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

Clinicoradiologic Correlations of Cerebral Microbleeds in Advanced Age

I. Barnaure, M.-L. Montandon, C. Rodriguez, F. Herrmann, K.O. Lövblad, P. Giannakopoulos and S. Haller
American Journal of Neuroradiology January 2017, 38 (1) 39-45; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4956
I. Barnaure
aFrom the Division of Neuroradiology (I.B., K.O.L.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for I. Barnaure
M.-L. Montandon
bDepartment of Mental Health and Psychiatry (M.-L.M., C.R., P.G.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for M.-L. Montandon
C. Rodriguez
bDepartment of Mental Health and Psychiatry (M.-L.M., C.R., P.G.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for C. Rodriguez
F. Herrmann
cDepartments of Internal Medicine, Rehabilitation, and Geriatrics (F.H.), Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for F. Herrmann
K.O. Lövblad
aFrom the Division of Neuroradiology (I.B., K.O.L.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for K.O. Lövblad
P. Giannakopoulos
bDepartment of Mental Health and Psychiatry (M.-L.M., C.R., P.G.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for P. Giannakopoulos
S. Haller
dAffidea Centre de Diagnostique Radiologique de Carouge CDRC (S.H.), Geneva, Switzerland
eDepartments of Surgical Sciences and Radiology (S.H.), Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
fDepartment of Neuroradiology (S.H.), University Hospital Freiburg, Germany
gFaculty of Medicine (S.H.), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for S. Haller
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The presence of cerebral microbleeds has been associated with dementia and cognitive decline, although studies report conflicting results. Our aim was to determine the potential role of the presence and location of cerebral microbleeds in early stages of cognitive decline.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Baseline 3T MR imaging examinations including SWI sequences of 328 cognitively intact community-dwelling controls and 72 subjects with mild cognitive impairment were analyzed with respect to the presence and distribution of cerebral microbleeds. A neuropsychological follow-up of controls was performed at 18 months post inclusion and identified cases with subtle cognitive deficits were referred to as controls with a deteriorating condition. Group differences in radiologic parameters were studied by using nonparametric tests, 1-way analysis of variance, and Spearman correlation coefficients.

RESULTS: Cerebral microbleed prevalence was similar in subjects with mild cognitive impairment and controls with stable and cognitively deteriorating conditions (25%–31.9%). In all diagnostic groups, lobar cerebral microbleeds were more common. They occurred in 20.1% of all cases compared with 6.5% of cases with deep cerebral microbleeds. None of the investigated variables (age, sex, microbleed number, location and depth, baseline Mini-Mental State Examination score, and the Fazekas score) were significantly associated with cognitive deterioration with the exception of education of >12 years showing a slight but significant protective effect (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22–0.92; P = .028). The Mini-Mental State Examination and the Buschke total score were correlated with neither the total number nor lobar-versus-deep location of cerebral microbleeds.

CONCLUSIONS: Cerebral microbleed presence, location, and severity are not related to the early stages of cognitive decline in advanced age.

ABBREVIATIONS:

CDR
Clinical Dementia Rating scale
CMB
cerebral microbleed
dCON
control with a deteriorating condition
sCON
control with a stable condition
MCI
mild cognitive impairment
MMSE
Mini-Mental State Examination

Cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) are small, round, or ovoid lesions of the cerebral parenchyma of low signal intensity on T2*-weighted and susceptibility-weighted sequences, with a maximal diameter of 5–10 mm,1 corresponding histologically to focal accumulations of hemosiderin-containing macrophages.2 They can be found in healthy subjects, their prevalence increasing with age,3⇓–5 but are more frequent in patients with hypertensive encephalopathy and cerebral amyloid angiopathy.1,2 Microbleeds have been considered markers of small-vessel disease and are strongly associated with white matter hyperintensities.3,6,7 Both hypertensive small-vessel disease and cerebral amyloid angiopathy contribute to the formation of lobar CMBs, while CMBs located in the basal ganglia or infratentorial brain regions are mainly associated with hypertensive vasculopathy.8⇓⇓–11

Their impact on cognition is still a matter of debate. Several studies supported a deleterious effect of CMBs, including increased prevalence in vascular dementia but also in Alzheimer disease,3,12⇓–14 associations with poorer cognitive function in cross-sectional studies of patients with dementia,15 lower Aβ42 levels in the CSF in Alzheimer disease and vascular dementia,16 and decreased frontal-executive performances at 5-year follow-up in patients with stroke.17 However, negative data were also reported with no or marginal impact of CMBs in early Alzheimer disease (for a review see van der Flier18 and Heringa et al19) and in subjects with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment20 and symptomatic small-vessel disease.21

Data on mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are even more ambiguous. This entity was initially used to denote a functionally nondisabling amnestic disorder, but its definition has been recently expanded to include any form of cognitive problem that may increase the risk of clinically overt dementia. Certain studies postulated that CMBs are significantly associated with both MCI and the risk of conversion to Alzheimer disease (for a review see Loitfelder et al8 and Lei et al22). Other authors reported a significant association between amyloid deposition and lobar CMB occurrence in patients with MCI but without any relationship between their presence and early cognitive decline.23 Similarly, substantial formation of lobar but not deep and infratentorial microbleeds was associated with worse cognition in the Rotterdam Scan Study.24 The latter is a population-based study on age-related changes on brain MR imaging. Cross-sectional analysis of 3979 individuals without dementia from this cohort revealed that subjects with higher numbers of lobar microbleeds performed worse in tests exploring various cognitive domains, even after adjustments for vascular risk factors and brain atrophy.24

Most of the previous studies concerned cross-sectional case-control comparisons and did not explore whether CMBs may predict very early phases of cognitive deterioration in healthy controls. Furthermore, the location of CMBs that may be associated with the disruption of brain networks was rarely taken into account.19 The current investigation is based on the assumption that if CMBs reflect structural damage, their location should have an impact on the corresponding function affected. To determine the potential role of CMBs in early stages of cognitive decline before MCI, we evaluated both the number and location of CMBs in a large sample of 328 community-dwelling healthy controls who were cognitively intact. Imaging was performed at baseline, and cognitive status was determined on the basis of extensive neuropsychological testing both at baseline and at 18-month follow-up. The results were compared with a group of 72 fully documented patients with MCI recruited in the same geographic area.

Materials and Methods

Participants

Participants were contacted via advertisements in local media to guarantee a community-based sample. After detailed information about the research was provided, telephone screening was performed with the following inclusion criteria: normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity; no history of major medical disorders (neoplasm, cardiovascular disorders, infectious diseases), sustained head injury, or psychiatric or neurologic disorders; no alcohol or drug abuse; and no regular use of neuroleptics, antidepressants, mood stabilizers, anticonvulsant drugs, or psychostimulants. To control for the confounding effect of cerebrovascular diseases, we did not include patients with subtle cardiovascular symptoms, severe hypertension, and a history of stroke or transient ischemic episodes in the present study. Mild hypertension was present at baseline in 27% of the entire sample. The local ethics committee approved this prospective study, and all participants gave written informed consent before inclusion. The inclusion period for controls and those with MCI was from October 2010 to January 2011, when the present cohort was established in the context of a federally funded research project for identifying functional imaging and electroencephalography markers predicting subtle cognitive deficits in a community-dwelling sample of healthy controls. A relatively small number of patients with MCI were recruited as an additional control group.

Neuropsychological Assessment

All participants underwent extensive neuropsychological testing, as described in detail in the On-line Appendix. Briefly, all participants underwent neuropsychological testing and MR imaging at baseline. Participants classified as controls at baseline additionally underwent neuropsychological testing at 18-month follow-up. Those whose cognitive scores remained unchanged were classified as controls with a stable condition (sCON). Those whose performance at follow-up was at least 0.5 SDs lower compared with the first evaluation on at least 2 cognitive tests were classified as controls with a deteriorating condition (dCON). All individuals were also evaluated with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale (CDR).25 Only those with a CDR score of 0 and scores within 1.5 SDs of the age-appropriate mean in all other tests were included in the control group. In agreement with the Petersen criteria,26 participants having a CDR score of 0.5 but no dementia and a score exceeding 1.5 SDs below the age-appropriate mean in any of the above tests were confirmed as to their MCI status.

Two neuropsychologists clinically assessed all individuals independently with high interrater agreement (κ = 0.92). The final classification of sCON versus dCON was made by a trained neuropsychologist, who took into account both the neuropsychological test results and overall clinical assessment.27

MR Imaging

MR imaging was performed with a routine 3T scanner (Magnetom Trio; Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) and included a standard susceptibility-weighted sequence (matrix, 192 × 256 × 128; voxel size, 0.98 × 0.98 × 1.1 mm; TE/TR, 20/28 ms; number of signals acquired, 1; flip angle, 15°; parallel imaging factor, 2; acquisition time, 6 minutes 1 second). In addition, standard DTI, T2-weighted, T1-weighted, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery sequences were performed and analyzed to exclude anomalies such as ischemic lesions, parenchymal macrobleeds, extra-axial hematomas, or space-occupying lesions.

Image Analysis

Cerebral microbleeds were defined as focal areas (<10 mm) of very low signal intensity. Two independent readers (1 board-certified neuroradiologist and 1 trained neuropsychologist with 7 and 3 years of experience, respectively) analyzed SWI to define the presence, number, and location of CMBs. In cases of discordant findings, a senior third reader (a board-certified neuroradiologist with 16 years of experience) reviewed the images and determined the final rating. CMB “mimics” such as signal voids caused by vessels or basal ganglia calcification were excluded.

CMBs were classified according to 2 different categories (Figure): lobar versus deep (including the basal ganglia, thalamus, deep white matter, and infratentorial structures) and with further classification of lobar microbleeds according to the cerebral lobe involved (frontal, parietal, temporal, or occipital).

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

Cerebral microbleeds. Axial SWI of 2 subjects. A, Lobar CMB. Right inferior frontal CMB (arrow) close to the corticomedullary junction. B, Right thalamic CMB (arrow).

In addition to the analysis of CMBs, microvascular burden in the form of white matter lesions was analyzed on T2-/FLAIR-weighted images according to the established Fazekas scale.28

Statistical Analysis

χ2 tests, Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric tests, and 1-way ANOVA were used to compare binary/nominal, ordinal, and continuous Gaussian variables, respectively, among the 3 groups. The Cuzick nonparametric test for trend across ordered groups was used to compare the lobar distribution of microbleeds. A t test and the Mann-Whitney U test were applied to compare ordinal and continuous variables between 2 groups. Moreover, the number and location of CMBs were correlated with neuropsychological data at baseline by using the Spearman rank correlation. A multiple logistic regression model was built with sCON/dCON distinction as the dependent variable and age, sex, CMB location and depth, baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, education, and Fazekas scale score as independent variables.

A multiple linear regression model was built to determine whether CMBs predict longitudinal changes in cognitive scores. Because cognitive performances at follow-up are expressed on different scales, which are often discrete, they cannot be linearly combined by adding the individual scores to a unique composite cognitive score. We converted all results to z scores; then, we summed the number of cognitive tests at follow-up with performances at least 0.5 SDs higher compared with the first evaluation, leading to the number of tests with improved performances (range, 0–14). Similarly, we summed the number of cognitive tests at follow-up with performances at least 0.5 SDs lower compared with the first evaluation, leading to the number of tests with decreased performances (range, 0–14). Finally, we computed the number of tests with improved minus the number of tests with decreased performances to obtain a continuous cognitive score and built a multiple linear regression model with this score as the dependent variable and age, sex, CMB location and depth, baseline MMSE score, education, and Fazekas scale score as independent variables.

All statistics were performed by using the STATA statistical software, Version 14.1 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas).

Results

Demographic Data

Demographic data of the cohort are shown in Table 1. There were no significant differences among the 3 groups (sCON, dCON, and MCI) regarding age (the mean age was 74 years) and education level. However, a significant difference was evident for sex with a male predominance in the MCI group (P < .001).

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

Demographic data for sCON, dCON, and MCI

Neuropsychological Data

Neuropsychological data are presented in Table 2. As expected, there were group differences at follow-up, with worse cognitive performances of dCON for the Shapes test (3 immediate recalls [P = .004] and delayed recall [P = .024]), Digit Symbol Coding (P < .001), and ideomotor transitive praxis (P = .008). The Shapes test assesses visual memory (immediate and delayed) via the reproduction of simple designs. Digit Symbol Coding (time-monitored copy of symbols) explores perceptual-motor speed mostly related to attention. Ideomotor transitive praxis refers to the ability to perform transitive movements demonstrating the use of tools.

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

Neuropsychological data of control subjects

Number of CMBs

Eleven subjects were excluded due to a presumed (incidental) diagnosis of amyloid angiopathy (based on the observation of multiple microbleeds at the corticomedullary junction in association with signs of superficial siderosis or sequelae of lobar hemorrhage) or hypertensive encephalopathy (based on the observation of microbleeds in association with extensive white matter signal anomalies and infarctions).

Most subjects had no CMBs: 75.0% of sCON, 72.7% of dCON, and 68.1% of MCI. Although the prevalence of at least 1 CMB increased from 25.0% in those with sCON to 28.3% in those with dCON and 31.9% in patients with MCI, group differences were not significant. There was no significant difference in the number of CMBs among the 3 groups (Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3:

Microbleed numbers in the present seriesa

Location of CMBs

Lobar versus Deep.

Overall, lobar CMBs were more common and occurred in 20.1% of all cases compared with only 6.5% of cases with deep CMBs. There was no significant difference in the number of cases with lobar or deep CMBs among the 3 groups (Table 4).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4:

Microbleed distributiona

Lobar Distribution.

There was no lobar predilection specific to 1 group. The highest prevalence of CMBs was found in the frontal lobe (11.3% of subjects having frontal lobe CMBs), followed by the occipital, parietal, and temporal lobes (6.5%, 5.3%, and 3.5%, respectively). There was no significant difference in the percentage of cases with CMBs among the 3 groups for any of these lobes, with the exception of the occipital lobe. The groups with more cognitive deficits had significantly fewer occipital lesions than those in the sCON group (P for trend = .0261) (Table 4).

Correlation of CMBs with Neurocognitive Testing

There was no significant correlation between the scores of the neurocognitive testing and the number or location of CMBs. For instance, the MMSE and the Buschke total score were correlated with neither the total number (Spearman ρ = −0.023, P = .653; ρ = −0.065; P = .213, respectively) nor the lobar-versus-deep location of CMBs (Spearman ρ = −0.013, P = .790; ρ = −0.064, P = .219, respectively). This finding was also the case for lobar distribution (data not shown).

A multiple logistic regression model (Table 5) showed that none of the investigated variables (age, sex, CMB number, location and depth, baseline MMSE score, and Fazekas score) were significantly associated with deterioration among controls as expressed by the dCON status, with the exception of education of >12 years showing a slight-but-significant protective effect (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22–0.92; P = .028).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 5:

Multivariate logistic regression to predict progression (sCON/dCON distinction)

Overall, 26% of the sample had a resulting decline in ≥2 cognitive tests when simultaneously taking into account both improved and decreased performances in the 14 cognitive tests. A multiple linear regression model (Table 6) predicting the number of cognitive tests (n = 14) with improved minus the number of tests with decreased performances by more than 0.5 SDs showed no effect of microbleeds and a protective effect of the MMSE score (coefficient, −0.35; 95% CI, −0.68–0.01; P = .042).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 6:

Multivariate linear regression to predict the number of cognitive tests (n = 14) that showed improvement minus the number of tests in which scores declined >0.5 SDs

Discussion

The current longitudinal, community-based study addresses the impact of CMBs in the very early stage of cognitive decline. We performed imaging at baseline in 328 elderly individuals with intact cognition at inclusion and determined very early cognitive decline based on neuropsychological follow-up at 18 months. Moreover, we compared these results with a group of 72 patients with fully documented MCI. We found no significant differences in the number or location of CMBs between controls with stable and deteriorating conditions and those with MCI. Moreover, there was no significant association between the number or location of CMBs and neuropsychological testing.

Prevalence of CMBs

Overall, the prevalence of CMBs in the present series varied from 25.0% in sCON to 28.3% in dCON and 31.9% in MCI. The trend toward increasing prevalence in MCI cases was not significant.

The prevalence in healthy controls (25.0%–28.3%) was higher than that reported in earlier studies.4,24,29 In particular, the Rotterdam Scan study that focused on elderly controls found a CMB prevalence of 15.3%.4,24 Differences in inclusion criteria and imaging techniques may be at the origin of these differences. Notably, our series included elderly individuals with a mean age of 74 years, clearly higher than that in previous reports. Because the prevalence of CMBs increases with age,3⇓–5 the higher age may partially explain the increased CMB prevalence observed here. In addition, technical differences among the studies, namely examinations at different field strengths (3T versus 1.5T) and with different sequences (SWI versus T2* gradient echo) may contribute to differing results. The present study used an SWI sequence obtained at 3T, while previous reports in controls used 1.5T machines and/or T2* sequences. It has been shown that SWI sequences detect more CMBs than 2D gradient-recalled echo sequences,30⇓–32 with an increase in detected lesions of 67% according to Nandigam et al.30

As in our study, the prevalence of CMBs was relatively similar in patients with MCI and controls (14% and 11%, respectively) in the cohort of Ayaz et al,33 including 28 healthy controls and 75 subjects with MCI examined at 1.5T with a SWI sequence. Other studies found an association between CMBs and low cognitive performance12 or cognitive decline.13 This variability may be due to differences in study design with varying cohort sizes and composition (eg, absence of a control group, varying exclusion criteria) and variable definitions of cognitive impairment. In the present study, the control group at baseline included only subjects who were cognitively intact confirmed by extensive neuropsychological testing. Moreover, subjects with a presumed (incidental) diagnosis of amyloid angiopathy or hypertensive encephalopathy were excluded to eliminate confounding effects.

CMB-Related Variables in the 3 Diagnostic Groups

The location of CMBs (ie, lobar versus deep and according to cerebral lobes) was not different among the 3 groups in our study with the exception of occipital lobe location. In the present series, subjects with MCI had a strikingly low prevalence of CMBs in the occipital cortex compared with sCON (P for trend = .0261). This latter group showed a similar CMB prevalence in frontal (comparable to MCI) and occipital cortices, excluding the idea of a preferential CMB formation in the visual cortex. Although unclear from a physiologic viewpoint, this finding further points to the dissociation between the formation of these lesions and cognitive decline.

In contrast, previous reports showed a strong association of CMB location with performance on cognitive tasks both in cross-sectional and longitudinal studies, though with conflicting results. Qiu et al12 found that deep hemispheric and infratentorial CMBs were associated with low performance, while in the Rotterdam Scan Study, strictly lobar CMB had the strongest impact on cognition.24 In a longitudinal study by Miwa et al,34 multiple CMBs or the presence of both deep and lobar CMBs (but not only strictly lobar CMBs) was associated with an increased risk for dementia, whereas Chiang et al35 found that lobar CMBs were associated with accelerated cognitive decline in their cohort. One could speculate that because CMBs reflect structural damage in a given region, their formation locally may affect the corresponding cognitive functions (eg, executive impairment in a frontal location). This was clearly not the case in the present series.

In fact, CMB presence and number did not correlate with neuropsychological variables in our cohort.

CMB-Based Prediction of Cognitive Decline in Healthy Elderly

In previous studies, greater or increasing numbers of CMBs with time were related to impaired cognitive functioning, in both cross-sectional12,24 and longitudinal analyses13,33⇓⇓–36 in different types of cohorts (eg, population-based or in a memory clinic setting). The nature of the associations between CMBs and cognitive performance was, however, variable and not necessarily independent. While the presence of CMBs was predictive of progression from MCI to dementia in the cohort of Kirsch et al,13 this association did not persist when adjusting for age. We found no association between cognitive decline at 18-month follow-up and CMB burden or location at baseline.

Several reasons may explain this clinicoradiologic dissociation. The low number of microbleeds in this community-based sample may prevent establishing valid correlations with clinical variables. Such correlations may become obvious at later time points at further follow-up; the absence of follow-up imaging constitutes one of the limitations of the present investigation. Similarly, the short clinical follow-up interval may have masked potential associations. Kirsch et al13 noted that during the 50-month follow-up of their study, only 5% of the subjects initially classified as healthy controls progressed to MCI or dementia. In the cohort of Miwa et al,34 8% of subjects developed dementia during a median follow-up of 7.5 years. Most of the prior studies did not investigate very early cognitive decline longitudinally. While 26% of controls in the present study showed deteriorating performance in an 18-month period, the investigated changes may have been too subtle, leading to the absence of an association with CMB observed here. In fact, we cannot formally exclude cognitive restoration possibly occurring at later time points in some of our subjects with dCON. One could speculate that a more prominent decline at later follow-up could allow identifying a cognitive impact of CMBs. However, this is unlikely because no difference in CMB prevalence was found between subjects with MCI with stable and deteriorating conditions in a prior study.36

Alternatively, structural damage reflected by isolated CMBs may not be important enough to impair clinically apparent locally associated functions, in contrast to the larger number of CMBs in vascular dementia and cerebral amyloid angiopathy (and Alzheimer disease).1,3,4

In contrast to CMB, there has been rising interest in the correlation of declining cognitive function and another possible marker of small (and large) vessel disease in dementia, cortical microinfarcts. This entity consists of lesions barely visible at conventional imaging but demonstrated at pathology and 7T MR imaging, with the lesions visible on imaging (especially at 3T) representing only a small fraction of the actual lesional burden.37 Future radiologic studies with new-generation MRIs may lead to better insight into the deleterious effects of widely disseminated microvascular changes in advanced age.

Conclusions

Ultimately, in this large extensively tested cohort of subjects with MCI and controls having undergone MR imaging at 3T with a SWI sequence, there was no group-level difference in microbleed prevalence or distribution or a correlation with neuropsychological test results.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Sven Haller—RELATED: Grant: Swiss National Foundation Grant SNF 3200B0-1161193 and SPUM 33CM30-124111.* *Money paid to the institution.

  • This study was partially funded by grants from the Swiss National Foundation (grant Nos. SNF 3200B0-1161193, SPUM 33CM30-124111).

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

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Greenberg SM,
    2. Vernooij MW,
    3. Cordonnier C, et al
    ; Microbleed Study Group. Cerebral microbleeds: a guide to detection and interpretation. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:165–74 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70013-4 pmid:19161908
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Fazekas F,
    2. Kleinert R,
    3. Roob G, et al
    . Histopathologic analysis of foci of signal loss on gradient-echo T2*-weighted MR images in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: evidence of microangiopathy-related microbleeds. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1999;20:637–42 pmid:10319975
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Cordonnier C,
    2. van der Flier WM,
    3. Sluimer JD, et al
    . Prevalence and severity of microbleeds in a memory clinic setting. Neurology 2006;66:1356–60 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000210535.20297.ae pmid:16682667
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Vernooij MW,
    2. van der Lugt A,
    3. Ikram MA, et al
    . Prevalence and risk factors of cerebral microbleeds: the Rotterdam Scan Study. Neurology 2008;70:1208–14 doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000307750.41970.d9 pmid:18378884
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Sveinbjornsdottir S,
    2. Sigurdsson S,
    3. Aspelund T, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds in the population based AGES-Reykjavik study: prevalence and location. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2008;79:1002–06 doi:10.1136/jnnp.2007.121913 pmid:18270235
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Schmidt R,
    2. Berghold A,
    3. Jokinen H, et al
    . White matter lesion progression in LADIS: frequency, clinical effects, and sample size calculations. Stroke 2012;43:2643–47 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.662593 pmid:22879094
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Del Brutto VJ,
    2. Zambrano M,
    3. Mera RM, et al
    . Population-based study of cerebral microbleeds in stroke-free older adults living in Rural Ecuador: the Atahualpa Project. Stroke 2015;46:1984–86 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.009594 pmid:26022640
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Loitfelder M,
    2. Seiler S,
    3. Schwingenschuh P, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds: a review. Panminerva Med 2012;54:149–60 pmid:22801432 pmid:22801432
    PubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Park JH,
    2. Seo SW,
    3. Kim C, et al
    . Pathogenesis of cerebral microbleeds: in vivo imaging of amyloid and subcortical ischemic small vessel disease in 226 individuals with cognitive impairment. Ann Neurol 2013;73:584–93 doi:10.1002/ana.23845 pmid:23495089
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Nagasawa J,
    2. Kiyozaka T,
    3. Ikeda K
    . Prevalence and clinicoradiological analyses of patients with Alzheimer disease coexisting multiple microbleeds. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;23:2444–49 doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.05.036 pmid:25174565
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Yakushiji Y,
    2. Yokota C,
    3. Yamada N, et al
    . Clinical characteristics by topographical distribution of brain microbleeds, with a particular emphasis on diffuse microbleeds. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2011;20:214–21 doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2009.12.001 pmid:20621512
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Qiu C,
    2. Cotch MF,
    3. Sigurdsson S, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds, retinopathy, and dementia: the AGES-Reykjavik Study. Neurology 2010;75:2221–28 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182020349 pmid:21172845
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Kirsch W,
    2. McAuley G,
    3. Holshouser B, et al
    . Serial susceptibility weighted MRI measures brain iron and microbleeds in dementia. J Alzheimers Dis 2009;17:599–609 pmid:19433895
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Uetani H,
    2. Hirai T,
    3. Hashimoto M, et al
    . Prevalence and topography of small hypointense foci suggesting microbleeds on 3T susceptibility-weighted imaging in various types of dementia. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:984–89 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3332 pmid:23124636
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Hilal S,
    2. Saini M,
    3. Tan CS, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds and cognition: the epidemiology of dementia in Singapore study. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2014;28:106–12 doi:10.1097/WAD.0000000000000015 pmid:24322485
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Kester MI,
    2. Goos JD,
    3. Teunissen CE, et al
    . Associations between cerebral small-vessel disease and Alzheimer disease pathology as measured by cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers. JAMA Neurol 2014;71:855–62 doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.754 pmid:24818585
    CrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Gregoire SM,
    2. Smith K,
    3. Jäger HR, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds and long-term cognitive outcome: longitudinal cohort study of stroke clinic patients. Cerebrovasc Dis 2012;33:430–35 doi:10.1159/000336237 pmid:22456577
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. van der Flier WM
    . Clinical aspects of microbleeds in Alzheimer's disease. J Neurol Sci 2012;322:56–58 doi:10.1016/j.jns.2012.07.009 pmid:22836015
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Heringa SM,
    2. Reijmer YD,
    3. Leemans A, et al
    ; Utrecht Vascular Cognitive Impairment (VCI) Study Group. Multiple microbleeds are related to cerebral network disruptions in patients with early Alzheimer's disease. J Alzheimers Dis 2014;38:211–21 doi:10.3233/JAD-130542 pmid:23948936
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Park JH,
    2. Seo SW,
    3. Kim C, et al
    . Effects of cerebrovascular disease and amyloid beta burden on cognition in subjects with subcortical vascular cognitive impairment. Neurobiol Aging 2014;35:254–60 doi:10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2013.06.026 pmid:23932881
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Patel B,
    2. Lawrence AJ,
    3. Chung AW, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds and cognition in patients with symptomatic small vessel disease. Stroke 2013;44:356–61 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.112.670216 pmid:23321452
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Lei C,
    2. Lin S,
    3. Tao W, et al
    . Association between cerebral microbleeds and cognitive function: a systematic review. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2013;84:693–97 doi:10.1136/jnnp-2012-303948 pmid:23178504
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Yates PA,
    2. Desmond PM,
    3. Phal PM, et al
    ; AIBL Research Group. Incidence of cerebral microbleeds in preclinical Alzheimer disease. Neurology 2014;82:1266–73 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000000285 pmid:24623839
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Poels MM,
    2. Ikram MA,
    3. van der Lugt A, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds are associated with worse cognitive function: the Rotterdam Scan Study. Neurology 2012;78:326–33 doi:10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182452928 pmid:22262748
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Hughes CP,
    2. Berg L,
    3. Danziger WL, et al
    . A new clinical scale for the staging of dementia. Br J Psychiatry 1982;140:566–72 doi:10.1192/bjp.140.6.566 pmid:7104545
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Petersen RC
    . Mild cognitive impairment as a diagnostic entity. J Intern Med 2004;256:183–94 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2796.2004.01388.x pmid:15324362
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Deiber MP,
    2. Meziane HB,
    3. Hasler R, et al
    . Attention and working memory-related EEG markers of subtle cognitive deterioration in healthy elderly individuals. J Alzheimers Dis 2015;47:335–49 doi:10.3233/JAD-150111 pmid:26401557
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Fazekas F,
    2. Chawluk JB,
    3. Alavi A, et al
    . MR signal abnormalities at 1.5 T in Alzheimer's dementia and normal aging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987;149:351–56 doi:10.2214/ajr.149.2.351 pmid:3496763
    CrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Jeerakathil T,
    2. Wolf PA,
    3. Beiser A, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds: prevalence and associations with cardiovascular risk factors in the Framingham Study. Stroke 2004;35:1831–35 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000131809.35202.1b pmid:15155954
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Nandigam RN,
    2. Viswanathan A,
    3. Delgado P, et al
    . MR imaging detection of cerebral microbleeds: effect of susceptibility-weighted imaging, section thickness, and field strength. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:338–43 pmid:19001544
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  31. 31.↵
    1. Goos JD,
    2. van der Flier WM,
    3. Knol DL, et al
    . Clinical relevance of improved microbleed detection by susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Stroke 2011;42:1894–900 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.599837 pmid:21566235
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Shams S,
    2. Martola J,
    3. Cavallin L, et al
    . SWI or T2*: which MRI sequence to use in the detection of cerebral microbleeds? The Karolinska Imaging Dementia Study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1089–95 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4248 pmid:25698623
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Ayaz M,
    2. Boikov AS,
    3. Haacke EM, et al
    . Imaging cerebral microbleeds using susceptibility weighted imaging: one step toward detecting vascular dementia. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010;31:142–48 doi:10.1002/jmri.22001 pmid:20027582
    CrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Miwa K,
    2. Tanaka M,
    3. Okazaki S, et al
    . Multiple or mixed cerebral microbleeds and dementia in patients with vascular risk factors. Neurology 2014;83:646–53 doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000000692 pmid:25015364
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  35. 35.↵
    1. Chiang GC,
    2. Cruz Hernandez JC,
    3. Kantarci K, et al
    . Cerebral microbleeds, CSF p-tau, and cognitive decline: significance of anatomic distribution. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2015;36:1635–41 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4351 pmid:26228889
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Haller S,
    2. Bartsch A,
    3. Nguyen D, et al
    . Cerebral microhemorrhage and iron deposition in mild cognitive impairment: susceptibility-weighted MR imaging assessment. Radiology 2010;257:764–73 doi:10.1148/radiol.10100612 pmid:20923870
    CrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    1. van Veluw SJ,
    2. Hilal S,
    3. Kuijf HJ, et al
    . Cortical microinfarcts on 3T MRI: clinical correlates in memory-clinic patients. Alzheimers Dement 2015;11:1500–09 doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2014.12.010 pmid:25956990
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received March 15, 2016.
  • Accepted after revision August 15, 2016.
  • © 2017 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 38 (1)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 38, Issue 1
1 Jan 2017
  • 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.
Clinicoradiologic Correlations of Cerebral Microbleeds in Advanced Age
(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
I. Barnaure, M.-L. Montandon, C. Rodriguez, F. Herrmann, K.O. Lövblad, P. Giannakopoulos, S. Haller
Clinicoradiologic Correlations of Cerebral Microbleeds in Advanced Age
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jan 2017, 38 (1) 39-45; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4956

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
Clinicoradiologic Correlations of Cerebral Microbleeds in Advanced Age
I. Barnaure, M.-L. Montandon, C. Rodriguez, F. Herrmann, K.O. Lövblad, P. Giannakopoulos, S. Haller
American Journal of Neuroradiology Jan 2017, 38 (1) 39-45; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4956
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
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref (16)
  • Google Scholar

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

  • Cerebral Microbleeds: Imaging and Clinical Significance
    Sven Haller, Meike W. Vernooij, Joost P. A. Kuijer, Elna-Marie Larsson, Hans Rolf Jäger, Frederik Barkhof
    Radiology 2018 287 1
  • Biomarkers of aging
    Hainan Bao, Jiani Cao, Mengting Chen, Min Chen, Wei Chen, Xiao Chen, Yanhao Chen, Yu Chen, Yutian Chen, Zhiyang Chen, Jagadish K. Chhetri, Yingjie Ding, Junlin Feng, Jun Guo, Mengmeng Guo, Chuting He, Yujuan Jia, Haiping Jiang, Ying Jing, Dingfeng Li, Jiaming Li, Jingyi Li, Qinhao Liang, Rui Liang, Feng Liu, Xiaoqian Liu, Zuojun Liu, Oscar Junhong Luo, Jianwei Lv, Jingyi Ma, Kehang Mao, Jiawei Nie, Xinhua Qiao, Xinpei Sun, Xiaoqiang Tang, Jianfang Wang, Qiaoran Wang, Siyuan Wang, Xuan Wang, Yaning Wang, Yuhan Wang, Rimo Wu, Kai Xia, Fu-Hui Xiao, Lingyan Xu, Yingying Xu, Haoteng Yan, Liang Yang, Ruici Yang, Yuanxin Yang, Yilin Ying, Le Zhang, Weiwei Zhang, Wenwan Zhang, Xing Zhang, Zhuo Zhang, Min Zhou, Rui Zhou, Qingchen Zhu, Zhengmao Zhu, Feng Cao, Zhongwei Cao, Piu Chan, Chang Chen, Guobing Chen, Hou-Zao Chen, Jun Chen, Weimin Ci, Bi-Sen Ding, Qiurong Ding, Feng Gao, Jing-Dong J. Han, Kai Huang, Zhenyu Ju, Qing-Peng Kong, Ji Li, Jian Li, Xin Li, Baohua Liu, Feng Liu, Lin Liu, Qiang Liu, Qiang Liu, Xingguo Liu, Yong Liu, Xianghang Luo, Shuai Ma, Xinran Ma, Zhiyong Mao, Jing Nie, Yaojin Peng, Jing Qu, Jie Ren, Ruibao Ren, Moshi Song, Zhou Songyang, Yi Eve Sun, Yu Sun, Mei Tian, Shusen Wang, Si Wang, Xia Wang, Xiaoning Wang, Yan-Jiang Wang, Yunfang Wang, Catherine C. L. Wong, Andy Peng Xiang, Yichuan Xiao, Zhengwei Xie, Daichao Xu, Jing Ye, Rui Yue, Cuntai Zhang, Hongbo Zhang, Liang Zhang, Weiqi Zhang, Yong Zhang, Yun-Wu Zhang, Zhuohua Zhang, Tongbiao Zhao, Yuzheng Zhao, Dahai Zhu, Weiguo Zou, Gang Pei, Guang-Hui Liu
    Science China Life Sciences 2023 66 5
  • Susceptibility weighted imaging: Clinical applications and future directions
    Ahmet Mesrur Halefoglu, David Mark Yousem
    World Journal of Radiology 2018 10 4
  • Progression in Vascular Cognitive Impairment: Pathogenesis, Neuroimaging Evaluation, and Treatment
    Xin Zhang, Jiabin Su, Chao Gao, Wei Ni, Xinjie Gao, Yuxin Li, Jun Zhang, Yu Lei, Yuxiang Gu
    Cell Transplantation 2019 28 1
  • Mixed-Location Cerebral Microbleeds: An Imaging Biomarker for Cerebrovascular Pathology in Cognitive Impairment and Dementia in a Memory Clinic Population
    Bibek Gyanwali, Muhammad Amin Shaik, Narayanaswamy Venketasubramanian, Christopher Chen, Saima Hilal
    Journal of Alzheimer's Disease 2019 71 4
  • MRI detection of cerebral microbleeds: size matters
    Sven Haller, Max Scheffler, Rares Salomir, François R. Herrmann, Gabriel Gold, Marie-Louise Montandon, Enikö Kövari
    Neuroradiology 2019 61 10
  • Determinants of mesial temporal lobe volume loss in older individuals with preserved cognition: a longitudinal PET amyloid study
    Marie-Louise Montandon, François R. Herrmann, Valentina Garibotto, Cristelle Rodriguez, Sven Haller, Panteleimon Giannakopoulos
    Neurobiology of Aging 2020 87
  • Association of cerebral microbleeds with risks of cognitive impairment and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies
    Meng Wang, He-Ying Hu, Zuo-Teng Wang, Ya-Nan Ou, Yi Qu, Ya-Hui Ma, Qiang Dong, Lan Tan, Jin-Tai Yu
    Brain Disorders 2021 2
  • Routine Brain MRI Findings on the Long-Term Effects of COVID-19: A Scoping Review
    Yuriy Vasilev, Ivan Blokhin, Anna Khoruzhaya, Maria Kodenko, Vasiliy Kolyshenkov, Olga Nanova, Yuliya Shumskaya, Olga Omelyanskaya, Anton Vladzymyrskyy, Roman Reshetnikov
    Diagnostics 2023 13 15
  • Cerebral microbleeds in adult survivors of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia treated with cranial radiation
    Nicholas S. Phillips, Claudia M. Hillenbrand, Bogdan G. Mitrea, Jason Yan, Chenghong Li, Matthew A. Scoggins, Thomas E. Merchant, Gregory T. Armstrong, Deokumar Srivastava, Ching-Hon Pui, Leslie L. Robison, Melissa M. Hudson, Kevin R. Krull, Noah D. Sabin
    Scientific Reports 2020 10 1

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