MRI CRITERIA FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS: MAGNIMS CONSENSUS GUIDELINES

By M. Filippi, M. Rocca, O. Ciccarelli, N. de Stefano, N. Evangelou, L. Kappos, À. Rovira, J. Sastre-Garriga, M. Tintoré, J. Frederiksen and 6 more. Lancet Neurology, 2016

823 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Summary In patients presenting with a clinically isolated syndrome (CIS), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can support and substitute clinical information for multiple sclerosis (MS) diagnosis demonstrating disease dissemination in space (DIS) and time (DIT) and helping to rule out other conditions that can mimic MS. From their inclusion in the diagnostic work-up for MS in 2001, several modifications of MRI diagnostic criteria have been proposed, in the attempt to simplify lesion-count models for demonstrating DIS, change the timing of MRI scanning for demonstrating DIT, and increase the value of spinal cord imaging. Since the last update of these criteria, new data regarding the application of MRI for demonstrating DIS and DIT have become available and improvement in MRI technology has occurred. State-of-the-art MRI findings in these patients were discussed in a MAGNIMS workshop, the goal of which was to provide an evidence-based and expert-opinion consensus on diagnostic MRI criteria modifications.

Subfields: Biomedical Engineering, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Rheumatology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6571f1c5630793b6c3871f890c61f228741e3190

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Arnau Oliver
Sergi Valverde
Xavier Lladó
L. Ramió-Torrentá
Sandra González-Villà
Mariano Cabezas
À. Rovira
D. Pareto

Citations in the corpus

Improving automated multiple sclerosis lesion segmentation with a cascaded 3D convolutional neural network approach (2017, background): “Nowa-days, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is extensively used in the diagnosis and monitoring of MS (Polman et al., 2011), due to the sensitivity of struc-∗ tural MRI disseminating WM lesions in time and space (Rovira et al., 2015; Filippi et al., 2016).”