Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Research

Neuroradiological differentiation of white matter lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis and Fabry disease

Authors: Jakob Rath, Olivia Foesleitner, Lukas Haider, Hubert Bickel, Fritz Leutmezer, Stephan Polanec, Michael A. Arnoldner, Gere Sunder-Plassmann, Daniela Prayer, Thomas Berger, Paulus Rommer, Gregor Kasprian

Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Objective

White matter lesions (WML) in multiple sclerosis (MS) differ from vascular WML caused by Fabry disease (FD). However, in atypical cases the discrimination can be difficult and may vary between individual raters. The aim of this study was to evaluate interrater reliability of WML differentiation between MS and FD patients.

Materials and methods

Brain MRI scans of 21 patients with genetically confirmed FD were compared to 21 matched patients with MS. Pseudonymized axial FLAIR sequences were assessed by 6 blinded raters and attributed to either the MS or the FD group to investigate interrater reliability. Additionally, localization of WML was compared between the two groups.

Results

The median age of patients was 46 years (IQR 35–58). Interrater reliability was moderate with a Fleiss' Kappa of 0.45 (95%CI 0.3–0.59). Overall, 85% of all ratings in the MS group and 75% in the FD group were correct. However, only 38% of patients with MS and 33% of patients with FD were correctly identified by all 6 raters. WML involving the corpus callosum (p < 0.001) as well as juxtacortical (p < 0.001) and infratentorial lesions (p = 0.03) were more frequently observed in MS patients.

Conclusion

Interrater reliability regarding visual differentiation of WML in MS from vascular WML in FD on standard axial FLAIR images alone is only moderate, despite the distinctive features of lesions in each group.

Barkhof F, Scheltens P. Imaging of white matter lesions. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2002;13(Suppl 2):21–30. https://doi.org/10.1159/000049146.CrossRefPubMed

Filippi M, Rocca MA, Ciccarelli O, et al. MRI criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines. Lancet Neurol. 2016;15(3):292–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00393-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Geraldes R, Ciccarelli O, Barkhof F, et al. The current role of MRI in differentiating multiple sclerosis from its imaging mimics. Nat Rev Neurol. 2018;14(4):213. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2018.39.CrossRefPubMed

Thompson AJ, Banwell BL, Barkhof F, et al. Diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: 2017 revisions of the McDonald criteria. Lancet Neurol. 2018;17(2):162–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(17)30470-2.CrossRefPubMed

Barkhof F, Filippi M, Miller DH, et al. Comparison of MRI criteria at first presentation to predict conversion to clinically definite multiple sclerosis. Brain. 1997;120(Pt 11):2059–69. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/120.11.2059.CrossRefPubMed

Newton BD, Wright K, Winkler MD, et al. Three-dimensional shape and surface features distinguish multiple sclerosis lesions from nonspecific white matter disease. J Neuroimaging Off J Am Soc Neuroimaging. 2017;27(6):613–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/jon.12449.CrossRef

Chen JJ, Carletti F, Young V, Mckean D, Quaghebeur G. MRI differential diagnosis of suspected multiple sclerosis. Clin Radiol. 2016;71(9):815–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2016.05.010.CrossRefPubMed

de Leeuw FE, de Groot JC, Achten E, et al. Prevalence of cerebral white matter lesions in elderly people: a population based magnetic resonance imaging study. The Rotterdam Scan Study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2001;70(1):9–14. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.70.1.9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Zarate YA, Hopkin RJ. Fabry’s disease. Lancet. 2008;372(9647):1427–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61589-5.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Fellgiebel A, Müller MJ, Ginsberg L. CNS manifestations of Fabry’s disease. Lancet Neurol. 2006;5(9):791–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70548-8.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Fazekas F, Enzinger C, Schmidt R, et al. Brain magnetic resonance imaging findings fail to suspect Fabry disease in young patients with an acute cerebrovascular event. Stroke. 2015;46(6):1548–53. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.008548.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Solomon AJ. Diagnosis, differential diagnosis, and misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Contin Minneap Minn. 2019;25(3):611–35. https://doi.org/10.1212/CON.0000000000000728.CrossRef

13.

Solomon AJ, Bourdette DN, Cross AH, et al. The contemporary spectrum of multiple sclerosis misdiagnosis: a multicenter study. Neurology. 2016;87(13):1393–9. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000003152.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

14.

Liu S, Kullnat J, Bourdette D, et al. Prevalence of brain magnetic resonance imaging meeting Barkhof and McDonald criteria for dissemination in space among headache patients. Mult Scler J. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458512471874.CrossRef

15.

Akman-Demir G, Mutlu M, Kiyat-Atamer A, et al. Behçet’s disease patients with multiple sclerosis-like features: discriminative value of Barkhof criteria. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2015;33(6 Suppl 94):S80-84.PubMed

16.

Kim SS, Richman DP, Johnson WO, Hald JK, Agius MA. Limited utility of current MRI criteria for distinguishing multiple sclerosis from common mimickers: primary and secondary CNS vasculitis, lupus and Sjogren’s syndrome. Mult Scler Houndmills Basingstoke Engl. 2014;20(1):57–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458513491329.CrossRef

17.

Böttcher T, Rolfs A, Tanislav C, et al. Fabry disease: underestimated in the differential diagnosis of multiple sclerosis? PLoS ONE. 2013;8(8):e71894. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0071894.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Yau WY, Fabis-Pedrini MJ, Kermode AG. Fabry heterozygote mimicking multiple sclerosis. BMJ Case Rep. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2017-220274.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Berger JR. Misdiagnosis of multiple sclerosis in a female heterozygote with Fabry’s disease. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2019;30:45–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2019.01.040.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Shribman SE, Shah ARF, Werring DJ, Cockerell OC. Fabry disease mimicking multiple sclerosis: lessons from two case reports. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2015;4(2):170–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msard.2015.01.001.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Solomon AJ, Pettigrew R, Naismith RT, Chahin S, Krieger S, Weinshenker B. Challenges in multiple sclerosis diagnosis: misunderstanding and misapplication of the McDonald criteria. Mult Scler J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458520910496.CrossRef

22.

Fazekas F, Chawluk JB, Alavi A, Hurtig HI, Zimmerman RA. MR signal abnormalities at 1.5 T in Alzheimer’s dementia and normal aging. Am J Roentgenol. 1987;149(2):351–6. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.149.2.351.CrossRef

23.

Zapf A, Castell S, Morawietz L, Karch A. Measuring inter-rater reliability for nominal data: which coefficients and confidence intervals are appropriate? BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16:93. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0200-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Altman DG. Practical statistics for medical research. 1st ed. London: Chapman and Hall; 1990.CrossRef

25.

Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat. 1979;6(2):65–70.

26.

George IC, Sati P, Absinta M, et al. Clinical 3-tesla FLAIR* MRI improves diagnostic accuracy in multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler J. 2016;22(12):1578–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458515624975.CrossRef

27.

Schmidt R, Schmidt H, Haybaeck J, et al. Heterogeneity in age-related white matter changes. Acta Neuropathol (Berl). 2011;122(2):171–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-011-0851-x.CrossRef

28.

Geraldes R, Esiri MM, DeLuca GC, Palace J. Age-related small vessel disease: a potential contributor to neurodegeneration in multiple sclerosis. Brain Pathol. 2017;27(6):707–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/bpa.12460.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Gean-Marton AD, Vezina LG, Marton KI, et al. Abnormal corpus callosum: a sensitive and specific indicator of multiple sclerosis. Radiology. 1991;180(1):215–21. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.180.1.2052698.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Palmer S, Bradley WG, Chen DY, Patel S. Subcallosal striations: early findings of multiple sclerosis on sagittal, thin-section, fast FLAIR MR images. Radiology. 1999;210(1):149–53. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.210.1.r99ja38149.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Simon JH, Holtås SL, Schiffer RB, et al. Corpus callosum and subcallosal-periventricular lesions in multiple sclerosis: detection with MR. Radiology. 1986;160(2):363–7. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.160.2.3726114.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Cocozza S, Olivo G, Riccio E, et al. Corpus callosum involvement: a useful clue for differentiating Fabry disease from multiple sclerosis. Neuroradiology. 2017;59(6):563–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-017-1829-8.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Ugga L, Cocozza S, Pontillo G, et al. Absence of infratentorial lesions in Fabry disease contributes to differential diagnosis with multiple sclerosis. Brain Behav. 2018;8(11):e01121. https://doi.org/10.1002/brb3.1121.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Filippi M, Preziosa P, Banwell BL, et al. Assessment of lesions on magnetic resonance imaging in multiple sclerosis: practical guidelines. Brain J Neurol. 2019;142(7):1858–75. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awz144.CrossRef

35.

Takanashi J, Barkovich AJ, Dillon WP, Sherr EH, Hart KA, Packman S. T1 hyperintensity in the pulvinar: key imaging feature for diagnosis of Fabry disease. Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24(5):916–21.PubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Cocozza S, Russo C, Pisani A, et al. Redefining the pulvinar sign in Fabry disease. Am J Neuroradiol. 2017;38(12):2264–9. https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5420.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Maggi P, Absinta M, Sati P, et al. The “central vein sign” in patients with diagnostic “red flags” for multiple sclerosis: a prospective multicenter 3T study. Mult Scler J. 2020;26(4):421–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458519876031.CrossRef

38.

Mistry N, Abdel-Fahim R, Samaraweera A, et al. Imaging central veins in brain lesions with 3-T T2*-weighted magnetic resonance imaging differentiates multiple sclerosis from microangiopathic brain lesions. Mult Scler J. 2016;22(10):1289–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1352458515616700.CrossRef

39.

Sati P, Oh J, Constable RT, et al. The central vein sign and its clinical evaluation for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: a consensus statement from the North American Imaging in Multiple Sclerosis Cooperative. Nat Rev Neurol. 2016;12(12):714–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneurol.2016.166.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Sati P, George IC, Shea CD, Gaitán MI, Reich DS. FLAIR*: a combined MR contrast technique for visualizing white matter lesions and parenchymal veins. Radiology. 2012;265(3):926–32. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120208.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Sinnecker T, Clarke MA, Meier D, et al. Evaluation of the central vein sign as a diagnostic imaging biomarker in multiple sclerosis. JAMA Neurol. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.2478.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Samaraweera APR, Falah Y, Pitiot A, Dineen RA, Morgan PS, Evangelou N. The MRI central vein marker; differentiating PPMS from RRMS and ischemic SVD. Neurol Neuroimmunol Neuroinflamm. 2018;5(6):e496. https://doi.org/10.1212/NXI.0000000000000496.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Neuroradiological differentiation of white matter lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis and Fabry disease
Authors: Jakob Rath
Olivia Foesleitner
Lukas Haider
Hubert Bickel
Fritz Leutmezer
Stephan Polanec
Michael A. Arnoldner
Gere Sunder-Plassmann
Daniela Prayer
Thomas Berger
Paulus Rommer
Gregor Kasprian
Publication date: 01-12-2022
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Multiple Sclerosis
Fabry Disease
Published in: Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1750-1172
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-022-02187-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Neuroradiological differentiation of white matter lesions in patients with multiple sclerosis and Fabry disease

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

What role can decentralized trial designs play to improve rare disease studies?

Patient involvement in rare diseases research: a scoping review of the literature and mixed method evaluation of Norwegian researchers’ experiences and perceptions

Untangling neurodevelopmental disorders in the adulthood: a movement disorder is the clue

Multidisciplinary management for Peutz–Jeghers syndrome and prevention of vertical transmission to offspring using preimplantation genetic testing

Clinical and genetic spectrums of 413 North African families with inherited retinal dystrophies and optic neuropathies

Dissociation of early and late face-related processes in autism spectrum disorder and Williams syndrome