Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31185944›Full record

Observational studyBMC neurology2019

No association between variations in extracranial venous anatomy and clinical outcomes in multiple sclerosis patients over 5 years.

Sirin Gandhi, Karen Marr, Marcello Mancini, Maria Grazia Caprio, Dejan Jakimovski, Avinash Chandra, Jesper Hagemeier, David Hojnacki, Channa Kolb, Bianca Weinstock-Guttman and 1 more

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC neurology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Developmental venous anomalies in patients with multiple sclerosis: is that a coincidence or an ancillary finding?Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Sirin GandhiBuffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Karen MarrBuffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Marcello ManciniInstitute of Biostructure and Bioimaging, National Research Council of Italy, Rome, Italy.
Maria Grazia CaprioInstitute of Biostructure and Bioimaging, National Research Council of Italy, Rome, Italy.
Dejan JakimovskiBuffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Avinash ChandraBuffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Jesper HagemeierBuffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
David HojnackiJacobs Multiple Sclerosis Center, Department of Neurology, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Channa KolbJacobs Multiple Sclerosis Center, Department of Neurology, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Bianca Weinstock-GuttmanJacobs Multiple Sclerosis Center, Department of Neurology, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Robert ZivadinovBuffalo Neuroimaging Analysis Center, Department of Neurology, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA. rzivadinov@bnac.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7799-1485

Funding

University of Buffalo Clinical and Translational Science Institute - Supplement SchulyerUL1TR001412 · NCATS · STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO · PI MURPHY, TIMOTHY F · 2015 to 2024
$33.8M
Jacquemin Family Foundation N/ANational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health UL1TR001412NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001412The Annette Funicello Research Fund for Neurological Diseases N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNo longitudinal, long-term, follow-up studies have explored the association between presence and severity of variations in extracranial venous anatomy, and clinical outcomes in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS).

objectiveThis prospective 5-year follow-up study assessed the relationship of variations in extracranial venous anatomy, indicative of chronic cerebrospinal venous insufficiency (CCSVI) on Doppler sonography, according to the International Society for Neurovascular Disease (ISNVD) proposed consensus criteria, with clinical outcomes and disease progression in MS patients.

methods90 MS patients (52 relapsing-remitting, RRMS and 38 secondary-progressive, SPMS) and 38 age- and sex-matched HIs were prospectively followed for 5.5 years. Extracranial and transcranial Doppler-based venous hemodynamic assessment was conducted at baseline and follow-up to determine the extent of variations in extracranial venous anatomy. Change in Expanded Disability Status Scale (∆EDSS), development of disability progression (DP) and annualized relapse rate (ARR) were assessed.

resultsNo significant differences were observed in MS patients, based on their presence of variations in extracranial venous anatomy at baseline or at the follow-up, in ∆EDSS, development of DP or ARR. While more MS patients had ISNVD CCSVI criteria fulfilled at baseline compared to HIs (58% vs. 37%, p = 0.03), no differences were found at the 5-year follow-up (61% vs. 56%, p = 0.486). DISCUSSION: This is the longest follow-up study assessing the longitudinal relationship between the presence of variations in extracranial venous anatomy and clinical outcomes in MS patients.

conclusionThe presence of variations in extracranial venous anatomy does not influence clinical outcomes over the 5-year follow-up in MS patients.

Indexed as

Multiple SclerosisAdultAzygos VeinBrainCase-Control StudiesCerebrovascular CirculationDisease ProgressionFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansJugular VeinsLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRecurrenceCCSVIDisability progressionExtracranialLongitudinalMultiple sclerosisRelapse rateVariations in extracranial venous anatomy

Identifiers

PMID31185944
PMCPMC6560860

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.