BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Evaluation of the spinal cord is important in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with multiple sclerosis. Our purpose was to investigate diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) changes in different regions of normal-appearing spinal cord (NASC) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). METHODS: Axial DTI of the cervical spinal cord was performed in 24 patients with RRMS and 24 age- and sex-matched control subjects. Fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) were calculated in separate regions of interest (ROIs) in the anterior, lateral, and posterior spinal cord, bilaterally, and the central spinal cord, at the C2-C3 level. Patients and control subjects were compared with respect to FA and MD with the use of an exact Mann-Whitney test. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis assessed the utility of each measure for the diagnosis of RRMS. RESULTS: DTI metrics in areas of NASC in MS were significantly different in patients compared with control subjects; FA was lower in the lateral (mean +/- SD of 0.56 +/- 0.10 versus 0.69 +/- 0.09 in control subjects, P < .0001), posterior (0.52 +/- 0.11 versus 0.63 +/- 0.10, P < .0001), and central (0.53 +/- 0.10 versus 0.58 +/- 0.10, P = .049) NASC ROIs. Assessing DTI metrics in the diagnosis of MS, a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.4 to 97.1) and a specificity of 91.7% (95% CI, 73.0 to 98.7) were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: The NASC in RRMS demonstrates DTI changes. This may prove useful in detecting occult spinal cord pathology, predicting clinical course, and monitoring disease progression and therapeutic effect in MS.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Evaluation of the spinal cord is important in the diagnosis and follow-up of patients with multiple sclerosis. Our purpose was to investigate diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) changes in different regions of normal-appearing spinal cord (NASC) in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). METHODS: Axial DTI of the cervical spinal cord was performed in 24 patients with RRMS and 24 age- and sex-matched control subjects. Fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) were calculated in separate regions of interest (ROIs) in the anterior, lateral, and posterior spinal cord, bilaterally, and the central spinal cord, at the C2-C3 level. Patients and control subjects were compared with respect to FA and MD with the use of an exact Mann-Whitney test. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis assessed the utility of each measure for the diagnosis of RRMS. RESULTS: DTI metrics in areas of NASC in MS were significantly different in patients compared with control subjects; FA was lower in the lateral (mean +/- SD of 0.56 +/- 0.10 versus 0.69 +/- 0.09 in control subjects, P < .0001), posterior (0.52 +/- 0.11 versus 0.63 +/- 0.10, P < .0001), and central (0.53 +/- 0.10 versus 0.58 +/- 0.10, P = .049) NASC ROIs. Assessing DTI metrics in the diagnosis of MS, a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.4 to 97.1) and a specificity of 91.7% (95% CI, 73.0 to 98.7) were demonstrated. CONCLUSION: The NASC in RRMS demonstrates DTI changes. This may prove useful in detecting occult spinal cord pathology, predicting clinical course, and monitoring disease progression and therapeutic effect in MS.
Authors: Paola Valsasina; Maria A Rocca; Federica Agosta; Beatrice Benedetti; Mark A Horsfield; Antonio Gallo; Marco Rovaris; Giancarlo Comi; Massimo Filippi Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2005-03-31 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: C A Davie; G J Barker; A J Thompson; P S Tofts; W I McDonald; D H Miller Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 1997-12 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Eric D Schwartz; Emily T Cooper; Chih-Liang Chin; Suzanne Wehrli; Alan Tessler; David B Hackney Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: N De Stefano; P M Matthews; M Filippi; F Agosta; M De Luca; M L Bartolozzi; L Guidi; A Ghezzi; E Montanari; A Cifelli; A Federico; S M Smith Journal: Neurology Date: 2003-04-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: W I McDonald; A Compston; G Edan; D Goodkin; H P Hartung; F D Lublin; H F McFarland; D W Paty; C H Polman; S C Reingold; M Sandberg-Wollheim; W Sibley; A Thompson; S van den Noort; B Y Weinshenker; J S Wolinsky Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Kelley C Atkinson; Jeong Bin Lee; Jonathan P C Hasselmann; Sung Hoon Kim; Alyson Drew; Joselyn Soto; John A Katzenellenbogen; Neil G Harris; Andre Obenaus; Seema K Tiwari-Woodruff Journal: Neurobiol Dis Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 5.996
Authors: Joon Woo Lee; Jae Hyoung Kim; Jong Bin Park; Kun Woo Park; Jin S Yeom; Guen Young Lee; Heung Sik Kang Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Cornelia Laule; Irene M Vavasour; Shannon H Kolind; David K B Li; Tony L Traboulsee; G R Wayne Moore; Alex L MacKay Journal: Neurotherapeutics Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 7.620
Authors: J M Stankiewicz; M Neema; D C Alsop; B C Healy; A Arora; G J Buckle; T Chitnis; C R G Guttmann; D Hackney; R Bakshi Journal: J Neurol Sci Date: 2009-04-15 Impact factor: 3.181