neurology 2009;72:705–11

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
23. 23.↵
    1. Li DK,
    2. Held U,
    3. Petkau J,
    4. et al

    . MRI T2 lesion burden in multiple sclerosis: a plateauing relationship with clinical disability. Neurology 2006;66:1384–89

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
24. 24.↵
    1. Kappos L,
    2. Moeri D,
    3. Radue EW,
    4. et al

    . Predictive value of gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for relapse rate and changes in disability or impairment in multiple sclerosis: a meta-analysis—Gadolinium MRI Meta-Analysis Group. Lancet 1999;353:964–69

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Kappos L,
    2. Antel J,
    3. Comi G,
    4. et al

    . Oral fingolimod (FTY720) for relapsing multiple sclerosis. N Engl J Med 2006;355:1124–40

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Sormani MP,
    2. Bonzano L,
    3. Roccatagliata L,
    4. et al

    . Magnetic resonance imaging as a potential surrogate for relapses in multiple sclerosis: a meta-analytic approach. Ann Neurol 2009;65:268–75

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Rovira Á,
    2. León A

    . MR in the diagnosis and monitoring of multiple sclerosis: an overview. Eur J Radiol 2008;67:409–11

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Jacobs LD,
    2. Beck RW,
    3. Simon JH,
    4. et al

    . Intramuscular interferon beta-1a therapy initiated during a first demyelinating event in multiple sclerosis: CHAMPS Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000;343:898–904

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
29. 29.↵
    1. Comi G,
    2. Filippi M,
    3. Barkhoff F,
    4. et al

    . Effect of early interferon treatment on conversion to definite multiple sclerosis: a randomised study. Lancet 2001;357:1576–82

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    1. Kinkel RP,
    2. Kollman C,
    3. O'Connor P,
    4. et al.,
    5. for the CHAMPIONS Study Group

    . IM interferon beta-1a delays definite multiple sclerosis 5 years after a first demyelinating event. Neurology 2006;66:678–84. Epub 2006 Jan 25

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    1. Kappos L,
    2. Freedman MS,
    3. Polman CH,
    4. et al.,
    5. for the BENEFIT Study Group

    . Effect of early versus delayed interferon beta-1b treatment on disability after a first clinical event suggestive of multiple sclerosis: a 3-year follow-up analysis of the BENEFIT study. Lancet 2007;370:389–97

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    1. Trojano,
    2. Pellegrini F,
    3. Fuiani A,
    4. et al

    . New natural history of interferon-beta-treated relapsing multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2007;61:300–06

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 33.↵
    1. Ge Y

    . Multiple sclerosis: the role of MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:1165–76

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    1. Tas MW,
    2. Barkhol F,
    3. van Walderveen MA,
    4. et al

    . The effect of gadolinium on the sensitivity and specificity of MR in the initial diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1995;16:259–64

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    1. Ge Y,
    2. Law M,
    3. Herbert J,
    4. et al

    . Prominent perivenular spaces in multiple sclerosis as a sign of perivascular inflammation in primary demyelination. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:2316–19

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
36. 36.↵
    1. Charil A,
    2. Yousry TA,
    3. Rovaris M,
    4. et al

    . MRI and the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: expanding the concept of “no better explanation.” Lancet Neurol 2006;5:841–52

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    1. Kupersmith MJ,
    2. Alban T,
    3. Zeiffer B,
    4. et al

    . Contrast-enhanced MRI in acute optic neuritis: relationship to visual performance. Brain 2002;125:812–22

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
38. 38.↵
    1. Bot JC,
    2. Barkhof F,
    3. Lycklama à Nijeholt G,
    4. et al

    . Differentiation of multiple sclerosis from other inflammatory disorders and cerebrovascular disease: value of spinal MR imaging. Radiology 2002;223:46–56

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
39. 39.↵
    1. Lycklama G,
    2. Thompson A,
    3. Filippi M,
    4. et al

    . Spinal-cord MRI in multiple sclerosis. Lancet Neurol 2003;2:555–62

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
40. 40.↵
    1. Tombach B,
    2. Heindel W

    . Value of 1.0-M gadolinium chelates: review of preclinical and clinical data on gadobutrol. Eur Radiol 2002;12:1550–56. Epub 2002 Feb 21

    CrossRefPubMed
41. 41.↵
    1. Sieber MA,
    2. Lengsfeld P,
    3. Frenzel T,
    4. et al

    . Preclinical investigation to compare different gadolinium-based contrast agents regarding their propensity to release gadolinium in vivo and to trigger nephrogenic systemic fibrosis-like lesions. Eur Radiol 2008;18:2164–73

    CrossRefPubMed
42. 42.↵
    1. Frenzel T,
    2. Lengsfeld P,
    3. Schirmer H,
    4. et al

    . Stability of gadolinium-based magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents in human serum at 37°C. Invest Radiol 2008;43:817–28

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
43. 43.↵
    1. Grobner T

    . Gadolinium: a specific trigger for the development of nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy and nephrogenic systemic fibrosis? Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006;21:1104–08

    FREE Full Text
44. 44.↵
    1. Kanal E,
    2. Barkovich AJ,
    3. Bell C,
    4. et al

    . ACR Blue Ribbon Panel on MR Safety: ACR guidance document for safe MR practices−2007. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:1447–74

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
45. 45.↵
    1. Maravilla KR,
    2. Maldjian JA,
    3. Schmalfuss IM,
    4. et al

    . Contrast enhancement of central nervous system lesions: multicenter intraindividual crossover comparative study of two MR contrast agents. Radiology 2006;240:389–400

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Runge VM,
    2. Kirsch JE,
    3. Burke VJ,
    4. et al

    . High dose gadoteridol in MR imaging of intracranial neoplasms. J Magn Reson Imaging 1992;2:9–18

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
47. 47.↵
    1. Uysal E,
    2. Erturk SM,
    3. Yildirim H,
    4. et al

    . Sensitivity of immediate and delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI after injection of 0.5 M and 1.0 M gadolinium chelates for detecting multiple sclerosis lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188:697–702

    CrossRefPubMed
48. 48.↵
    1. Benner T,
    2. Reimer P,
    3. Erb G,
    4. et al

    . Cerebral MR perfusion imaging: first clinical application of a 1 M gadolinium chelate (Gadovist 1.0) in a double-blinded randomized dose-finding study. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;12:371–80

    CrossRefPubMed
49. 49.↵
    1. Filippi M,
    2. Rovaris M,
    3. Capra R,
    4. et al

    . A multi-centre longitudinal study comparing the sensitivity of monthly MRI after standard and triple dose gadolinium-DTPA for monitoring disease activity in multiple sclerosis: implications for phase II clinical trials. Brain 1998;121:2011–20

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
50. 50.↵
    1. Wolansky LJ,
    2. Bardini JA,
    3. Cook SD,
    4. et al

    . Triple-dose versus single-dose gadoteridol in multiple sclerosis patients. J Neuroimaging 1994;4:141–45

    PubMed
51. 51.↵
    1. Stecco A,
    2. Migazzo E,
    3. Saponaro A,
    4. et al

    . Gadolinium dose optimisation in patients with multiple sclerosis: intra- and inter-individual comparisons. Eur J Radiol 2006;57:37–42

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
52. 52.↵
    1. Rohrer M,
    2. Bauer H,
    3. Mintorovitch J,
    4. et al

    . Comparison of magnetic properties of MRI contrast media solutions at different magnetic field strengths. Invest Radiol 2005;40:715–24

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
53. 53.↵
    1. Rowley HA,
    2. Scialfa G,
    3. Gao PY,
    4. et al

    . Contrast-enhanced MR imaging of brain lesions: a large-scale intraindividual crossover comparison of gadobenate dimeglumine versus gadodiamide. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:1684–91

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
54. 54.
    1. Pintaske J,
    2. Martirosian P,
    3. Graf H,
    4. et al

    . Relaxivity of gadopentetate dimeglumine (Magnevist), gadobutrol (Gadovist), and gadobenate dimeglumine (MultiHance) in human blood plasma at 0.2, 1.5, and 3 Tesla. Invest Radiol 2006;41:213–21

    CrossRefPubMed
55. 55.↵
    1. Essig M,
    2. Tartaro A,
    3. Tartaglione T,
    4. et al

    . Enhancing lesions of the brain: intraindividual crossover comparison of contrast enhancement after gadobenate dimeglumine versus established gadolinium comparators. Acad Radiol 2006;13:744–51

    CrossRefPubMed
56. 56.↵
    1. Port M,
    2. Corot C,
    3. Violas X,
    4. et al

    . How to compare the efficacy of albumin bound and nonalbumin-bound contrast agents in vivo: the concept of dynamic relaxivity. Invest Radiol 2005;40:565–73

    CrossRefPubMed