Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Video Articles
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
  • Special Collections
    • AJNR Awards
    • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
    • Photon-Counting CT
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcasts
    • AJNR SCANtastic
    • Trainee Corner
    • MRI Safety Corner
    • Imaging Protocols
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Submit a Video Article
    • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Statistical Tips
    • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Author Policies
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Board Alumni
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

AJNR is seeking candidates for the AJNR Podcast Editor. Read the position description.

Research ArticleADULT BRAIN
Open Access

Regional Frontal Perfusion Deficits in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis with Cognitive Decline

R. Vitorino, S.-P. Hojjat, C.G. Cantrell, A. Feinstein, L. Zhang, L. Lee, P. O'Connor, T.J. Carroll and R.I. Aviv
American Journal of Neuroradiology October 2016, 37 (10) 1800-1807; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4824
R. Vitorino
cMedical Imaging (R.V., S.-P.H., L.Z., R.I.A.), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for R. Vitorino
S.-P. Hojjat
cMedical Imaging (R.V., S.-P.H., L.Z., R.I.A.), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
fMedical Imaging (S.-P.H., R.I.A.), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for S.-P. Hojjat
C.G. Cantrell
gDepartments of Biomedical Engineering (C.G.C., T.J.C)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for C.G. Cantrell
A. Feinstein
aFrom the Departments of Psychiatry (A.F.)
ePsychiatry (A.F.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for A. Feinstein
L. Zhang
cMedical Imaging (R.V., S.-P.H., L.Z., R.I.A.), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L. Zhang
L. Lee
bNeurology (L.L.)
dDepartments of Medicine (L.L., P.O.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L. Lee
P. O'Connor
dDepartments of Medicine (L.L., P.O.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for P. O'Connor
T.J. Carroll
gDepartments of Biomedical Engineering (C.G.C., T.J.C)
hRadiology (T.J.C.), Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for T.J. Carroll
R.I. Aviv
cMedical Imaging (R.V., S.-P.H., L.Z., R.I.A.), Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
fMedical Imaging (S.-P.H., R.I.A.), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for R.I. Aviv
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cortical dysfunction, quantifiable by cerebral perfusion techniques, is prevalent in patients with MS, contributing to cognitive impairment. We sought to localize perfusion distribution differences in patients with relapsing-remitting MS with and without cognitive impairment and healthy controls.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with relapsing-remitting MS (20 cognitively impaired, 19 nonimpaired) and 19 age- and sex-matched healthy controls underwent a neurocognitive battery and MR imaging. Voxel-based analysis compared regional deep and cortical GM perfusion and volume among the cohorts.

RESULTS: After we adjusted for localized volumetric differences in the right frontal, temporal, and occipital lobes, progressive CBF and CBV deficits were present in the left middle frontal cortex for all cohorts and in the left superior frontal gyrus for patients with cognitive impairment compared with patients without impairment and controls. Compared with healthy controls, reduced CBF was present in the limbic regions of patients with cognitive impairment, and reduced CBV was present in the right middle frontal gyrus in patients with cognitive impairment and in the temporal gyrus of relapsing-remitting MS patients without cognitive impairment.

CONCLUSIONS: Consistent regional frontal cortical perfusion deficits are present in patients with relapsing-remitting MS, with more widespread hypoperfusion in those with cognitive impairment, independent of structural differences, indicating that cortical perfusion may be a useful biomarker of cortical dysfunction and cognitive impairment in MS.

ABBREVIATIONS:

BA
Brodmann area
DARTEL
Diffeomorphic Anatomical Registration Through Exponentiated Lie Algebra
HC
healthy controls
MNI
Montreal Neurological Institute
qCBF
quantitative cerebral blood flow
qCBV
quantitative cerebral blood volume
RRMS
relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis
VBM
voxel-based morphometry

MS is traditionally considered a demyelinating-inflammatory WM disorder; however, GM involvement is recognized in 50%–93% of patients,1,2 contributing to cognitive impairment, which is present in 40%–68% of cases.3,4 Patients with MS may display deficits in several cognitive domains, including working memory, learning and memory retrieval, executive function, and especially information-processing speed.2,5

Multiple studies have quantified the relative contributions of WM T2 hyperintense lesions and, to a lesser extent, GM cortical lesions to cognition in MS. The relationship between WM T2 hyperintense lesion burden and cognitive impairment is modest,6 and GM and WM damage may occur interdependently,1 with cortical abnormalities reported in the absence of WM disease.7 Both atrophy and cortical lesion load are important predictors of cognitive deficits in patients with MS5; nevertheless, cortical lesion burden is increasingly reported as a stronger and independent predictor of cognitive performance in comparison with cortical volume.8

Current clinical imaging techniques used for cortical lesion detection, such as double inversion recovery, detect few lesions (around 18%) compared with histopathologic studies.9 Several studies have proposed new strategies to detect cortical abnormalities, including cortical lesion volume or more subtle ultrastructural (magnetization transfer ratio10,11 and DTI12,13) or perfusion abnormalities, in the clinical setting. GM is inherently sensitive to perfusion changes caused by both physiologic and pathologic alterations, due to its high vascularity and metabolic activity. Cortical perfusion can be evaluated with multiple imaging techniques, including fMRI, arterial spin-labeling, and gadolinium-based MR imaging techniques, such as DSC, which is the most widely performed clinical perfusion technique. By using pre- and postgadolinium scans to calibrate DSC, the bookend technique offers accurate cerebral perfusion quantification with high PET correlation and interobserver reliability.14,15

Previous perfusion studies have shown that regardless of MS clinical subtype, cerebral hypoperfusion is an early and integral occurrence,16,17 including in early relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS), in which reduction may be seen in the absence of structural differences compared with healthy controls (HC).18 Studies explicitly exploring cognitive impairment in both RRMS and secondary-progressive MS describe significant and focal frontal cortical correlations between CBV and CBF reductions and cognitive deficits.16,19⇓–21

In the present study, we sought to localize CBF and CBV in HC and RRMS patients with and without cognitive impairment to determine whether a similar pattern of involvement is present compared with that previously reported for secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis. We hypothesized that patients with RRMS with cognitive impairment similarly exhibit localized frontal cerebral CBF and CBV reduction in functionally consistent brain regions, compared with patients without impairment and HC. We further evaluated the consistency of the localized findings before and after accounting for any structural group differences.

Materials and Methods

Patient Cohort

Thirty-nine patients with RRMS (modified McDonald criteria, 201022) were prospectively recruited during a 1-year period from 2 tertiary referral MS clinics at Sunnybrook and St. Michael's hospitals. Initially, 20 patients with cognitive impairment were recruited followed by the remaining patients without impairment and 19 HC (with no previous history of neurologic disorders) who were selected to reflect the overall distribution of sex and age of the impaired cohort. Charts of potential patients were reviewed by a senior neurologist (20 years' experience) before recruitment. Exclusion criteria included relapse or corticosteroid use within the past 3 months; history of drug/alcohol abuse; premorbid (pre-MS) psychiatric history; head injury, including loss of consciousness; concurrent morbidity; and MR imaging/gadolinium contraindications. All study participants were purposely recruited for this study. At the time of consent, the small potential risks associated with gadolinium injection were discussed, referencing American College of Radiology and FDA communications. Consent was obtained following confirmation of MR imaging (and gadolinium) eligibility on the basis of a standardized MR imaging contraindication questionnaire and glomerular filtration rate determination. The study was approved by the research ethics board of both Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and St. Michael's Hospital, and informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Neurocognitive Testing

All patients underwent clinical assessments within 1 week of image acquisition, documenting demographic data and medical history, including relapse history. Disability was assessed by using the Expanded Disability Status Scale.23 All participants were tested by using the Minimal Assessment of Cognitive Function in Multiple Sclerosis battery covering 5 cognitive domains: working memory and processing speed (Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test; Symbol Digit Modalities Test); learning and memory (Brief Visual Memory Test-Revised; California Verbal Learning Test-II); executive function (Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System); verbal fluency (Controlled Word Association Test); and visuospatial perception (Judgment of Line Orientations).24 Raw scores of each individual test were converted to z scores by using widely available normative data, which correct for age and sex. Norms for 3 of the key components of the neurocognitive battery (Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test; Symbol Digit Modalities Test; Controlled Word Association Test) also correct for education. Patients scoring 1.5 SDs below normative data on ≥2 cognitive tests were considered cognitively impaired.25 The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was also administered.

MR Imaging Acquisition

All scans were acquired on a 3T MR imaging system (Achieva; Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands) with an 8-channel phased array head coil receiver. Conventional MR imaging sequences were acquired for structural and lesion characterization, including axial volumetric TSE T1 (TR/TE/flip angle = 9.5/2.3 ms/12°; FOV = 24 cm; acquisition matrix = 256 × 219; section thickness = 1.2 mm); axial proton-density/T2 (TR/TE/flip angle = 2500/10.7 ms/90°; FOV = 23 cm; acquisition matrix = 256 × 263; section thickness = 3 mm); axial phase-sensitive inversion recovery (TR/TE = 3374/15 ms; FOV = 23 cm; acquisition matrix = 400 × 255; section thickness = 3 mm); and axial field-echo echo-planar DSC (TR/TE/flip angle = 1633/30 ms/60°; FOV = 22 cm; acquisition matrix = 96 × 93; section thickness = 4 mm; no gap; signal bandwidth = 1260 Hz/pixel; sections = 24). A segmented inversion recovery Look-Locker EPI sequence was performed immediately before and after the axial DSC sequence (TR/TE/flip angle = 29/14 ms/20°; TI = 15.8 ms; FOV = 22 cm; acquisition matrix = 128 × 126; 15 lines in k-space per acquisition; section thickness = 4 mm; 60 time points). Ten milliliters of 1 mmol/mL concentration of gadobutrol (Gadovist; Bayer Schering Pharma, Berlin, Germany) was administered by power injector at a rate of 5 mL/s, followed by a 25-mL bolus of saline at 5 mL/s. Sixty images were acquired at 1.6-second intervals with the injection occurring at the fifth volume. A 3-second delay was placed after the last imaging time point to facilitate longitudinal magnetization recovery.

Image Processing

Perfusion Maps.

Quantitative CBF (qCBF) and CBV (qCBV) maps were generated from the DSC and Look-Locker echo-planar images (T1-weighted pre- and postgadolinium reference scans) by using the bookend technique.15 Briefly, these Look-Locker EPI scans allow DSC calibration, independent of an arterial input function, by quantifying WM T1 signal changes relative to the blood pool to calculate the steady-state CBV in WM by using a water-correction factor to correct for intra- to extravascular water exchange. Deconvolution of tissue-concentration–time curves by the arterial input function by using singular value decomposition yields the relative CBF, while relative CBV is determined by calculating the ratio of the area under the tissue-concentration–time curve and the arterial input function. Final perfusion quantification of qCBV and qCBF is then performed as previously described.26

Lesion Load.

Structural T1- and proton-density/T2-weighted images were coregistered by using linear registration (SPM8 software; http://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/). Lesions were manually traced with Analyze 8.0 software (AnalyzeDirect, Overland Park, Kansas) by an experienced clinician (10 years' experience) by using phase-sensitive inversion recovery for cortical lesion tracing and proton-density/T2 and T1 scans for WM T2 hyperintense lesions and T1 black hole tracing, respectively.

Voxel-Based Morphometry Analysis.

Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis was performed in SPM8 by using Diffeomorphic Anatomical Registration Through Exponentiated Lie Algebra (DARTEL) and the unified segmentation model for structural and perfusion images, respectively.27,28

Structural VBM.

T1 structural images were segmented by using both a unified segmentation model and DARTEL functions in SPM8 and then checked for accuracy. A group-specific template was created by using the DARTEL space segmentations. Each participant's native space segmentations were registered to this template with a nonlinear transformation; then they were affine-transformed into Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI, McGill University) space before being smoothed with an 8-mm full width at half maximum isotropic Gaussian kernel. The segmentations were aligned to MNI152 space via the DARTEL template by using the same transformations in a single step.

Perfusion VBM.

A mean DSC series was constructed for each patient by averaging the 60 EPI DSC acquisitions and then normalizing them to MNI152 space by using SPM8. A group-specific perfusion template was then created in MNI space. The DSC sequence was linearly registered to the group template by using the FMRIB Linear Image Registration Tool (FLIRT; http://www.fmrib.ox.ac.uk) followed by nonlinear intensity modulation and multiresolution nonlinear registration with 4 subsampling levels (FMRIB Nonlinear Registration Tool, FNIRT; http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsl/fslwiki/FNIRT).29 These sequences were smoothed at each respective resolution level during the registration by using full width at half maximum Gaussian kernels of 6, 4, 2, and 2 mm. This transformation matrix was then applied to the intrinsically coregistered bookend perfusion maps of qCBF and qCBV.

Statistical Analysis

Clinical and Demographic Measures.

Demographic, neurologic, and neuropsychological data were summarized in HC and patients with RRMS with and without cognitive impairment by using means and SDs for continuous variables and counts for categoric variables. Statistical Analysis Software (SAS, Version 9.4; SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) was used to compare each clinical, demographic, and volumetric measure among the 3 groups; general linear regression or logistic regression analysis was applied for continuous or categoric variables. Any variables demonstrating significant group differences (P < .017, P < .05 corrected for multiple comparisons among the 3 cohorts) were included as covariates for the respective mass univariate analysis.

VBM Analysis.

Perfusion maps and structural images were compared by using the mass univariate technique used by SPM. On the basis of previous research,16,19 we hypothesized cortical perfusion changes in the frontal cortex. With this a priori hypothesis, VBM analysis was restricted to GM and clusters with ≥20 contiguous voxels, with a voxelwise P value threshold of P < .001 considered significant. VBM analysis was repeated for perfusion measures with structural findings as covariates. Brain regions identified by SPM as statistically significant were identified by using xjView software 8.12 (http://www.alivelearn.net/xjview).

Results

Demographic, Clinical, and Volumetric Data

Demographic, clinical, and volumetric data are summarized in Table 1. Similar group characteristics were present with the exception of lower education in patients with RRMS with cognitive impairment compared with HC (P = .004). RRMS patients with and without cognitive impairment scored higher on the anxiety measure than HC (P = .0004 and P = .012, respectively), and patients with cognitive impairment also showed higher depression scores compared with those with RRMS without impairment and HC (P < .0001, P = .0001). Furthermore, patients with cognitive impairment were more functionally disabled compared with those without impairment (P = .014) as measured by the Expanded Disability Status Scale. With respect to structural/volumetric differences, patients with RRMS with cognitive impairment had a reduction in WM (P = .008) and thalamic volume (P = .014).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Demographic, neurologic, and neuropsychological data of healthy controls and patients with RRMSa

Neurocognitive Performance

There was no difference in cognitive performance between HC and those with nonimpaired RRMS. Patients with RRMS with cognitive impairment performed significantly worse on all cognitive tests compared with both HC and those without impairment (Table 1), except for the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System and the Judgment of Line Orientations test.

VBM Data (Perfusion and Structural)

Mass univariate SPM analysis detected significantly reduced qCBF and qCBV in the left middle frontal gyrus (encompassing Brodmann areas [BAs] 10, 11, 46) for all group comparisons (Puncorrected < .001). Patients with cognitive impairment showed qCBF and qCBV reduction compared with those with RRMS without impairment and HC in the bilateral superior frontal gyrus (BAs 6, 8, 10), left fusiform gyrus (BA 20), and right limbic lobe, including the cingulate gyrus (BA 24).

Compared with unimpaired RRMS, those with RRMS and cognitive impairment showed lower qCBF in the left thalamus (including the medial dorsal nuclei) and lower qCBV in the right anterior cingulate (BA 25), left posterior cingulate (BA 31), right inferior parietal lobule (BA 40), right lingual gyrus, and left caudate. Furthermore, those with RRMS and cognitive impairment showed qCBF reductions compared with HC in the right middle frontal gyrus (BA 6, 10) and qCBV deficits in the right precentral (BA 4) and right parahippocampal gyri (BA 28).

Regional volume of the right superior frontal gyrus (BA 6, 10) was decreased in those with cognitively impaired RRMS compared with those without it, and those without impairment compared with healthy controls. Additionally, patients with RRMS and cognitive impairment showed focal atrophy in the right precentral (BA 6) and transtemporal gyri (BA 42) compared with patients with nonimpaired RRMS and in the right inferior occipital gyrus (BA 18) compared with HC.

VBM analysis conducted with regional volumes of focal atrophy included as covariates found that cortical hypoperfusion (qCBF and qCBV) was maintained in the left middle frontal gyrus (BAs 10, 11, 46) for all group comparisons and in the left superior frontal gyrus (BAs 6, 10) for patients with RRMS and cognitive impairment compared with both patients without impairment and HC (Figure and Table 2). Patients with cognitive impairment continued showing qCBV deficits in the right lingual gyrus (with additional qCBF reduction in the left BA 18), right inferior parietal lobule (BA 40), and left fusiform gyrus (BA 20) and qCBF reductions in the caudate head and thalamic medial dorsal nuclei in comparison with those with RRMS without impairment, and decreased qCBF in the right middle frontal gyrus (BA 6) and decreased qCBV in the left parahippocampal gyrus (BA 28) in comparison with HC. Reduced qCBV in cognitively impaired compared with nonimpaired patients with RRMS was present in the left inferior frontal gyrus (BA 46) and diminished qCBF, in the right caudate body. Compared with HC, patients without impairment showed reduced qCBF in the superior temporal lobe (BA 38).

FIGURE.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE.

Areas of significantly (Puncorrected < .001) reduced cortical perfusion in RRMS subgroups and healthy controls, with volumes for atrophied regions added as covariates. Green indicates healthy controls versus nonimpaired RRMS; red, healthy controls versus cognitively impaired RRMS; and yellow, nonimpaired RRMS versus cognitively impaired RRMS.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Areas of significantly (Puncorrected < .001) reduced cortical perfusion in RRMS subgroups and healthy controls, with volumes for atrophied regions added as covariates

Discussion

Consistent perfusion deficits in the frontal cortex are present in patients with RRMS independent of global or regional atrophy. Significantly different and progressive qCBF and qCBV reduction among all groups was demonstrated in the middle frontal cortex and the left superior frontal gyrus in the impaired RRMS compared with the other 2 cohorts, after considering confounding variables of disability, anxiety, depression, and education. Patients with RRMS and HC were further distinguished by qCBV reductions in the right limbic and qCBF reductions in the right frontal (for impaired) and right temporal region (for nonimpaired). Finally, qCBV deficits were found in cognitively impaired compared with nonimpaired patients with RRMS in the left frontal (inferior frontal gyrus), right parietal (inferior parietal lobule), left temporal (fusiform gyrus), and bilateral occipital (lingual gyrus) lobes, and qCBF deficits, in deep GM structures, including the bilateral caudate and the left thalamus (medial dorsal nuclei).

Distribution of qCBF and qCBV reductions in the superior frontal, middle frontal, and parahippocampal gyri is similar to that reported in a recent pseudocontinuous arterial spin-labeling study comparing HC and patients with very early RRMS.18 That study also showed additional qCBF reduction in multiple other areas not demonstrated in the present study; however, the discrepancies could be explained by different MR imaging techniques (pseudocontinuous arterial spin-labeling versus bookend perfusion) and patient populations. Unlike findings in our RRMS patients without impairment, who are cognitively indistinguishable from healthy controls, Debernard et al18 reported a borderline significant Brief Visuospatial Test reduction and demonstrated a lower white matter volume in their early RRMS cohort, suggesting a greater level of disease burden in the patient sample (supported by a higher upper Expanded Disability Status Scale score of 4.5 compared with 3.5 in our sample). In contrast to that study, we demonstrated regional cortical GM volume reduction within the right frontal, temporal, and occipital lobes consistent with that observed by Riccitelli et al.30 Reduced superior frontal gyrus, thalamic, and caudate nuclei perfusion was similarly reported in a secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis with cognitive impairment patient cohort, suggesting that the frontal reduction may be a marker of impairment in patients with both RRMS and secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis, even after controlling for structural differences.19

The frontal areas, BAs 6, 10, and 46, affected in our patients with RRMS, are responsible for memory processing, particularly working memory, memory encoding, and retrieval.31,32 Several studies relate BA 10 with prospective memory and “intentional forgetting,” suggesting involvement of BA 10 in controlling and manipulating memory.32,33 BA 46 activation is associated with working memory processes and memory manipulation.31,33 It has been assumed that working memory is involved in a diversity of cognitive processes, including planning,34 reasoning,35 and problem-solving.36 On the other hand, involvement of BA 6 in memory and attention may be due to the activation of an extended brain network in which the middle frontal gyrus has a fundamental task in memory strategy organization and memory control.37 Hypoperfusion (qCBF and qCBV) in the left middle frontal and right superior temporal gyri with preservation of perfusion within the remaining medial prefrontal cortex in patients with RRMS who are nonimpaired compared with those who are cognitively impaired likely reflects increased cortical plasticity, because the medial prefrontal cortex has been previously shown to adaptively compensate for functional impairment in patients with MS.38 Patients with RRMS and secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis performing a processing speed and attention task (Counting Stroop Task) were found to have activation predominantly in the left medial frontal region (left middle frontal gyrus/superior frontal sulcus and bilateral superior frontal gyri, corresponding to BAs 8, 9, 10), while HC had greater right frontal activation (inferior frontal gyrus, BA 45; and right basal ganglia).38

Last, BAs 28 and 38 are also implicated in memory, particularly nonverbal memory (right parahippocampal gyrus)39 and multimodal memory retrieval (superior temporal gyrus).40 Supporting the validity of the structural and progressive perfusion differences in patients with RRMS with cognitive impairment described above, significant impairment in working memory (Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test and Symbol Digit Modalities Test), visual and verbal learning, and memory retrieval (Brief Visual Memory Test-Revised and California Verbal Learning Test-II) was present compared with patients who were nonimpaired and HC.

Our VBM analysis by necessity controlled for a number of important potential confounding covariates; for example, the effect of depression was accounted for by the inclusion of Hosptial Anxiety and Depression Scale. Differing educational levels among cohorts was accounted for by the “normalization” of raw neurocognitive battery scores against representative population datasets. Cortical lesions and, to a lesser extent, T2 hyperintense lesion burden are both implicated in cognitive impairment of patients with MS. Comparisons between patient groups and HC included lesion volumes as covariates in our VBM analysis. However, no significant difference in lesion burden was present between MS groups, precluding a quid pro quo comparison.

Cerebral blood volume (amount of blood in 100 g of brain tissue) and blood flow (amount of blood flowing through 100 g of brain tissue per minute) abnormalities are found in a number of neurologic conditions such as stroke, characterized by ischemia. The physiopathology leading to cerebral hypoperfusion is unknown and may be multifactorial. While evidence does not support a primary neuronal loss mechanism given multiple findings of reduced cortical perfusion in the absence of GM volume loss,16,18,19 mitochondrial disturbances and vascular abnormalities have been implicated in cerebral hypoperfusion in MS. Mitochondrial dysfunction can contribute to cerebral hypoperfusion in the form of a diminished mitochondrial capacity resulting from reductions in gene products specific for the mitochondrial electron transport chain41 or due to intra-axonal mitochondrial pathology triggered by macrophage-derived reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, which may precede axonal damage.42 Cerebral hypoperfusion can also be secondary to vascular abnormalities. Increased levels of endothelin-1, a potent vasoconstrictive peptide, are found in patients with MS, suggesting that cerebral blood flow reductions are mediated by elevated levels of this peptide.43 Astrocytes of patients with MS are deficient in the β2-adrenergic receptor, resulting in cellular metabolic dysfunction affecting potassium uptake after synaptic activity and its subsequent release to the perivascular space, thus reducing arteriolar vasodilation.44

Venous changes are also well-described in MS; and given that venous capacitance accounts for approximately 70% of CBV, pathologies that decrease venous capacitance should greatly impact qCBV. For example, Ge et al45 demonstrated reduced visibility of periventricular venous vasculature in patients with MS by using susceptibility-weighted imaging. The authors suggested that this reduction could be attributable to decreased vein number or size secondary to venous occlusion and perivenular inflammation. Such pathology could also be driven by obliterative vasculitis, which preferentially disrupts venous changes.46,47 Additionally, intrastriatal injections of proinflammatory cytokine tumor necrosis factor-α, found elevated in MS brains,48 in rat models resulted in significant reductions of cerebral blood flow.49 Cerebral hypoperfusion is characterized by both blood flow and volume changes, and these perfusion metrics may be differentially affected by the physiopathologic methods proposed. Additional studies should be conducted to explore the differences in cerebral blood flow and volume and their relation to physiopathology.

Limitations include the need for contrast agent injection required for DSC perfusion, precluding its use in patients with contraindications such as renal impairment. DSC is a relatively low-resolution technique in comparison with structural imaging but comparable with other functional techniques such as diffusion tensor and arterial spin-labeling techniques, which were previously applied to MS. DSC enables whole-brain scanning in approximately 2 minutes, therefore, minimally prolonging scanning time with higher signal-to-noise than arterial spin-labeling. Because the classes of disease-modifying drugs were evenly represented in both cognitively impaired and nonimpaired groups, we did not adjust for this factor. However, given that the effects of such treatments on cortical perfusion abnormalities are unclear, it would be prudent to adjust for disease-modifying drugs in future studies if difference occurs. Similarly, fatigue, experienced by 78%–90% of patients with MS,50 may be associated with impaired cognitive function and should be accounted for in future studies.51 Despite the relatively small sample size, consistent frontal perfusion deficits were demonstrated in our RRMS sample. According to our a priori hypothesis, this comparison was uncorrected but included several confounders. These results should be validated in a larger patient cohort. Longitudinal studies would also be helpful in determining whether perfusion measurements are sensitive to disease progression.

Conclusions

Consistent regional frontal cortical perfusion deficits are found in patients with RRMS, with more widespread hypoperfusion in cognitively impaired RRMS, independent of structural differences. Our findings suggest a potential role for cortical perfusion as a useful biomarker of cortical dysfunction and cognitive impairment in MS.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Charles G. Cantrell—RELATED: Grant: American Heart Association (14PRE20380810).* Liesly Lee—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Biogen Canada, Novartis Canada, Genyzme Canada, Teva Neurosciences, Serono Canada, Comments: advisory board member; Payment for Manuscript Preparation: Biogen Canada, Comments: publication of review article; Travel/Accommodations/Meeting Expenses Unrelated to Activities Listed: Biogen Canada, Novartis Canada, Comments: travel to conferences and advisory boards; OTHER: Biogen Canada,* Novartis Canada,* Teva Neurosciences,* Comments: clinical trial funding. Timothy J. Carroll—RELATED: Grant: National Institutes of Health,* Comments: I hold a National Institutes of Health research grant related to cerebral perfusion; UNRELATED: Grants/Grants Pending: National Institutes of Health,* American Hospital Association,* Comments: In addition to the National Institutes of Health and American Hospital Association grants that support this work, I have research grants that are independent of the work presented in this article. Richard I. Aviv—RELATED: Grant: Canadian Institutes of Health Research,* Biogen.* *Money paid to the institution.

  • Dr. Aviv was supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research operating grant (130366). Drs. Aviv and Hojjat are supported by a Biogen Fellowship Funding Award. Charles Cantrell is supported by the American Heart Association (14PRE20380310). Dr. Carroll is supported by the US National Institutes of Health (1R21EB017928-01A1).

Indicates open access to non-subscribers at www.ajnr.org

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Calabrese M,
    2. De Stefano N,
    3. Atzori M, et al
    . Detection of cortical inflammatory lesions by double inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging in patients with multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2007;64:1416–22 doi:10.1001/archneur.64.10.1416 pmid:17923625
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Calabrese M,
    2. Rocca MA,
    3. Atzori M, et al
    . A 3-year magnetic resonance imaging study of cortical lesions in relapse-onset multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 2010;67:376–83 doi:10.1002/ana.21906 pmid:20373349
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Deloire MS,
    2. Salort E,
    3. Bonnet M, et al
    . Cognitive impairment as marker of diffuse brain abnormalities in early relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2005;76:519–26 doi:10.1136/jnnp.2004.045872 pmid:15774439
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Heaton RK,
    2. Nelson LM,
    3. Thompson DS, et al
    . Neuropsychological findings in relapsing-remitting and chronic-progressive multiple sclerosis. J Consult Clin Psychol 1985;53:103–10 doi:10.1037/0022-006X.53.1.103 pmid:3980815
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Calabrese M,
    2. Agosta F,
    3. Rinaldi F, et al
    . Cortical lesions and atrophy associated with cognitive impairment in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2009;66:1144–50 pmid:19752305
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Rao SM,
    2. Leo GJ,
    3. Bernardin L, et al
    . Cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis, I: frequency, patterns, and prediction. Neurology 1991;41:685–91 doi:10.1212/WNL.41.5.685 pmid:2027484
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Calabrese M,
    2. Gallo P
    . Magnetic resonance evidence of cortical onset of multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2009;15:933–41 doi:10.1177/1352458509106510 pmid:19667021
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Calabrese M,
    2. Poretto V,
    3. Favaretto A, et al
    . Cortical lesion load associates with progression of disability in multiple sclerosis. Brain 2012;135(pt 10):2952–61 doi:10.1093/brain/aws246 pmid:23065788
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Seewann A,
    2. Enzinger C,
    3. Filippi M, et al
    . MRI characteristics of atypical idiopathic inflammatory demyelinating lesions of the brain: a review of reported findings. J Neurol 2008;255:1–10 pmid:18004634
    PubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Tardif CL,
    2. Bedell BJ,
    3. Eskildsen SF, et al
    . Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of cortical multiple sclerosis pathology. Mult Scler Int 2012;2012:742018 doi:10.1155/2012/742018 pmid:23213531
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Chen JT,
    2. Easley K,
    3. Schneider C, et al
    . Clinically feasible MTR is sensitive to cortical demyelination in MS. Neurology 2013;80:246–52 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e31827deb99 pmid:23269598
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Poonawalla AH,
    2. Hasan KM,
    3. Gupta RK, et al
    . Diffusion-tensor MR imaging of cortical lesions in multiple sclerosis: initial findings. Radiology 2008;246:880–86 doi:10.1148/radiol.2463070486 pmid:18195384
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Calabrese M,
    2. Rinaldi F,
    3. Seppi D, et al
    . Cortical diffusion-tensor imaging abnormalities in multiple sclerosis: a 3-year longitudinal study. Radiology 2011;261:891–98 doi:10.1148/radiol.11110195 pmid:22031708
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Shin W,
    2. Horowitz S,
    3. Ragin A, et al
    . Quantitative cerebral perfusion using dynamic susceptibility contrast MRI: evaluation of reproducibility and age- and gender-dependence with fully automatic image postprocessing algorithm. Magn Reson Med 2007;58:1232–41 doi:10.1002/mrm.21420 pmid:17969025
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Vakil P,
    2. Lee JJ,
    3. Mouannes-Srour JJ, et al
    . Cerebrovascular occlusive disease: quantitative cerebral blood flow using dynamic susceptibility contrast MR imaging correlates with quantitative H2[15O] PET. Radiology 2013;266:879–86 doi:10.1148/radiol.12120756 pmid:23297337
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Aviv RI,
    2. Francis PL,
    3. Tenenbein R, et al
    . Decreased frontal lobe gray matter perfusion in cognitively impaired patients with secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis detected by the bookend technique. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1779–85 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3060 pmid:22538071
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Rashid W,
    2. Parkes LM,
    3. Ingle GT, et al
    . Abnormalities of cerebral perfusion in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004;75:1288–93 doi:10.1136/jnnp.2003.026021 pmid:15314117
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  18. 18.↵
    1. Debernard L,
    2. Melzer TR,
    3. Van Stockum S, et al
    . Reduced grey matter perfusion without volume loss in early relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2014;85:544–51 doi:10.1136/jnnp-2013-305612 pmid:24039024
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Francis PL,
    2. Jakubovic R,
    3. O'Connor P, et al
    . Robust perfusion deficits in cognitively impaired patients with secondary-progressive multiple sclerosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:62–67 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3148 pmid:22700746
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Hojjat SP,
    2. C C,
    3. Vitorino R,
    4. Feinstein A, et al
    . Regional reduction in cortical blood flow among cognitively impaired adults with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients. Mult Scler 2016 Jan 11. [Epub ahead of print] pmid:26754799
  21. 21.↵
    1. Hojjat SP,
    2. C C,
    3. Carroll TJ,
    4. Vitorino R, et al
    . Perfusion reduction in the absence of structural differences in cognitively impaired versus unimpaired RRMS patients. Mult Sclel 2016 Feb 4. [Epub ahead of print] pmid:26846987
  22. 22.↵
    1. Polman CH,
    2. Reingold SC,
    3. Banwell B, et al
    . Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria. Ann Neurol 2011;69:292–302 doi:10.1002/ana.22366 pmid:21387374
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Kurtzke JF
    . Rating neurologic impairment in multiple sclerosis: an expanded disability status scale (EDSS). Neurology 1983;33:1444–52 doi:10.1212/WNL.33.11.1444 pmid:6685237
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Benedict RH,
    2. Fischer JS,
    3. Archibald CJ, et al
    . Minimal neuropsychological assessment of MS patients: a consensus approach. Clin Neuropsychol 2002;16:381–97 doi:10.1076/clin.16.3.381.13859 pmid:12607150
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Benedict RH,
    2. Bruce JM,
    3. Dwyer MG, et al
    . Neocortical atrophy, third ventricular width, and cognitive dysfunction in multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 2006;63:1301–06 doi:10.1001/archneur.63.9.1301 pmid:16966509
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Shah MK,
    2. Shin W,
    3. Parikh VS, et al
    . Quantitative cerebral MR perfusion imaging: preliminary results in stroke. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;32:796–802 doi:10.1002/jmri.22302 pmid:20882609
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Ashburner J,
    2. Friston KJ
    . Unified segmentation. Neuroimage 2005;26:839–51 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.02.018 pmid:15955494
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Ashburner J
    . A fast diffeomorphic image registration algorithm. Neuroimage 2007;38:95–113 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.07.007 pmid:17761438
    CrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.
    1. Jenkinson M,
    2. Beckmann CF,
    3. Behrens TE, et al
    . FSL. Neuroimage 2012;62:782–90 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.015 pmid:21979382
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Riccitelli G,
    2. Rocca MA,
    3. Pagani E, et al
    . Mapping regional grey and white matter atrophy in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler 2012;18:1027–37 doi:10.1177/1352458512439239 pmid:22422807
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Ranganath C,
    2. Johnson MK,
    3. D'Esposito M
    . Prefrontal activity associated with working memory and episodic long-term memory. Neuropsychologia 2003;41:378–89 doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(02)00169-0 pmid:12457762
    CrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Leung HC,
    2. Gore JC,
    3. Goldman-Rakic PS
    . Sustained mnemonic response in the human middle frontal gyrus during on-line storage of spatial memoranda. J Cogn Neurosci 2002;14:659–71 doi:10.1162/08989290260045882 pmid:12126506
    CrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Zhang JX,
    2. Leung HC,
    3. Johnson MK
    . Frontal activations associated with accessing and evaluating information in working memory: an fMRI study. Neuroimage 2003;20:1531–39 doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.07.016 pmid:14642465
    CrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Law AS,
    2. Trawley SL,
    3. Brown LA, et al
    . The impact of working memory load on task execution and online plan adjustment during multitasking in a virtual environment. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) 2013;66:1241–58 doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.748813 pmid:23234420
    CrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Suss HM,
    2. Oberauer K,
    3. Wittmann WW, et al
    . Working-memory capacity explains reasoning ability—and a little bit more. Intelligence 2002;30:161–288 doi:10.1016/S0160-2896(01)00100-3
    CrossRef
  36. 36.↵
    1. Wiley J,
    2. Jarosz AF
    . Working memory capacity, attentional focus, and problem solving. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2012;21:258–62 doi:10.1177/0963721412447622
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Haxby JV,
    2. Petit L,
    3. Ungerleider LG, et al
    . Distinguishing the functional roles of multiple regions in distributed neural systems for visual working memory. Neuroimage 2000;11(5 pt 1):380–91 doi:10.1006/nimg.2000.0592 pmid:10806025
    CrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. Parry AM,
    2. Scott RB,
    3. Palace J, et al
    . Potentially adaptive functional changes in cognitive processing for patients with multiple sclerosis and their acute modulation by rivastigmine. Brain 2003;126(pt 12):2750–60 doi:10.1093/brain/awg284 pmid:12958082
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    1. Köhler S,
    2. Black SE,
    3. Sinden M, et al
    . Memory impairments associated with hippocampal versus parahippocampal-gyrus atrophy: an MR volumetry study in Alzheimer's disease. Neuropsychologia 1998;36:901–14 doi:10.1016/S0028-3932(98)00017-7 pmid:9740363
    CrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Takashima A,
    2. Nieuwenhuis IL,
    3. Rijpkema M, et al
    . Memory trace stabilization leads to large-scale changes in the retrieval network: a functional MRI study on associative memory. Learn Mem 2007;14:472–79 doi:10.1101/lm.605607 pmid:17622649
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Dutta R,
    2. McDonough J,
    3. Yin X, et al
    . Mitochondrial dysfunction as a cause of axonal degeneration in multiple sclerosis patients. Ann Neurol 2006;59:478–89 doi:10.1002/ana.20736 pmid:16392116
    CrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Nikić I,
    2. Merkler D,
    3. Sorbara C, et al
    . A reversible form of axon damage in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis and multiple sclerosis. Nat Med 2011;17:495–99 doi:10.1038/nm.2324 pmid:21441916
    CrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. D'Haeseleer M,
    2. Hostenbach S,
    3. Peeters I, et al
    . Cerebral hypoperfusion: a new pathophysiologic concept in multiple sclerosis? J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2015;35:1406–10 doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2015.131 pmid:26104292
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. De Keyser J,
    2. Steen C,
    3. Mostert JP, et al
    . Hypoperfusion of the cerebral white matter in multiple sclerosis: possible mechanisms and pathophysiological significance. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 2008;28:1645–51 doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2008.72 pmid:18594554
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  45. 45.↵
    1. Ge Y,
    2. Zohrabian VM,
    3. Osa EO, et al
    . Diminished visibility of cerebral venous vasculature in multiple sclerosis by susceptibility-weighted imaging at 3.0 Tesla. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;29:1190–94 doi:10.1002/jmri.21758 pmid:19388109
    CrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Tanaka R,
    2. Iwasaki Y,
    3. Koprowski H
    . Ultrastructural studies of perivascular cuffing cells in multiple sclerosis brain. Am J Pathol 1975;81:467–78 pmid:1211421
    PubMed
  47. 47.↵
    1. Adams CW,
    2. Poston RN,
    3. Buk SJ, et al
    . Inflammatory vasculitis in multiple sclerosis. J Neurol Sci 1985;69:269–83 doi:10.1016/0022-510X(85)90139-X pmid:4031947
    CrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. Woodroofe MN,
    2. Cuzner ML
    . Cytokine mRNA expression in inflammatory multiple sclerosis lesions: detection by non-radioactive in situ hybridization. Cytokin 1993;5:583–88 pmid:8186370
    PubMed
  49. 49.↵
    1. Sibson NR,
    2. Blamire AM,
    3. Perry VH, et al
    . TNF-alpha reduces cerebral blood volume and disrupts tissue homeostasis via an endothelin- and TNFR2-dependent pathway. Brain 2002;125(pt 11):2446–59 doi:10.1093/brain/awf256 pmid:12390971
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.↵
    1. Fisk JD,
    2. Pontefract A,
    3. Ritvo PG, et al
    . The impact of fatigue on patients with multiple sclerosis. Can J Neurol Sci 1994;21:9–14 doi:10.1017/S0317167100048691 pmid:8180914
    CrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    1. Krupp LB,
    2. Elkins LE
    . Fatigue and declines in cognitive functioning in multiple sclerosis. Neurology 2000;55:934–39 doi:10.1212/WNL.55.7.934, doi:10.1212/WNL.55.7.934-a pmid:11061247
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  • Received January 6, 2016.
  • Accepted after revision March 17, 2016.
  • © 2016 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 37 (10)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 37, Issue 10
1 Oct 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Regional Frontal Perfusion Deficits in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis with Cognitive Decline
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
R. Vitorino, S.-P. Hojjat, C.G. Cantrell, A. Feinstein, L. Zhang, L. Lee, P. O'Connor, T.J. Carroll, R.I. Aviv
Regional Frontal Perfusion Deficits in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis with Cognitive Decline
American Journal of Neuroradiology Oct 2016, 37 (10) 1800-1807; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4824

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Regional Frontal Perfusion Deficits in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis with Cognitive Decline
R. Vitorino, S.-P. Hojjat, C.G. Cantrell, A. Feinstein, L. Zhang, L. Lee, P. O'Connor, T.J. Carroll, R.I. Aviv
American Journal of Neuroradiology Oct 2016, 37 (10) 1800-1807; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4824
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Resting state functional connectivity in relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis with mild disability - a data driven, whole brain multivoxel pattern analysis study
  • Enrichment of disease-associated genes in cortical areas defined by transcriptome-based parcellation
  • Crossref (16)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging towards clinical application in multiple sclerosis
    Cristina Granziera, Jens Wuerfel, Frederik Barkhof, Massimiliano Calabrese, Nicola De Stefano, Christian Enzinger, Nikos Evangelou, Massimo Filippi, Jeroen J G Geurts, Daniel S Reich, Maria A Rocca, Stefan Ropele, Àlex Rovira, Pascal Sati, Ahmed T Toosy, Hugo Vrenken, Claudia A M Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott, Ludwig Kappos, F Barkhof, N de Stefano, J Sastre-Garriga, O Ciccarelli, C Enzinger, M Filippi, Claudio Gasperini, L Kappos, J Palace, H Vrenken, À Rovira, M A Rocca, T Yousry
    Brain 2021 144 5
  • Does cognitive reserve play any role in multiple sclerosis? A meta-analytic study
    Gabriella Santangelo, Manuela Altieri, Antonio Gallo, Luigi Trojano
    Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders 2019 30
  • Vascular aspects of multiple sclerosis: emphasis on perfusion and cardiovascular comorbidities
    Dejan Jakimovski, Matthew Topolski, Antonia Valentina Genovese, Bianca Weinstock - Guttman, Robert Zivadinov
    Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics 2019 19 5
  • Untargeted metabolomic analysis of plasma from relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis patients reveals changes in metabolites associated with structural changes in brain
    Duncan A. Sylvestre, Carolyn M. Slupsky, Richard I. Aviv, Walter Swardfager, Ameer Y. Taha
    Brain Research 2020 1732
  • Relationship between MRI perfusion and clinical severity in multiple sclerosis
    MariaMarcella Lagana, Laura Pelizzari, Francesca Baglio
    Neural Regeneration Research 2020 15 4
  • Protective potential of dimethyl fumarate in a mouse model of thalamocortical demyelination
    Manuela Cerina, Venu Narayanan, Anna Delank, Patrick Meuth, Stephanie Graebenitz, Kerstin Göbel, Alexander M. Herrmann, Stefanie Albrecht, Thiemo Daldrup, Thomas Seidenbecher, Ali Gorji, Tanja Kuhlmann, Heinz Wiendl, Christoph Kleinschnitz, Erwin J. Speckmann, Hans-Christian Pape, Sven G. Meuth, Thomas Budde
    Brain Structure and Function 2018 223 7
  • Cortical and Deep Gray Matter Perfusion Associations With Physical and Cognitive Performance in Multiple Sclerosis Patients
    Dejan Jakimovski, Niels Bergsland, Michael G. Dwyer, John Traversone, Jesper Hagemeier, Tom A. Fuchs, Deepa P. Ramasamy, Bianca Weinstock-Guttman, Ralph H. B. Benedict, Robert Zivadinov
    Frontiers in Neurology 2020 11
  • Early perfusion changes in multiple sclerosis patients as assessed by MRI using arterial spin labeling
    Mar Jiménez de la Peña, Ignacio Casanova Peña, Pablo García-Polo García, Miguel López Gavilán, Norberto Malpica, Margarita Rubio, Rafael Arroyo González, Vicente Martínez de Vega
    Acta Radiologica Open 2019 8 12
  • Local functional connectivity of patients with acute and remitting multiple sclerosis
    Yanyan Zhu, Muhua Huang, Yanlin Zhao, Yixiu Pei, Yao Wang, Lei Wang, Ting He, Fuqing Zhou, Xianjun Zeng
    Medicine 2020 99 43
  • Quantitative Limbic System Mapping of Main Cognitive Domains in Multiple Sclerosis
    Zafer Keser, Khader M. Hasan, Benson Mwangi, Kyan Younes, Mahsa Khayat-Khoei, Arash Kamali, John A. Lincoln, Flavia M. Nelson
    Frontiers in Neurology 2018 9

More in this TOC Section

  • Diagnostic Neuroradiology of Monoclonal Antibodies
  • Clinical Outcomes After Chiari I Decompression
  • Segmentation of Brain Metastases with BLAST
Show more Adult Brain

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editor's Choice
  • Fellows' Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Video Articles

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • AJNR Awards
  • ASNR Foundation Special Collection
  • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Photon-Counting CT
  • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)

More from AJNR

  • Trainee Corner
  • Imaging Protocols
  • MRI Safety Corner

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcasts
  • AJNR Scantastics

Resources

  • Turnaround Time
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Submit a Video Article
  • Submit an eLetter to the Editor/Response
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Statistical Tips
  • Fast Publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Author Policies
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • News and Updates

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Editorial Board Alumni
  • Alerts
  • Permissions
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Advertise with Us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Feedback
  • Terms and Conditions
  • AJNR Editorial Board Alumni

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire