Mri of the entire spinal cord—worth the while or waste of time? A retrospective study of 74 patients with multiple sclerosis

Esben Nyborg Poulsen, Anna Olsson, Stefan Gustavsen, Annika Reynberg Langkilde, Annette Bang Oturai, Jonathan Frederik Carlsen*

*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

3 Citationer (Scopus)
11 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Spinal cord lesions are included in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS), yet spinal cord MRI is not mandatory for diagnosis according to the latest revisions of the McDonald Criteria. We investigated the distribution of spinal cord lesions in MS patients and examined how it influences the fulfillment of the 2017 McDonald Criteria. Seventy-four patients with relapsing-remitting MS were examined with brain and entire spinal cord MRI. Sixty-five patients received contrast. The number and anatomical location of MS lesions were assessed along with the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). A Chi-square test, Fischer’s exact test, and one-sided McNemar’s test were used to test distributions. MS lesions were distributed throughout the spinal cord. Diagnosis of dissemination in space (DIS) was increased from 58/74 (78.4%) to 67/74 (90.5%) when adding cervical spinal cord MRI to brain MRI alone (p = 0.004). Diagnosis of dissemination in time (DIT) was not significantly increased when adding entire spinal cord MRI to brain MRI alone (p = 0.04). There was no association between the number of spinal cord lesions and the EDSS score (p = 0.71). MS lesions are present throughout the spinal cord, and spinal cord MRI may play an important role in the diagnosis and follow-up of MS patients.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Artikelnummer1424
TidsskriftDiagnostics
Vol/bind11
Udgave nummer8
Antal sider10
ISSN2075-4418
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 2021

Bibliografisk note

Funding Information:
We would like to thank all the participating patients. Conflicts of Interest: A. Olsson has received support for congress participation from Roche and Novartis. Annette Oturai has served on scientific advisory boards for Biogen Idec, Novartis, and Sanofi Genzyme; has received research support from Novartis; has received speaker honoraria from Biogen Idec, Novartis, and TEVA; and has received support for congress participation from Merck, TEVA, Biogen, Roche, Novartis, and Sanofi Genzyme. S. Gustavsen has received support for congress participation from Merck. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.

Citationsformater