Please wait a minute...
 Home  About the Journal Editorial Board Aims & Scope Peer Review Policy Subscription Contact us
 
Early Edition  //  Current Issue  //  Open Special Issues  //  Archives  //  Most Read  //  Most Downloaded  //  Most Cited
Aging and disease    2018, Vol. 9 Issue (3) : 444-452     DOI: 10.14336/AD.2017.0808
Orginal Article |
Progression of White Matter Hyperintensities Contributes to Lacunar Infarction
Xu Xin1,2,3, Gao Yuanyuan1,2,3, Liu Renyuan1,2,3, Qian Lai1,2,3, Chen Yan1,2,3, Wang Xiaoying4, Xu Yun1,2,3,*
1Department of Neurology, Affiliated Drum Tower Hospital, and Jiangsu Key Laboratory for Molecular Medicine, Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing 210008, China.
2Jiangsu Province Stroke Center for Diagnosis and Therapy, Nanjing 210008, China.
3Nanjing Neuropsychiatry Clinic Medical Center, Nanjing 210008, China.
4Departments of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA, USA.
Download: PDF(747 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    
Abstract  

Both white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) and lacunar infarctions (LIs) are magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) markers of cerebral small vessel disease (SVD). However, the association between WMH and LI remains unclear. In this study, we asked whether WMH progression is related to LI occurrence using retrospective data. Overall, 8475 WMH patients with at least two MRI images were screened, and 187 patients were included in the final study; 76 patients had WMH with LI (WL), and 111 patients had WMH without LI (WOL). The 187 patients were divided into three groups according to WMH progression: Group 1 (no progression), Group 2 (0-53.64% WMH progression) and Group 3 (≥53.64% WMH progression). We found that both WMH volumes and Fazekas scores were higher in WL patients compared with those in WOL patients according to the 1st and 2nd MRI images (P<0.001), whereas WMH progression was not significantly different between these two groups (P>0.05). Importantly, we found that the occurrence rates for LI were increased in Groups 2 and 3 compared with those in Group 1. Multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the risk of LI occurrence was significantly increased in Group 2 versus that in Group 1 (odds ratio, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.48 to 7.67; P=0.004) after adjusting for the baseline patient characteristics and the interval between the two MRI scans. Additionally, with a stratification time of less than 24 months, the risk of LI occurrence was higher in Group 2 versus that in Group 1, after adjusting for baseline confounding factors (odds ratio, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.51 to 8.99; P=0.004). In conclusion, we found that WMH progression was significantly associated with LI occurrence, particularly within the first two years, and that this progression could serve as an independent indicator of LI development.

Keywords progression of white matter hyperintensities      lacunar infarction      incidence      quantitative analysis     
Corresponding Authors: Xu Yun   
About author:

SZ and JZ denote equal first authorship contribution.

Issue Date: 05 June 2018
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Xu Xin
Gao Yuanyuan
Liu Renyuan
Qian Lai
Chen Yan
Wang Xiaoying
Xu Yun
Cite this article:   
Xu Xin,Gao Yuanyuan,Liu Renyuan, et al. Progression of White Matter Hyperintensities Contributes to Lacunar Infarction[J]. Aging and disease, 2018, 9(3): 444-452.
URL:  
http://www.aginganddisease.org/EN/10.14336/AD.2017.0808     OR     http://www.aginganddisease.org/EN/Y2018/V9/I3/444
Figure 1.  Diagrammatic sketch of the screening process.
Figure 2.  Quantitative steps of WMH volume. (A) Original FLAIR image. (B) The high signal area. (C) A sketch of the effective WMH area. (D) Extract of the effective WMH area.
WL (n=76)WOL (n=111)P Value
Age, mean ± SD72.45±10.9368.37±10.810.013 *
Men, n (%)52 (68.42)61 (54.95)0.064
Smoking, n (%)12 (15.79)13 (11.71)0.421
Alcohol, n (%)4 (5.26)7 (6.31)0.766
SBP, mean ± SD139.33±19.19131.47±14.910.002 **
DBP, mean ± SD76.36±12.4473.77±11.590.147
FPG, median (IQR)5.27 (4.69-6.74)5.21 (4.60-6.39)0.391
RBG, median (IQR)7.05 (5.60-9.00)7.20 (6.00-8.90)0.577
PBG, median (IQR)10.40 (7.65-12.85)8.00 (7.00-11.00)0.005 **
HbA1c, median (IQR)6.00 (5.60-6.70)6.00 (5.50-6.70)0.993
TC, median (IQR)3.81 (3.14-4.67)4.12 (3.58-4.90)0.027 *
TG, median (IQR)1.33 (0.86-1.89)1.34 (0.95-1.96)0.414
LDL, median (IQR)1.96 (1.35-2.57)2.21 (1.74-2.72)0.121
HDL, median (IQR)1.02 (0.89-1.15)1.05 (0.86-1.25)0.337
ApoA I, median (IQR)1.06 (0.95-1.27)1.15 (1.04-1.38)0.009 **
BUN, median (IQR)5.40 (4.40-6.96)5.20 (4.30-6.30)0.347
Cr, median (IQR)70.50 (61.50-89.50)66.00 (56.00-78.00)0.044 *
UA, median (IQR)315.5 (243.5-380)315 (268-384)0.412
CRP, median (IQR)4.1 (3.0-10.3)3.7 (2.5-4.8)0.004 **
Hypertension, n (%)37 (48.68)34 (30.63)0.013 *
Diabetes mellitus, n (%)44 (57.89)48 (43.24)0.049 *
Dyslipidaemia, n (%)46 (60.53)60 (54.05)0.380
Interval time, n (%)19 (11-29)15.5 (10-27)0.2931
Table 1  Baseline characteristics.
Group by WMH ProgressionUnivariate Analysis
Multivariate Analysis
OR (95%CI)P ValueOR (95% CI)#P Value
Group 1(≤0)1.001.000
Group 2 (0, 53.64%)3.29 (1.51-7.15)0.0033.36 (1.48-7.67)0.004
Group 3 (≥53.64%)2.21 (1.02-4.81)0.0462.14 (0.93-4.92)0.073
Table 2  Relationship between WMH Progression and LI.
Group by WMH Progression≤24 months
>24 months
OR(95%CI)P ValueOR(95%CI)P Value
Group 1(≤0)1.001.000
Group 2 (0, 53.64%)3.68 (1.51-8.99)0.0042.40 (0.48-11.93)0.285
Group 3 (≥53.64%)2.39 (0.94-6.05)0.0661.83 (0.40-8.49)0.438
Table 3  WMH Progression stratified by time between the two times for MRI.
Figure 3.  WMH volume and Fazekas scale scores for the 1st and 2nd MRI scans for WL and WOL. (A) Comparison of WMH volumes between two groups for two MRI scans. (B) Comparison of WMH progression between two groups. (C) Comparison of Fazekas scale score between two groups for two MRI scans. (D) Comparison of Fazekas scale score changes between two groups. ΔFazekas scale score = the total Fazekas scale score at 2nd MRI scan - the total Fazekas scale score at 1st MRI scan. *** Significant difference (P<0.001).
Figure 4.  Prevalence of LI in patients stratified by WMH progression.
[1] Wardlaw JM, Smith C, Dichgans M (2013). Mechanisms of sporadic cerebral small vessel disease: insights from neuroimaging. Lancet Neurol, 12: 483-497
[2] Choi JC (2015). Genetics of cerebral small vessel disease. J Stroke, 17: 7-16
[3] Hinman JD, Lee MD, Tung S, Vinters HV, Carmichael ST (2015). Molecular disorganization of axons adjacent to human lacunar infarcts. Brain, 138: 736-745
[4] Pinter D, Enzinger C, Fazekas F (2015). Cerebral small vessel disease, cognitive reserve and cognitive dysfunction. J Neurol, 262: 2411-2419
[5] Wardlaw JM, Smith EE, Biessels GJ, Cordonnier C, Fazekas F, Frayne R, et al. (2013). Neuroimaging standards for research into small vessel disease and its contribution to ageing and neurodegeneration. Lancet Neurol, 12: 822-838
[6] Moran C, Phan TG, Srikanth VK (2012). Cerebral small vessel disease: a review of clinical, radiological, and histopathological phenotypes. Int J Stroke, 7: 36-46
[7] Pantoni L (2010). Cerebral small vessel disease: from pathogenesis and clinical characteristics to therapeutic challenges. Lancet Neurol, 9: 689-701
[8] Wu YF, Wu WB, Liu QP, He WW, Ding H, Nedelska Z, et al. (2016). Presence of lacunar infarctions is associated with the spatial navigation impairment in patients with mild cognitive impairment: a DTI study. Oncotarget, 7: 78310-78319
[9] Leeuw FD, Groot JCD, Achten E, Oudkerk M, Ramos LMP, Heijboer R, et al. (2001). Prevalence of cerebral white matter lesions in elderly people: a population based magnetic resonance imaging study. The Rotterdam Scan Study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry, 70: 9-14
[10] Smith EE, Saposnik G, Biessels GJ, Doubal FN, Fornage M, Gorelick PB, et al. (2017). Prevention of Stroke in Patients With Silent Cerebrovascular Disease: A Scientific Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke, 48: e44-e71
[11] Wen W, Sachdev PS (2004). Extent and distribution of white matter hyperintensities in stroke patients: the Sydney Stroke Study. Stroke, 35: 2813-2819
[12] Fanning JP, Wong AA, Fraser JF (2014). The epidemiology of silent brain infarction: a systematic review of population-based cohorts. BMC Med, 12: 119
[13] Allan CL, Zsoldos E, Filippini N, Sexton CE, Topiwala A, Valkanova V, et al. (2015). Lifetime hypertension as a predictor of brain structure in older adults: cohort study with a 28-year follow up. Br J Psychiatry, 206: 308-315
[14] Srikanth V, Phan TG, Chen J, Beare R, Stapleton JM, Reutens DC (2010). The location of white matter lesions and gait--A voxel-based study. Ann Neurol, 67: 265-269
[15] Callisaya ML, Beare R, Phan T, Blizzard L, Thrift AG, Chen J, et al. (2015). Progression of white matter hyperintensities of presumed vascular origin increases the risk of falls in older people. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 70: 360-366
[16] Edwards JD, Jacova C, Sepehry AA, Pratt B, Benavente OR (2013). A quantitative systematic review of domain-specific cognitive impairment in lacunar stroke. Neurology, 80: 315-322
[17] Goldberg I, Auriel E, Russell D, Korczyn AD (2012). Microembolism, silent brain infarcts and dementia. J Neurol Sci, 322: 250-253
[18] Gouw AA, van der Flier WM, Fazekas F, van Straaten EC, Pantoni L, Poggesi A, et al. (2008). Progression of white matter hyperintensities and incidence of new lacunes over a 3-year period: the Leukoaraiosis and Disability study. Stroke, 39: 1414-1420
[19] Fazekas F, Chawluk JB, Alavi A, Hurtig HI, Zimmerman RA (1987). MR signal abnormalities at 1.5 T in Alzheimer’s dementia and normal aging. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 149: 351-356
[20] Boutet C, Rouffiange-Leclair L, Schneider F, Camdessanche JP, Antoine JC, Barral FG (2016). Visual Assessment of Age-Related White Matter Hyperintensities Using FLAIR Images at 3 T: Inter- and Intra-Rater Agreement. Neurodegener Dis, 16: 279-283
[21] Luo Y, Li J, Zhang J, Xu Y (2014). Low HDL cholesterol is correlated to the acute ischemic stroke with diabetes mellitus. Lipids Health Dis, 13: 171
[22] Imaizumi T, Inamura S, Nomura T, Kanno A, Kim SN (2015). The Severity of White Matter Lesions Possibly Influences Stroke Recurrence in Patients with Histories of Lacunar Infarctions. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis, 24: 2154-2160
[23] Helenius J, Mayasi Y, Henninger N (2017). White matter hyperintensity lesion burden is associated with the infarct volume and 90-day outcome in small subcortical infarcts. Acta Neurol Scand, 135: 585-592
[24] Mok V, Kim JS (2015). Prevention and Management of Cerebral Small Vessel Disease. J Stroke, 17: 111-122
[25] Yan T, Yu JR, Zhang YP, Li T (2015). Analysis on correlation of white matter lesion and lacunar infarction with vascular cognitive impairment. Int J Clin Exp Med, 8: 14119-14122
[26] Zhang X, Ding L, Yuan J, Qin W, Hu W (2015). Spatial Relationship between Acute Lacunar Infarction and White Matter Hyperintensities. Eur Neurol, 74: 259-266
[27] Schmidt R, Fazekas F, Enzinger C, Ropele S, Kapeller P, Schmidt H (2002). Risk factors and progression of small vessel disease-related cerebral abnormalities. J Neural Transm Suppl, 62: 47-52
[28] Reijmer YD, Freeze WM, Leemans A, Biessels GJ, Utrecht Vascular Cognitive Impairment Study G (2013). The effect of lacunar infarcts on white matter tract integrity. Stroke, 44: 2019-2021
[29] Traylor M, Rutten-Jacobs LC, Thijs V, Holliday EG, Levi C, Bevan S, et al. (2016). Genetic Associations With White Matter Hyperintensities Confer Risk of Lacunar Stroke. Stroke, 47: 1174-1179
[1] Xuemei Chen, Yuexinzi Jin, Jian Chen, Xin Chen, Xiang Cao, Linjie Yu, Yun Xu. Relationship between White Matter Hyperintensities and Hematoma Volume in Patients with Intracerebral Hematoma[J]. Aging and disease, 2018, 9(6): 999-1009.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
Copyright © 2014 Aging and Disease, All Rights Reserved.
Address: Aging and Disease Editorial Office 3400 Camp Bowie Boulevard Fort Worth, TX76106 USA
Fax: (817) 735-0408 E-mail: editorial@aginganddisease.org
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd