Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34035361›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

White matter hyperintensity in different migraine subtypes.

L A Dobrynina, A D Suslina, M V Gubanova, A V Belopasova, A N Sergeeva, S Evers, E V Gnedovskaya, M V Krotenkova

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pancreatic Steatosis: Innocent Bystander or Silent Culprit?The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

L A Dobrynina3rd Neurological Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia.
A D SuslinaNeuroradiology Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia.
M V Gubanova3rd Neurological Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia. m.v.gubanova@yandex.ru.ORCID 0000-0002-9893-712X
A V Belopasova3rd Neurological Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia.
A N SergeevaNeuroradiology Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia.
S EversFaculty of Medicine, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
E V Gnedovskaya3rd Neurological Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia.
M V KrotenkovaNeuroradiology Department, Research Center of Neurology, Volokolamskoe shosse, 80, 125367, Moscow, Russia.
Research Center of Neurology · RUUniversity of Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnostic value of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) in different types of migraineare unknown. To evaluate the WMH pattern of different subtypes in migraine patients with no vascular risk factors. 92 migraine patients (73 females, mean age 34.6 ± 8.9; 61 episodic migraine, 31 chronic migraine, 36 migraine with aura, 56 migraine without aura) without vascular risk factors underwent brain MRI (3 T). We also included a matched healthy control group with no migraine (n = 24). The prevalence of WMH in different types of migraine was similar and ranged from 38.7 to 44.4%; the control group showed no WMH at all. Lesions were located within frontal, parietal and temporal lobes (in order of decreasing incidence) in juxtacortical and/or deep white matter. WMH appeared as round or slightly elongated foci with a median size of 2.5 mm [1.5; 3]. Total number, size and prevalence of WMH by lobes and white matter regions were similar between groups, and no interaction with age or sex was found. The number of lesions within the frontal lobe juxtacortical white matter correlated with the age of patients (r = 0.331, p = 0.001) and the duration since migraine onset (r = 0.264, p = 0.012). Patients with different migraine subtypes and without vascular risk factors are characterized by a similar pattern of WMH in the absence of subclinical infarctions or microbleedings. Therefore, WMH have no relevant prognostic value regarding the course of migraine and vascular complications. WMH pattern may be used to differentiate migraine as a primary disorder and other disorders with migraine-like headache and WMH.

Indexed as

AdultBiomarkersFemaleHeadacheHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMigraine DisordersPain ThresholdWhite MatterBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID34035361
PMCPMC8149843
OpenAlexW3124845123

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.