Vessel Wall Enhancement on Black-Blood MRI Predicts Acute and Future Stroke in Cerebral Amyloid Angiopathy

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Mossa-Basha M,
   3. Hwang WD,
   4. De Havenon A, et al

   . Multicontrast high-resolution vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging and its value in differentiating intracranial vasculopathic processes. Stroke 2015;46:1567–73 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.009037 pmid:25953365

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   2. Alexander MD,
   3. de Havenon A,
   4. Kim SE, et al

   . Assessment of quantitative methods for enhancement measurement on vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of intracranial atherosclerosis. Neuroradiology 2019;61:643–50 doi:10.1007/s00234-019-02167-3 pmid:30675639

   CrossRefPubMed
3. 3.↵
   2. de Havenon A,
   3. Mossa-Basha M,
   4. Shah L, et al

   . High-resolution vessel wall MRI for the evaluation of intracranial atherosclerotic disease. Neuroradiology 2017;59:1193–1202 doi:10.1007/s00234-017-1925-9 pmid:28942481

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Kim JM,
   3. Jung KH,
   4. Sohn CH, et al

   . Intracranial plaque enhancement from high resolution vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging predicts stroke recurrence. Int J Stroke 2016;11:171–79 doi:10.1177/1747493015609775 pmid:26783308

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   2. Mossa-Basha M,
   3. de Havenon A,
   4. Becker KJ, et al

   . Added value of vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of Moyamoya vasculopathies in a non-Asian cohort. Stroke 2016;47:1782–88 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.013320 pmid:27272486

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   2. Mossa-Basha M,
   3. Alexander M,
   4. Gaddikeri S, et al

   . Vessel wall imaging for intracranial vascular disease evaluation. J Neurointerv Surg 2016;8:1154–59 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2015-012127 pmid:26769729

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Hao Q,
   3. Tsankova NM,
   4. Shoirah H, et al

   . Vessel wall MRI enhancement in noninflammatory cerebral amyloid angiopathy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2020;41:446–48 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A6445 pmid:32139424

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   2. Kimberly WT,
   3. Gilson A,
   4. Rost NS, et al

   . Silent ischemic infarcts are associated with hemorrhage burden in cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Neurology 2009;72:1230–35 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000345666.83318.03 pmid:19349602

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   2. Gregoire SM,
   3. Charidimou A,
   4. Gadapa N, et al

   . Acute ischaemic brain lesions in intracerebral haemorrhage: multicentre cross-sectional magnetic resonance imaging study. Brain 2011;134:2376–86 doi:10.1093/brain/awr172 pmid:21841203

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    2. Vallat W,
    3. Maundrell A,
    4. Leyden J, et al

    . Cerebral amyloid angiopathy causing cortical microinfarction. J Clin Neurosci 2013;20:1802–04 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2012.11.029 pmid:23871452

    CrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    2. Mandybur TI

    . Cerebral amyloid angiopathy: the vascular pathology and complications. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 1986;45:79–90 pmid:3941328

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Vonsattel JP,
    3. Myers RH,
    4. Hedley-Whyte ET, et al

    . Cerebral amyloid angiopathy without and with cerebral hemorrhages: a comparative histological study. Ann Neurol 1991;30:637–49 doi:10.1002/ana.410300503 pmid:1763890

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
13. 13.↵
    2. Yamada M

    . Cerebral amyloid angiopathy: emerging concepts. J Stroke 2015;17:17–30 doi:10.5853/jos.2015.17.1.17 pmid:25692104

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Linn J,
    3. Halpin A,
    4. Demaerel P, et al

    . Prevalence of superficial siderosis in patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Neurology 2010;74:1346–50 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181dad605 pmid:20421578

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
15. 15.↵
    2. Smith EE,
    3. Eichler F

    . Cerebral amyloid angiopathy and lobar intracerebral hemorrhage. Arch Neurol 2006;63:148–51 doi:10.1001/archneur.63.1.148 pmid:16401753

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    2. Milner E,
    3. Zhou ML,
    4. Johnson AW, et al

    . Cerebral amyloid angiopathy increases susceptibility to infarction after focal cerebral ischemia in Tg2576 mice. Stroke 2014;45:3064–69 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006078 pmid:25190447

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    2. van Veluw SJ,
    3. Charidimou A,
    4. van der Kouwe AJ, et al

    . Microbleed and microinfarct detection in amyloid angiopathy: a high-resolution MRI-histopathology study. Brain 2016;139:3151–62 doi:10.1093/brain/aww229 pmid:27645801

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    2. Lauer A,
    3. van Veluw SJ,
    4. William CM, et al

    . Microbleeds on MRI are associated with microinfarcts on autopsy in cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Neurology 2016;87:1488–92 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000003184 pmid:27613583

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    2. Fotiadis P,
    3. van Rooden S,
    4. van der Grond J, et al

    . Cortical atrophy in patients with cerebral amyloid angiopathy: a case-control study. Lancet Neurol 2016;15:811–19 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(16)30030-8 pmid:27180034

    CrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    2. Cheng AL,
    3. Batool S,
    4. McCreary CR, et al

    . Susceptibility-weighted imaging is more reliable than T2*-weighted gradient-recalled echo MRI for detecting microbleeds. Stroke 2013;44:2782–86 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002267 pmid:23920014

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    2. Greenberg SM,
    3. Vonsattel JP

    . Diagnosis of cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Sensitivity and specificity of cortical biopsy. Stroke 1997;28:1418–22 doi:10.1161/01.str.28.7.1418 pmid:9227694

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    2. Ter Telgte A,
    3. Scherlek AA,
    4. Reijmer YD, et al

    . Histopathology of diffusion-weighted imaging-positive lesions in cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Acta Neuropathol 2020;139:799–812 doi:10.1007/s00401-020-02140-y pmid:32108259

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    2. Hecht M,
    3. Kramer LM,
    4. von Arnim CAF, et al

    . Capillary cerebral amyloid angiopathy in Alzheimer's disease: association with allocortical/hippocampal microinfarcts and cognitive decline. Acta Neuropathol 2018;135:681–94 doi:10.1007/s00401-018-1834-y pmid:29574591

    CrossRefPubMed
24. 24.↵
    2. Li L,
    3. Miller KL,
    4. Jezzard P

    . DANTE-prepared pulse trains: a novel approach to motion-sensitized and motion-suppressed quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med 2012;68:1423–38 doi:10.1002/mrm.24142 pmid:22246917

    CrossRefPubMed
25. 25.↵
    2. Sacco RL,
    3. Kasner SE,
    4. Broderick JP, et al

    . An updated definition of stroke for the 21st century: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2013;44:2064–89 doi:10.1161/STR.0b013e318296aeca pmid:23652265

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
26. 26.↵
    2. McNally JS,
    3. Kim SE,
    4. Yoon HC, et al

    . Carotid magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition with gradient-echo signal is associated with acute territorial cerebral ischemic events detected by diffusion-weighted MRI. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:376–82 doi:10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.111.967398 pmid:22495769

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
27. 27.↵
    2. Chou MC,
    3. Tzeng WS,
    4. Chung HW, et al

    . T2-enhanced tensor diffusion trace-weighted image in the detection of hyper-acute cerebral infarction: comparison with isotropic diffusion-weighted image. Eur J Radiol 2010;74:e89–e94 doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.04.023 pmid:19428210

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Samuels OB,
    3. Joseph GJ,
    4. Lynn MJ, et al

    . A standardized method for measuring intracranial arterial stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:643–46 pmid:10782772

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    2. Vittinghoff E,
    3. McCulloch CE

    . Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression. Am J Epidemiol 2007;165:710–18 doi:10.1093/aje/kwk052 pmid:17182981

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
30. 30.↵
    2. Vittinghoff EG,
    3. Shiboski SC,
    4. McCulloch CE

    . Regression Methods in Biostatistics: Linear, Logistic, Survival, and Repeated Measures Models. Springer-Verlag; 2005:134
31. 31.↵
    2. Royston P,
    3. Sauerbrei W

    . Bootstrap assessment of the stability of multivariate models. Stat Med 2009;9:547–70 doi:10.1177/1536867X0900900403 pmid:12590419

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    2. Sauerbrei W,
    3. Schumacher M

    . A bootstrap resampling procedure for model building: application to the Cox regression model. Stat Med 1992;11:2093–09 doi:10.1002/sim.4780111607 pmid:1293671

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
33. 33.↵
    2. Menon RS,
    3. Kidwell CS

    . Neuroimaging demonstration of evolving small vessel ischemic injury in cerebral amyloid angiopathy. Stroke 2009;40:e675-677–e677 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.109.552935 pmid:19850897

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    2. van Veluw SJ,
    3. Lauer A,
    4. Charidimou A, et al

    . Evolution of DWI lesions in cerebral amyloid angiopathy: evidence for ischemia. Neurology 2017;89:2136–42 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000004668 pmid:29070668

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
35. 35.↵
    2. Boulouis G,
    3. Charidimou A,
    4. Auriel E, et al

    . Intracranial atherosclerosis and cerebral small vessel disease in intracerebral hemorrhage patients. J Neurol Sci 2016;369:324–29 doi:10.1016/j.jns.2016.08.049 pmid:27653918

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    2. Honda K

    . Cerebral arterial occlusion did not promote the prevalence of cerebral amyloid angiopathy. J Alzheimers Dis 2016;54:269–74 doi:10.3233/JAD-160499 pmid:27497483

    CrossRefPubMed
37. 37.↵
    2. Eng JA,
    3. Frosch MP,
    4. Choi K, et al

    . Clinical manifestations of cerebral amyloid angiopathy-related inflammation. Ann Neurol 2004;55:250–56 doi:10.1002/ana.10810 pmid:14755729

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. 38.↵
    2. Sperling R,
    3. Salloway S,
    4. Brooks DJ, et al

    . Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities in patients with Alzheimer's disease treated with bapineuzumab: a retrospective analysis. Lancet Neurol 2012;11:241–49 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70015-7 pmid:22305802

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    2. Lassmann H

    . Pathogenic mechanisms associated with different clinical courses of multiple sclerosis. Front Immunol 2018;9:3116. doi:10.3389/fimmu.2018.03116 pmid:30687321

    CrossRefPubMed