• Kacie L Wright, Ramona O Hopkins, Frank E Robertson, Erin D Bigler, H Gerry Taylor, Kenneth H Rubin, Kathryn Vannatta, Terry Stancin, and Keith Owen Yeates.
• Psychology Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA.
• J. Neurotrauma. 2020 Oct 15; 37 (20): 218821972188-2197.

AbstractWhite matter (WM) abnormalities, such as atrophy and hyperintensities (WMH), can be accessed via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI). Several methods are available to classify WM abnormalities (i.e., total WM volumes and WMHs), but automated and manual volumes and clinical ratings have yet to be compared in pediatric TBI. In addition, WM integrity has been associated reliably with processing speed. Consequently, methods of assessing WM integrity should relate to processing speed to have clinical application. This study had two goals: (1) to compare Scheltens rating scale, manual tracing, FreeSurfer, and NeuroQuant® methods of assessing WM abnormalities, and (2) to relate WM methods to processing speed scores. We report findings from the Social Outcomes of Brain Injury in Kids (SOBIK) study, a multi-center study of 60 children with chronic TBI (65% male) from ages 8-13. Scheltens WMH ratings had good to excellent agreement with WMH volumes for both NeuroQuant (ICC = 0.62; r = 0.29, p = 0.005) and manual tracing (ICC = 0.82; r = 0.50, p = 0.000). NeuroQuant WMH volumes did not correlate with manually traced WMH volumes (r = 0.12, p = 0.21) and had poor agreement (ICC = 0.24). NeuroQuant and FreeSurfer total WM volumes correlated (r = 0.38, p = 0.004) and had fair agreement (ICC = 0.52). The WMH assessment methods, both ratings and volumes, were associated with processing speed scores. In contrast, total WM volume was not related to processing speed. Measures of WMH may hold clinical utility for predicting cognitive functioning after pediatric TBI.

22 keywords...

hide…