↓ Skip to main content

Corpus callosum involvement: a useful clue for differentiating Fabry Disease from Multiple Sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Neuroradiology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Corpus callosum involvement: a useful clue for differentiating Fabry Disease from Multiple Sclerosis
Published in
Neuroradiology, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00234-017-1829-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sirio Cocozza, Gaia Olivo, Eleonora Riccio, Camilla Russo, Giuseppe Pontillo, Lorenzo Ugga, Silvia Migliaccio, Dario de Rosa, Sandro Feriozzi, Massimiliano Veroux, Yuri Battaglia, Daniela Concolino, Federico Pieruzzi, Antonino Tuttolomondo, Aurelio Caronia, Cinzia Valeria Russo, Roberta Lanzillo, Vincenzo Brescia Morra, Massimo Imbriaco, Arturo Brunetti, Enrico Tedeschi, Antonio Pisani

Abstract

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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 5 22%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Other 5 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 39%
Unspecified 8 35%
Neuroscience 4 17%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2017.
All research outputs
#4,256,080
of 9,700,021 outputs
Outputs from Neuroradiology
#142
of 392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,821
of 262,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuroradiology
#4
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,700,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 55th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 392 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.