Corpus callosum involvement: a useful clue for differentiating Fabry Disease from Multiple Sclerosis
- 802 Downloads
Multiple sclerosis (MS) has been proposed as a possible differential diagnosis for Fabry disease (FD). The aim of this work was to evaluate the involvement of corpus callosum (CC) on MR images and its possible role as a radiological sign to differentiate between FD and MS.
In this multicentric study, we retrospectively evaluated the presence of white matter lesions (WMLs) on the FLAIR images of 104 patients with FD and 117 patients with MS. The incidence of CC-WML was assessed in the two groups and also in a subgroup of 37 FD patients showing neurological symptoms.
WMLs were detected in 50 of 104 FD patients (48.1%) and in all MS patients. However, a lesion in the CC was detected in only 3 FD patients (2.9%) and in 106 MS patients (90.6%). In the FD subgroup with neurological symptoms, WMLs were present in 26 of 37 patients (70.3%), with two subjects (5.4%) showing a definite callosal lesion.
FD patients have a very low incidence of CC involvement on conventional MR images compared to MS, independently from the clinical presentation and the overall degree of WM involvement. Evaluating the presence of CC lesions on brain MR scans can be used as a radiological sign for a differential diagnosis between MS and FD, rapidly addressing the physician toward a correct diagnosis and subsequent treatment options.
KeywordsMRI Corpus callosum Fabry disease Multiple sclerosis
White matter lesions
Estimated glomerular filtration rate
Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration
Enzyme replacement therapy
Expanded Disability Status Scale
Annualized Relapse Rate
Multiple Sclerosis Severity Score
Compliance with ethical standards
No funding was received for the study.
Conflict of interest
AP has received reimbursement for attending symposiums, honorariums for speaking, funds for research and fees for consulting from Shire, Genzyme and Amicus companies.
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
Informed consent was previously obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 2.Ishii S, Chang HH, Kawasaki K, Yasuda K, Wu HL, Garman SC, Fan JQ (2007) Mutant alpha-galactosidase A enzymes identified in Fabry disease patients with residual enzyme activity: biochemical characterization and restoration of normal intracellular processing by 1-deoxygalactonojirimycin. Biochem J 406(2):285–295. doi: 10.1042/BJ20070479 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Filippi M, Rocca MA, Ciccarelli O, De Stefano N, Evangelou N, Kappos L, Rovira A, Sastre-Garriga J, Tintore M, Frederiksen JL, Gasperini C, Palace J, Reich DS, Banwell B, Montalban X, Barkhof F (2016) MRI criteria for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis: MAGNIMS consensus guidelines. Lancet Neurol 15(3):292–303. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(15)00393-2 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Garg N, Reddel SW, Miller DH, Chataway J, Riminton DS, Barnett Y, Masters L, Barnett MH, Hardy TA (2015) The corpus callosum in the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis and other CNS demyelinating and inflammatory diseases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 86(12):1374–1382. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2014-309649 PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.Vucic Lovrencic M, Radisic Biljak V, Bozicevic S, Prasek M, Pavkovic P, Knotek M (2012) Estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in diabetes: the performance of MDRD and CKD-EPI equations in patients with various degrees of albuminuria. Clin Biochem 45(18):1694–1696. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2012.07.115 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Polman CH, Reingold SC, Banwell B, Clanet M, Cohen JA, Filippi M, Fujihara K, Havrdova E, Hutchinson M, Kappos L, Lublin FD, Montalban X, O’Connor P, Sandberg-Wollheim M, Thompson AJ, Waubant E, Weinshenker B, Wolinsky JS (2011) Diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: 2010 revisions to the McDonald criteria. Ann Neurol 69(2):292–302. doi: 10.1002/ana.22366 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Fazekas F, Enzinger C, Schmidt R, Grittner U, Giese AK, Hennerici MG, Huber R, Jungehulsing GJ, Kaps M, Kessler C, Martus P, Putaala J, Ropele S, Tanislav C, Tatlisumak T, Thijs V, von Sarnowski B, Norrving B, Rolfs A (2015) Brain magnetic resonance imaging findings fail to suspect Fabry disease in young patients with an acute cerebrovascular event. Stroke 46(6):1548–1553. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.008548 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Rost NS, Cloonan L, Kanakis AS, Fitzpatrick KM, Azzariti DR, Clarke V, Lourenco CM, Germain DP, Politei JM, Homola GA, Sommer C, Uceyler N, Sims KB (2016) Determinants of white matter hyperintensity burden in patients with Fabry disease. Neurology 86(20):1880–1886. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002673 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Fellgiebel A, Mazanek M, Whybra C, Beck M, Hartung R, Muller KM, Scheurich A, Dellani PR, Stoeter P, Muller MJ (2006) Pattern of microstructural brain tissue alterations in Fabry disease: a diffusion-tensor imaging study. J Neurol 253(6):780–787. doi: 10.1007/s00415-006-0118-y PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Underhill HR, Golden-Grant K, Garrett LT, Uhrich S, Zielinski BA, Scott CR (2015) Detecting the effects of Fabry disease in the adult human brain with diffusion tensor imaging and fast bound-pool fraction imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 42(6):1611–1622. doi: 10.1002/jmri.24952 PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.McDonald WI, Compston A, Edan G, Goodkin D, Hartung HP, Lublin FD, McFarland HF, Paty DW, Polman CH, Reingold SC, Sandberg-Wollheim M, Sibley W, Thompson A, van den Noort S, Weinshenker BY, Wolinsky JS (2001) Recommended diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis: guidelines from the international panel on the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol 50(1):121–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar