| Literature DB >> 22593708 |
Tobias Engelhorn1, Georg Michelson, Simone Waerntges, Marlen Otto, Ahmed El-Rafei, Tobias Struffert, Arnd Doerfler.
Abstract
Purpose of this study was to evaluate with diffusion-tensor imaging (DTI) changes of radial diffusivity (RD) and fractional anisotropy (FA) in the optic nerve (ON) and optic radiation (OR) in glaucoma and to determine whether changes in RD and FA correlate with disease severity. Therefore, glaucoma patients and controls were examined using 3T. Regions of interest were positioned on RD and FA maps, and mean values were calculated for ON and OR and correlated with optic nerve atrophy and reduced spatial-temporal contrast sensitivity (STCS) of the retina. We found, that RD in glaucoma patients was significantly higher in the ON (0.74 ± 0.21 versus 0.58 ± 0.17·10(-3) mm(2) s(-1); P < 0.05) and OR (0.79 ± 0.23 versus 0.62 ± 0.14·10(-3) mm(2) s(-1); P < 0.05) compared to controls. Aside, FA was significantly decreased (0.48 ± 0.15 versus 0.66 ± 0.12 and 0.50 ± 0.20 versus 0.66 ± 0.11; P < 0.05). Hereby, correlation between changes in RD/FA and optic nerve atrophy/STCS was observed (r > 0.77). In conclusion, DTI at 3 Tesla allows robust RD and FA measurements in the ON and OR. Hereby, the extent of RD increase and FA decrease in glaucoma correlate with established ophthalmological examinations.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22593708 PMCID: PMC3349161 DOI: 10.1100/2012/849632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 1Different regions of interest (red circles in the right visual pathways) that were used for evaluation of radial diffusivity (RD) and fractional anisotropy (FA) in glaucoma patients and controls in the left and right visual pathways: intraorbital part of the optic nerve (a), intracranial part of the optic nerve (b), optic chiasm (c), lateral geniculate nucleus (d), and different sections of the optic radiation (e, f). All regions of interest are drawn in a fused dataset of FA-weighted DTI and 3D-MPRAGE sequences (a–c: coronal slides; d–f: axial slides).
Averaged RD values in different ROI of glaucoma patients and controls.
| Localization | Mean RD ± standard deviation (glaucoma patients versus controls) |
|---|---|
| ROI 1 | 0.74 ± 0.21 versus 0.58 ± 0.17·10−3 mm2 s−1∗ |
| ROI 2 | 0.70 ± 0.26 versus 0.55 ± 0.16·10−3 mm2 s−1∗ |
| ROI 3 | 0.76 ± 0.22 versus 0.60 ± 0.14·10−3 mm2 s−1∗ |
| ROI 4 | 0.79 ± 0.24 versus 0.65 ± 0.14·10−3 mm2 s−1∗ |
*Significant lower RD values compared to controls (P < 0.05).
Averaged FA values in different ROIs of glaucoma patients and controls.
| Localization | Mean FA ± standard deviation (glaucoma patients versus controls) |
|---|---|
| ROI 1 | 0.48 ± 0.15 versus 0.66 ± 0.12* |
| ROI 2 | 0.40 ± 0.16 versus 0.57 ± 0.13* |
| ROI 3 | 0.48 ± 0.17 versus 0.64 ± 0.11* |
| ROI 4 | 0.44 ± 0.22 versus 0.53 ± 0.20* |
*Significant lower FA values compared to controls (P < 0.05).