This Is MS Multiple Sclerosis Knowledge & Support Community

New imaging research shows increased iron in the brain in earliest stages of MS

While it's been known for over a century that iron deposits in the brain play a role in the pathology of Multiple Sclerosis (MS), new imaging research from Western University (London, Canada) helps to answer the question of whether these accumulations are a cause or consequence of the disease. The study led by Ravi Menon, PhD, of the Robarts Research Institute found iron deposits in deep gray matter, suggesting the accumulation occurs very early in the disease course. The researchers also found evidence casting further doubt on the controversial liberation therapy for MS. The research is in early publication online in Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders........ Read More - http://www.ms-uk.org/brainirondeposits

This study is noting what Dr. Haacke, Ge and Zivadinov have been saying for a decade-
iron deposition is the first thing that happens in the MS brain, before lesions, before a definite MS diagnosis, and there is a correlation to a change in venous hemodynamics. It's not about measuring the veins--it's flow, not architecture.

I really wish these researchers would read and reference each others' papers before claiming there is no correlation to CCSVI. So much wasted time.

Fifty-two patients with MS were recruited to assess abnormal iron content in their basal ganglia and thalamas (THA) structures. One hundred twenty-two healthy subjects were recruited to establish a baseline of normal iron content in deep gray matter (GM) structures.

RESULTS: A clear separation between iron content in healthy subjects versus patients with MS was seen. For healthy subjects 13% and for patients with MS 65% showed an iron-weighting factor.

The results for those patients younger than 40 years are even more impressive. In these cases, only 1% of healthy subjects and 67% of patients with RRMS showed abnormally high iron content.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22116106

Sixteen (16) consecutive relapsing-remitting MS patients and 8 age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HC) were scanned on a GE 3T scanner, using SWI.

Results. All 16 MS patients fulfilled the diagnosis of CCSVI, compared to none of the HC. In MS patients, the higher iron concentration in the pulvinar nucleus of the thalamus, thalamus, globus pallidus, and hippocampus was related to a higher number of venous hemodynamic (VH) criteria . There was also a significant association between a higher number of VH criteria and higher iron concentration of over- lapping T2 (r=-0.64, P=0.007) and T1 (r=-0.56, P=0.023) phase lesions. Iron concentration measures were related to longer disease duration and increased disability as measured by EDSS and MSFC, and to increased MRI lesion burden and decreased brain volume.

Conclusion. The findings from this pilot study suggest that CCSVI may be an important mechanism related to iron deposition in the brain parenchyma of MS patients. In turn, iron deposition, as measured by SWI, is a modest-to-strong predictor of disability progression, lesion volume accumulation and atrophy development in patients with MS.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20351672

I wrote about these, and other studies on iron and the links to disturbed venous hemodynamics, almost two years ago.
http://ccsviinms.blogspot.com/2012/01/i ... -know.html
cheer

Hi Cheer,

Interesting that all this is going on 15 minutes from where I live! They do some very heavy research at this institute and I'm sure the MS Clinic next door to them is quite interested in what they've found. Now I wonder what they will do with these findings.

Harry

I am wondering if it is significant that " both groups had narrower veins on one side compared to the other."?

When I showed my first MRV (which was not performed well) to Dr Dake in the USA, he noted that one side was more prominent than the other. However, when I saw Prof Thompson in Victoria AUS, and mentioned/pointed it out to him, he spun around and pulled one of the text books off his shelf behind him, and said and showed me a passage saying that it was normal or common (I can't remember his exact words or the exact wording of the passage).

i must be really dumb cause these smart researchers get it and i don't. what am I missing?

1) you have iron in the brain (that's bad)

2) iron is normally in the bloodstream not floating around the brain (just looked it up - About 70 percent of your body's iron is found in the red blood cells of your blood and the good old BBB keeps it out of the brain)

3) CCSVI, in some way we don't understand yet, affects blood flow from/to the head (i saw my wife's scans - her vein went from a small little red line to a huge "fill the whole screen" splatter of blood because of major reflux)

So, for every beat of her heart, blood is pooling on the right side of her neck (um, isn't that pretty close to her brain?). Yet the iron in her brain is no way related to that. I wish someone would explain that to me.

In the mean time, I will ask my wife to stop sticking those rusty old nails up her nose - that must be where the iron is coming from

Brainteaser wrote:I am wondering if it is significant that " both groups had narrower veins on one side compared to the other."?

In this new iron in MS study from Western University, the researchers found that one jugular vein was larger in diameter than the other in normals and in CIS. And then they use this "finding" to refute the correlation of jugular size with CCSVI....but CCSVI has never been about jugular size or dominance. It's always been about flow, or as BNAC calls it "venous hemodynamic insufficiency."
Venous hemodynamics have a direct correlation on CCSVI and iron deposition into the brain.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20351672


Researchers have recently begun noting that the jugular veins are not the exact same size on both sides in humans. The irony here is that our understanding of the jugular veins has been mostly nonexistent until Dr. Zamboni began publishing.

When you consider the thousands of studies done on arteries-- the lack of knowledge into what a "normal jugular vein" looks like or how "normal venous return" functions-- is incredible. As Dr. B.B. Lee, a venous expert, said to me at the Bologna airport as we waited for our flights home---"we simply have not studied the jugular veins, or human venous return. We do not know what we do not know."

(1) The right IJV was larger in 81.3 %, while the left IJV was larger in only 11.0 %.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 013-0176-z

Here's a study on autopsied individuals, finding that the right IJV is larger than the left in 73.3% of individuals.
http://www.rjlm.ro/system/revista/14/125-128.pdf

Here's another study noting the prevelance of larger right jugular veins--
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811899/

And all of these studies are from the last 4 years. So--it really is a new frontier of medical research.
(Cure--we had discussed this one side being more prominent on MRV with Dr. Dake--but in Jeff's case, he had 0% jugular flow on the left side, and that was what made his venous insufficiency something worthy of being explored via catheter.)
cheer

I agree that there seems to be much to learn in this area and the research is haphazard. Even the very best may be going by instinct rather than solid science. Just for the record, I seem to fail all the 'normal' standards so far of the above studies are concerned in that my left IJV is four times the size of the right, my right is 5mm and yet the right flow is said to be 'acceptable'.