BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Our aim was to investigate the extent and severity of changes in spinal cord diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters in patients with cervical cord injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DTI was performed in 20 symptomatic patients (mean, 45.7 +/- 17.7 years of age; 2 women, 18 men) with cervical spine trauma and 8 volunteers (mean, 34.2 +/- 10.7 years of age; 6 men, 2 women). The whole cord and regional apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), fractional anisotropy (FA), relative anisotropy (RA), and volume ratio (VR) of patients and volunteers were compared. DTI parameters were calculated in 16 patients. MR imaging demonstrated hemorrhagic cord contusions (n = 6), nonhemorrhagic cord contusions (n = 4), and soft-tissue injury (n = 6). Medical records were reviewed for extent of neurologic deficit. RESULTS: Regional ADC values differed significantly between upper and mid and upper and lower (both, P < .004) cervical cord sections. FA was significantly different between upper and lower sections (P < .03). Whole cord ADC values were significantly lower in patients than in volunteers (P < .0001). Whole spine FA was not significantly decreased in patients (P < .06). ADC and FA values were significantly decreased at injury sites when compared with volunteers (P < .031 and .0001, respectively). The greatest differences in whole cord ADC, FA, RA, and VR were in patients with hemorrhagic cord contusions compared with healthy volunteers (P < .0001, .003, .0005, and .008, respectively). CONCLUSION: DTI parameters are sensitive markers of cervical cord injury, with ADC showing the greatest sensitivity. Changes in DTI parameters are most marked at injury sites and reflect the severity of cord injury.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Our aim was to investigate the extent and severity of changes in spinal cord diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters in patients with cervical cord injury. MATERIALS AND METHODS: DTI was performed in 20 symptomatic patients (mean, 45.7 +/- 17.7 years of age; 2 women, 18 men) with cervical spine trauma and 8 volunteers (mean, 34.2 +/- 10.7 years of age; 6 men, 2 women). The whole cord and regional apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), fractional anisotropy (FA), relative anisotropy (RA), and volume ratio (VR) of patients and volunteers were compared. DTI parameters were calculated in 16 patients. MR imaging demonstrated hemorrhagic cord contusions (n = 6), nonhemorrhagic cord contusions (n = 4), and soft-tissue injury (n = 6). Medical records were reviewed for extent of neurologic deficit. RESULTS: Regional ADC values differed significantly between upper and mid and upper and lower (both, P < .004) cervical cord sections. FA was significantly different between upper and lower sections (P < .03). Whole cord ADC values were significantly lower in patients than in volunteers (P < .0001). Whole spine FA was not significantly decreased in patients (P < .06). ADC and FA values were significantly decreased at injury sites when compared with volunteers (P < .031 and .0001, respectively). The greatest differences in whole cord ADC, FA, RA, and VR were in patients with hemorrhagic cord contusions compared with healthy volunteers (P < .0001, .003, .0005, and .008, respectively). CONCLUSION: DTI parameters are sensitive markers of cervical cord injury, with ADC showing the greatest sensitivity. Changes in DTI parameters are most marked at injury sites and reflect the severity of cord injury.
Authors: R W Katzberg; P F Benedetti; C M Drake; M Ivanovic; R A Levine; C S Beatty; W R Nemzek; R A McFall; F K Ontell; D M Bishop; V C Poirier; B W Chong Journal: Radiology Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 11.105
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: Ayhan Demir; Mario Ries; Crit T W Moonen; Jean-Marc Vital; Joël Dehais; Pierre Arne; Jean-Marie Caillé; Vincent Dousset Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Claudia A M Wheeler-Kingshott; Simon J Hickman; Geoffrey J M Parker; Olga Ciccarelli; Mark R Symms; David H Miller; Gareth J Barker Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Nadia Barakat; Pallav Shah; Scott H Faro; John P Gaughan; Devon Middleton; M J Mulcahey; Feroze B Mohamed Journal: World J Radiol Date: 2015-09-28
Authors: F Biering-Sørensen; S Alai; K Anderson; S Charlifue; Y Chen; M DeVivo; A E Flanders; L Jones; N Kleitman; A Lans; V K Noonan; J Odenkirchen; J Steeves; K Tansey; E Widerström-Noga; L B Jakeman Journal: Spinal Cord Date: 2015-02-10 Impact factor: 2.772
Authors: F B Mohamed; L N Hunter; N Barakat; C-S J Liu; H Sair; A F Samdani; R R Betz; S H Faro; J Gaughan; M J Mulcahey Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-01-13 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Megan Ryan Detloff; Evan J Smith; Daniel Quiros Molina; Patrick D Ganzer; John D Houlé Journal: Exp Neurol Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 5.330
Authors: J Hodel; P Besson; O Outteryck; H Zéphir; D Ducreux; A Monnet; D Chéchin; M Zins; M Rodallec; J P Pruvo; P Vermersch; X Leclerc Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-08-23 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Brian J Kelley; Noam Y Harel; Chang-Yeon Kim; Xenophon Papademetris; Daniel Coman; Xingxing Wang; Omar Hasan; Adam Kaufman; Ronen Globinsky; Lawrence H Staib; William B J Cafferty; Fahmeed Hyder; Stephen M Strittmatter Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2014-07-08 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Ke Li; Elham Javed; Tamara J Hala; Daniel Sannie; Kathleen A Regan; Nicholas J Maragakis; Megan C Wright; David J Poulsen; Angelo C Lepore Journal: Mol Ther Date: 2014-12-10 Impact factor: 11.454
Authors: Joong H Kim; David N Loy; Qing Wang; Matthew D Budde; Robert E Schmidt; Kathryn Trinkaus; Sheng-Kwei Song Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.269