Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29984171›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2018

Non-lesional cerebellar damage in patients with clinically isolated syndrome: DTI measures predict

Alexa V Kugler, Michael Deppe

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alexa V KuglerWestfälische Wilhelms University, Münster, Germany. Electronic address: alexa.kugler@uni-muenster.de.
Michael DeppeDepartment of Neurology, Westfälische Wilhelms University, Münster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Today, no specific test for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (MS) is available due to the lack of characteristic symptoms at beginning. This circumstance also complicates estimation of disease progression. Recent findings provided evidence for early, non-lesional cerebellar damage in patients with (clinically definite) relapsing-remitting MS. Objective: To investigate if microstructural cerebellar alterations can also serve as early structural biomarker for disease progression and conversion from clinically isolated syndrome (CIS) to MS. Methods: 46 patients diagnosed with CIS and 26 age-matched healthy controls were admitted to high-resolution MRI including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) to examine atrophy and microstructural integrity of the cerebellum. Microstructural integrity of cerebellar white matter was assessed by fractional anisotropy (FA) as derived from DTI. Results: Although all 46 patients of our CIS cohort showed no cerebellar lesions in structural MRI (T1w, T2w, FLAIR), their mean cerebellar FA was already reduced compared to healthy controls. Significant FA reduction at follow-up DTI 6 months after baseline examination was observed. In 16 patients that converted to MS, we found a correlation between initial cerebellar FA and conversion latency ( Conclusion: DTI seems to reflect early tissue injury in beginning MS, when atrophy and lesions are not yet detectable. Decreased cerebellar FA in patients with CIS might indicate an active and unstable disease stage, resulting in a shorter conversion time into MS.

Indexed as

AdultAtrophyCerebellumDemyelinating DiseasesDiffusion Tensor ImagingDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedMultiple SclerosisWhite MatterYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29984171
PMCPMC6031094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.