Christoph Schleich1, Anja Müller-Lutz2, Lisa Zimmermann1, Johannes Boos1, Benjamin Schmitt3, Hans-Jörg Wittsack1, Gerald Antoch1, Falk Miese1. 1. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany. 2. University Dusseldorf, Medical Faculty, Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, 40225, Dusseldorf, Germany. Anja.Lutz@med.uni-duesseldorf.de. 3. Siemens Ltd. Australia, Healthcare Sector, 160 Herring Road, Macquarie Park, NSW, 2113, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate glycosaminoglycan chemical exchange saturation transfer (gagCEST) imaging at 3T in the assessment of the GAG content of cervical IVDs in healthy volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two cervical intervertebral discs of seven healthy volunteers (four females, three males; mean age: 21.4 ± 1.4 years; range: 19-24 years) were examined at a 3T MRI scanner in this prospective study. The MRI protocol comprised standard morphological, sagittal T2 weighted (T2w) images to assess the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based grading system for cervical intervertebral disc degeneration (IVD) and biochemical imaging with gagCEST to calculate a region-of-interest analysis of nucleus pulposus (NP) and annulus fibrosus (AF). RESULTS: GagCEST of cervical IVDs was technically successful at 3T with significant higher gagCEST values in NP compared to AF (1.17% ± 1.03% vs. 0.79% ± 1.75%; p = 0.005). We found topological differences of gagCEST values of the cervical spine with significant higher gagCEST effects in lower IVDs (r = 1; p = 0). We could demonstrate a significant, negative correlation between gagCEST values and cervical disc degeneration of NP (r = -0.360; p = 0.019). Non-degenerated IVDs had significantly higher gagCEST effects compared to degenerated IVDs in NP (1.76% ± 0.92% vs. 0.52% ± 1.17%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Biochemical imaging of cervical IVDs is feasible at 3T. GagCEST analysis demonstrated a topological GAG distribution of the cervical spine. The depletion of GAG in the NP with increasing level of morphological degeneration can be assessed using gagCEST imaging.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate glycosaminoglycan chemical exchange saturation transfer (gagCEST) imaging at 3T in the assessment of the GAG content of cervical IVDs in healthy volunteers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-two cervical intervertebral discs of seven healthy volunteers (four females, three males; mean age: 21.4 ± 1.4 years; range: 19-24 years) were examined at a 3T MRI scanner in this prospective study. The MRI protocol comprised standard morphological, sagittal T2 weighted (T2w) images to assess the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) based grading system for cervical intervertebral disc degeneration (IVD) and biochemical imaging with gagCEST to calculate a region-of-interest analysis of nucleus pulposus (NP) and annulus fibrosus (AF). RESULTS: GagCEST of cervical IVDs was technically successful at 3T with significant higher gagCEST values in NP compared to AF (1.17% ± 1.03% vs. 0.79% ± 1.75%; p = 0.005). We found topological differences of gagCEST values of the cervical spine with significant higher gagCEST effects in lower IVDs (r = 1; p = 0). We could demonstrate a significant, negative correlation between gagCEST values and cervical disc degeneration of NP (r = -0.360; p = 0.019). Non-degenerated IVDs had significantly higher gagCEST effects compared to degenerated IVDs in NP (1.76% ± 0.92% vs. 0.52% ± 1.17%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Biochemical imaging of cervical IVDs is feasible at 3T. GagCEST analysis demonstrated a topological GAG distribution of the cervical spine. The depletion of GAG in the NP with increasing level of morphological degeneration can be assessed using gagCEST imaging.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cervical intervertebral discs; Chemical exchange saturation transfer; Glycosaminoglycan; Magnetic resonance imaging
Authors: Howard S An; Paul A Anderson; Victor M Haughton; James C Iatridis; James D Kang; Jeffrey C Lotz; Raghu N Natarajan; Theodore R Oegema; Peter Roughley; Lori A Setton; Jill P Urban; Tapio Videman; Gunnar B J Andersson; James N Weinstein Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-12-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Gwendolyn Sowa; Gianluca Vadalà; Rebecca Studer; John Kompel; Christina Iucu; Helga Georgescu; Lars Gilbertson; James Kang Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2008-08-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Rose G Long; Ivan Zderic; Boyko Gueorguiev; Stephen J Ferguson; Mauro Alini; Sibylle Grad; James C Iatridis Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2018-06-20 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Miriam Frenken; David Latz; Erik Schiffner; Wolfgang Alois Quante; Maxime Knautz; Daniel Benjamin Abrar; Benedikt Schaarschmidt; Christoph Schleich Journal: J Orthop Date: 2019-06-04
Authors: Tao Jin; Francesca J Nicholls; William R Crum; Harmanvir Ghuman; Stephen F Badylak; Michel Modo Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2016-10-29 Impact factor: 15.304