Evaluation of Cerebral Venous Outflow: A Comparative Study between Patients with Multiple Sclerosis and Controls
2011

Cerebral Venous Outflow in Multiple Sclerosis

Sample size: 79 publication Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Monti Lucia, Menci Elisabetta, Ulivelli Monica, Cerase Alfonso, Bartalini Sabina, Piu Pietro, Marotti Nicola, Leonini Sara, Galluzzi Paolo, Romano Daniele G., Casasco Alfredo E., Venturi Carlo

Primary Institution: Unit of Neuroimaging and Neurointervention, Department of Neurological and Sensorial Sciences, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Santa Maria alle Scotte General Hospital, Siena, Italy

Hypothesis

Is there a significant difference in cerebral venous outflow between healthy subjects and patients with multiple sclerosis?

Conclusion

Patients with multiple sclerosis show a significant negative change in cerebral venous outflow compared to healthy subjects.

Supporting Evidence

  • Negative ΔCVF values were significantly associated with MS (p<0.0001).
  • 96.3% of healthy subjects had positive ΔCVF values.
  • Concordance between two blinded observers was 86.6%.
  • 15 IJVs stenosis were demonstrated in the MS patients group.
  • Statistical analysis showed significant differences in venous outflow between MS patients and healthy controls.

Takeaway

This study found that people with multiple sclerosis have a different way their blood drains from the brain compared to healthy people.

Methodology

The study measured cerebral venous outflow using Colour-Doppler Sonography in 27 healthy adults and 52 patients with multiple sclerosis.

Potential Biases

The operators were not blinded to the clinical status of the subjects.

Limitations

The study had a limited number of MS patients and the operators were not blinded to the clinical status.

Participant Demographics

27 healthy adults (13 females, 14 males) and 52 MS patients (32 females, 20 males).

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.0001

Statistical Significance

p<0.0001

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0025012

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication