A R Martin1, B De Leener2, J Cohen-Adad2,3, D W Cadotte1, S Kalsi-Ryan1, S F Lange4, L Tetreault1, A Nouri1, A Crawley5, D J Mikulis5, H Ginsberg1, M G Fehlings6. 1. From the Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery (A.R.M., D.W.C., S.K.-R., L.T., A.N., H.G., M.G.F.). 2. Polytechnique Montreal (B.D.L., J.C.-A.), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 3. Functional Neuroimaging Unit (J.C.-A.), Centre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 4. University of Groningen (S.F.L.), Groningen, the Netherlands. 5. Department of Medical Imaging (A.C., D.J.M.), University of Toronto and the University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. From the Division of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery (A.R.M., D.W.C., S.K.-R., L.T., A.N., H.G., M.G.F.) michael.fehlings@uhn.on.ca madeleineoh@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: T2*-weighted imaging provides sharp contrast between spinal cord GM and WM, allowing their segmentation and cross-sectional area measurement. Injured WM demonstrates T2*WI hyperintensity but requires normalization for quantitative use. We introduce T2*WI WM/GM signal-intensity ratio and compare it against cross-sectional area, the DTI metric fractional anisotropy, and magnetization transfer ratio in degenerative cervical myelopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy and 40 healthy subjects underwent 3T MR imaging, covering C1-C7. Metrics were automatically extracted at maximally compressed and uncompressed rostral/caudal levels. Normalized metrics were compared with t tests, area under the curve, and logistic regression. Relationships with clinical measures were analyzed by using Pearson correlation and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The maximally compressed level cross-sectional area demonstrated superior differences (P = 1 × 10-13), diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve = 0.890), and univariate correlation with the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (0.66). T2*WI WM/GM showed strong differences (rostral: P = 8 × 10-7; maximally compressed level: P = 1 × 10-11; caudal: P = 1 × 10-4), correlations (modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score; rostral: -0.52; maximally compressed level: -0.59; caudal: -0.36), and diagnostic accuracy (rostral: 0.775; maximally compressed level: 0.860; caudal: 0.721), outperforming fractional anisotropy and magnetization transfer ratio in most comparisons and cross-sectional area at rostral/caudal levels. Rostral T2*WI WM/GM showed the strongest correlations with focal motor (-0.45) and sensory (-0.49) deficits and was the strongest independent predictor of the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (P = .01) and diagnosis (P = .02) in multivariate models (R2 = 0.59, P = 8 × 10-13; area under the curve = 0.954, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: T2*WI WM/GM shows promise as a novel biomarker of WM injury. It detects damage in compressed and uncompressed regions and contributes substantially to multivariate models for diagnosis and correlation with impairment. Our multiparametric approach overcomes limitations of individual measures, having the potential to improve diagnostics, monitor progression, and predict outcomes.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: T2*-weighted imaging provides sharp contrast between spinal cord GM and WM, allowing their segmentation and cross-sectional area measurement. Injured WM demonstrates T2*WI hyperintensity but requires normalization for quantitative use. We introduce T2*WI WM/GM signal-intensity ratio and compare it against cross-sectional area, the DTI metric fractional anisotropy, and magnetization transfer ratio in degenerative cervical myelopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-eight patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy and 40 healthy subjects underwent 3T MR imaging, covering C1-C7. Metrics were automatically extracted at maximally compressed and uncompressed rostral/caudal levels. Normalized metrics were compared with t tests, area under the curve, and logistic regression. Relationships with clinical measures were analyzed by using Pearson correlation and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The maximally compressed level cross-sectional area demonstrated superior differences (P = 1 × 10-13), diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve = 0.890), and univariate correlation with the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (0.66). T2*WI WM/GM showed strong differences (rostral: P = 8 × 10-7; maximally compressed level: P = 1 × 10-11; caudal: P = 1 × 10-4), correlations (modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score; rostral: -0.52; maximally compressed level: -0.59; caudal: -0.36), and diagnostic accuracy (rostral: 0.775; maximally compressed level: 0.860; caudal: 0.721), outperforming fractional anisotropy and magnetization transfer ratio in most comparisons and cross-sectional area at rostral/caudal levels. Rostral T2*WI WM/GM showed the strongest correlations with focal motor (-0.45) and sensory (-0.49) deficits and was the strongest independent predictor of the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score (P = .01) and diagnosis (P = .02) in multivariate models (R2 = 0.59, P = 8 × 10-13; area under the curve = 0.954, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: T2*WI WM/GM shows promise as a novel biomarker of WM injury. It detects damage in compressed and uncompressed regions and contributes substantially to multivariate models for diagnosis and correlation with impairment. Our multiparametric approach overcomes limitations of individual measures, having the potential to improve diagnostics, monitor progression, and predict outcomes.
Authors: Aditya Vedantam; Gerald Eckardt; Marjorie C Wang; Brian D Schmit; Shekar N Kurpad Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2013-09-18 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: J Cohen-Adad; M-M El Mendili; S Lehéricy; P-F Pradat; S Blancho; S Rossignol; H Benali Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Miloš Kerkovský; Josef Bednarík; Ladislav Dušek; Andrea Sprláková-Puková; Igor Urbánek; Marek Mechl; Vlastimil Válek; Zdenek Kadanka Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2012-01-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: C A Wheeler-Kingshott; P W Stroman; J M Schwab; M Bacon; R Bosma; J Brooks; D W Cadotte; T Carlstedt; O Ciccarelli; J Cohen-Adad; A Curt; N Evangelou; M G Fehlings; M Filippi; B J Kelley; S Kollias; A Mackay; C A Porro; S Smith; S M Strittmatter; P Summers; A J Thompson; I Tracey Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2013-07-14 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Rebecca S Samson; Simon Lévy; Torben Schneider; Alex K Smith; Seth A Smith; Julien Cohen-Adad; Claudia A M Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-05-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: R S Samson; O Ciccarelli; C Kachramanoglou; L Brightman; A Lutti; D L Thomas; N Weiskopf; C A M Wheeler-Kingshott Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: A R Martin; B De Leener; J Cohen-Adad; D W Cadotte; S Kalsi-Ryan; S F Lange; L Tetreault; A Nouri; A Crawley; D J Mikulis; H Ginsberg; M G Fehlings Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Magda Horáková; Tomáš Horák; Jan Valošek; Tomáš Rohan; Eva Koriťáková; Marek Dostál; Jan Kočica; Tomáš Skutil; Miloš Keřkovský; Zdeněk Kadaňka; Petr Bednařík; Alena Svátková; Petr Hluštík; Josef Bednařík Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2022-04
Authors: Julien Cohen-Adad; Eva Alonso-Ortiz; Mihael Abramovic; Carina Arneitz; Nicole Atcheson; Laura Barlow; Robert L Barry; Markus Barth; Marco Battiston; Christian Büchel; Matthew Budde; Virginie Callot; Anna J E Combes; Benjamin De Leener; Maxime Descoteaux; Paulo Loureiro de Sousa; Marek Dostál; Julien Doyon; Adam Dvorak; Falk Eippert; Karla R Epperson; Kevin S Epperson; Patrick Freund; Jürgen Finsterbusch; Alexandru Foias; Michela Fratini; Issei Fukunaga; Claudia A M Gandini Wheeler-Kingshott; Giancarlo Germani; Guillaume Gilbert; Federico Giove; Charley Gros; Francesco Grussu; Akifumi Hagiwara; Pierre-Gilles Henry; Tomáš Horák; Masaaki Hori; James Joers; Kouhei Kamiya; Haleh Karbasforoushan; Miloš Keřkovský; Ali Khatibi; Joo-Won Kim; Nawal Kinany; Hagen Kitzler; Shannon Kolind; Yazhuo Kong; Petr Kudlička; Paul Kuntke; Nyoman D Kurniawan; Slawomir Kusmia; René Labounek; Maria Marcella Laganà; Cornelia Laule; Christine S Law; Christophe Lenglet; Tobias Leutritz; Yaou Liu; Sara Llufriu; Sean Mackey; Eloy Martinez-Heras; Loan Mattera; Igor Nestrasil; Kristin P O'Grady; Nico Papinutto; Daniel Papp; Deborah Pareto; Todd B Parrish; Anna Pichiecchio; Ferran Prados; Àlex Rovira; Marc J Ruitenberg; Rebecca S Samson; Giovanni Savini; Maryam Seif; Alan C Seifert; Alex K Smith; Seth A Smith; Zachary A Smith; Elisabeth Solana; Yuichi Suzuki; George Tackley; Alexandra Tinnermann; Jan Valošek; Dimitri Van De Ville; Marios C Yiannakas; Kenneth A Weber; Nikolaus Weiskopf; Richard G Wise; Patrik O Wyss; Junqian Xu Journal: Nat Protoc Date: 2021-08-16 Impact factor: 17.021
Authors: M Hupp; N Pfender; K Vallotton; J Rosner; S Friedl; C M Zipser; R Sutter; M Klarhöfer; J M Spirig; M Betz; M Schubert; P Freund; M Farshad; A Curt Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Allan R Martin; Benjamin De Leener; Julien Cohen-Adad; David W Cadotte; Aria Nouri; Jefferson R Wilson; Lindsay Tetreault; Adrian P Crawley; David J Mikulis; Howard Ginsberg; Michael G Fehlings Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-13 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Allan R Martin; Benjamin De Leener; Julien Cohen-Adad; Sukhvinder Kalsi-Ryan; David W Cadotte; Jefferson R Wilson; Lindsay Tetreault; Aria Nouri; Adrian Crawley; David J Mikulis; Howard Ginsberg; Eric M Massicotte; Michael G Fehlings Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 3.240
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
Authors: Alice Motovylyak; Nathan P Skinner; Brian D Schmit; Natasha Wilkins; Shekar N Kurpad; Matthew D Budde Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 4.869