Literature DB >> 24827523

The assessment of neuronal status in normal and cervical spondylotic myelopathy using diffusion tensor imaging.

S Rajasekaran1, Janardhan S Yerramshetty, Vishnuprasath S Chittode, Rishi M Kanna, Gopalakrishnan Balamurali, Ajoy Prasad Shetty.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A prospective observational analysis of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) datametrics collected from control and patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM).
OBJECTIVE: The aims were to study the use of DTI in CSM and to probe whether DTI datametrics and tractography will correlate with magnetic resonance imaging and clinical findings. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Magnetic resonance imaging is the current "gold standard" in the assessment of cord status in CSM; however, various parameters such as extent of compression and presence of signal intensity changes do not correlate well with clinical status. DTI is a novel investigation tool with proven applications in brain pathologies but is not routinely used in spinal cord evaluation.
METHODS: Patients with CSM (n = 35) who required surgical decompression (mean age = 48 yr) and 40 normal individuals (mean age = 38 yr) were included. Diffusion Tensor Imaging of the cervical spine was obtained using a 1.5T magnetic resonance image. Apparent diffusion coefficient, fractional anisotropy, and eigenvalues (E1, E2, and E3) were obtained at each cervical level. The DTI datametrics of CSM patients were compared with normal volunteers and correlated with individual and grouped Nurick grades, which indicate the neurological status of patients.
RESULTS: There was significant difference in DTI datametrics between patients with myelopathy and control (P < 0.05), with decrease in fractional anisotropy (0.49 ± 0.081 vs. 0.53 ± 0.07) and increase in apparent diffusion coefficient (1.8 ± 0.315 vs. 1.44 ± 0.145) and eigenvalues (E1: 2.82 ± 0.395 vs. 2.37 ± 0.221, E2: 1.64 ± 0.39 vs. 1.18 ± 0.198, E3: 0.956 ± 0.277 vs. 0.76 ± 0.142). There was also a significant difference between increasing grades of myelopathy when individuals were grouped as-control, self-ambulant (Nurick grades 1 and 2), and dependent (Nurick grades 3, 4, and 5).
CONCLUSION: The study shows that DTI is a promising and useful investigational tool in evaluation of CSM. There was a significant difference in all DTI values between control and patients with CSM, and there was a significant trend of change in values between control, self-ambulant, and dependent patients. Our results encourage further investigation of this important modality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24827523     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000369

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  15 in total

1.  The evaluation on neural status of cervical spinal cord in normal and Hirayama disease using diffusion tensor imaging.

Authors:  Chi Sun; Shuyi Zhou; Zhongyi Cui; Yuxuan Zhang; Hongli Wang; Jianyuan Jiang; Feizhou Lu; Xiaosheng Ma
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Quantification of DTI in the Pediatric Spinal Cord: Application to Clinical Evaluation in a Healthy Patient Population.

Authors:  B B Reynolds; S By; Q R Weinberg; A A Witt; A T Newton; H R Feiler; B Ramkorun; D B Clayton; P Couture; J E Martus; M Adams; J C Wellons; S A Smith; A Bhatia
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 3.  Translating state-of-the-art spinal cord MRI techniques to clinical use: A systematic review of clinical studies utilizing DTI, MT, MWF, MRS, and fMRI.

Authors:  Allan R Martin; Izabela Aleksanderek; Julien Cohen-Adad; Zenovia Tarmohamed; Lindsay Tetreault; Nathaniel Smith; David W Cadotte; Adrian Crawley; Howard Ginsberg; David J Mikulis; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  Neuroimage Clin       Date:  2015-12-04       Impact factor: 4.881

4.  Apparent diffusion coefficient as an indicator of spinal cord compression due to anterior atlanto-axial subluxation in rheumatoid arthritis patients.

Authors:  Małgorzata Mańczak; Grzegorz Pracoń; Iwona Sudoł-Szopińska; Robert Gasik
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-07-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  Quantitative MR Markers in Non-Myelopathic Spinal Cord Compression: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Jan Valošek; Petr Bednařík; Miloš Keřkovský; Petr Hluštík; Josef Bednařík; Alena Svatkova
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-20       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 6.  Diffusion tensor imaging studies of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiaofei Guan; Guoxin Fan; Xinbo Wu; Guangfei Gu; Xin Gu; Hailong Zhang; Shisheng He
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-02-11       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: What the Neurologist Should Know.

Authors:  Celmir de Oliveira Vilaça; Marco Orsini; Marco A Araujo Leite; Marcos R G de Freitas; Eduardo Davidovich; Rossano Fiorelli; Stenio Fiorelli; Camila Fiorelli; Acary Bulle Oliveira; Bruno Lima Pessoa
Journal:  Neurol Int       Date:  2016-11-23

Review 8.  Traumatic and nontraumatic spinal cord injury: pathological insights from neuroimaging.

Authors:  Gergely David; Siawoosh Mohammadi; Allan R Martin; Julien Cohen-Adad; Nikolaus Weiskopf; Alan Thompson; Patrick Freund
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 42.937

9.  Prediction of the efficacy of surgical intervention in patients with cervical myelopathy by using diffusion tensor 3T-magnetic resonance imaging parameters.

Authors:  Hironori Arima; Shinichi Sakamoto; Kentaro Naito; Toru Yamagata; Takehiro Uda; Kenji Ohata; Toshihiro Takami
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep

10.  Voxel-based analysis of grey and white matter degeneration in cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Patrick Grabher; Siawoosh Mohammadi; Aaron Trachsler; Susanne Friedl; Gergely David; Reto Sutter; Nikolaus Weiskopf; Alan J Thompson; Armin Curt; Patrick Freund
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.