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.), Montréal, Quebec, Canada. 3. Functional Neuroimaging Unit (J.C.-A.), Centre de recherche de l'Institut universitaire de gériatrie de Montréal, Université de Montréal, Montréal, 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 Western Hospital, 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: DTI, magnetization transfer, T2*-weighted imaging, and cross-sectional area can quantify aspects of spinal cord microstructure. However, clinical adoption remains elusive due to complex acquisitions, cumbersome analysis, limited reliability, and wide ranges of normal values. We propose a simple multiparametric protocol with automated analysis and report normative data, analysis of confounding variables, and reliability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty healthy subjects underwent T2WI, DTI, magnetization transfer, and T2*WI at 3T in <35 minutes using standard hardware and pulse sequences. Cross-sectional area, fractional anisotropy, magnetization transfer ratio, and T2*WI WM/GM signal intensity ratio were calculated. Relationships between MR imaging metrics and age, sex, height, weight, cervical cord length, and rostrocaudal level were analyzed. Test-retest coefficient of variation measured reliability in 24 DTI, 17 magnetization transfer, and 16 T2*WI datasets. DTI with and without cardiac triggering was compared in 10 subjects. RESULTS: T2*WI WM/GM showed lower intersubject coefficient of variation (3.5%) compared with magnetization transfer ratio (5.8%), fractional anisotropy (6.0%), and cross-sectional area (12.2%). Linear correction of cross-sectional area with cervical cord length, fractional anisotropy with age, and magnetization transfer ratio with age and height led to decreased coefficients of variation (4.8%, 5.4%, and 10.2%, respectively). Acceptable reliability was achieved for all metrics/levels (test-retest coefficient of variation < 5%), with T2*WI WM/GM comparing favorably with fractional anisotropy and magnetization transfer ratio. DTI with and without cardiac triggering showed no significant differences for fractional anisotropy and test-retest coefficient of variation. CONCLUSIONS: Reliable multiparametric assessment of spinal cord microstructure is possible by using clinically suitable methods. These results establish normalization procedures and pave the way for clinical studies, with the potential for improving diagnostics, objectively monitoring disease progression, and predicting outcomes in spinal pathologies.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: DTI, magnetization transfer, T2*-weighted imaging, and cross-sectional area can quantify aspects of spinal cord microstructure. However, clinical adoption remains elusive due to complex acquisitions, cumbersome analysis, limited reliability, and wide ranges of normal values. We propose a simple multiparametric protocol with automated analysis and report normative data, analysis of confounding variables, and reliability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty healthy subjects underwent T2WI, DTI, magnetization transfer, and T2*WI at 3T in <35 minutes using standard hardware and pulse sequences. Cross-sectional area, fractional anisotropy, magnetization transfer ratio, and T2*WI WM/GM signal intensity ratio were calculated. Relationships between MR imaging metrics and age, sex, height, weight, cervical cord length, and rostrocaudal level were analyzed. Test-retest coefficient of variation measured reliability in 24 DTI, 17 magnetization transfer, and 16 T2*WI datasets. DTI with and without cardiac triggering was compared in 10 subjects. RESULTS: T2*WI WM/GM showed lower intersubject coefficient of variation (3.5%) compared with magnetization transfer ratio (5.8%), fractional anisotropy (6.0%), and cross-sectional area (12.2%). Linear correction of cross-sectional area with cervical cord length, fractional anisotropy with age, and magnetization transfer ratio with age and height led to decreased coefficients of variation (4.8%, 5.4%, and 10.2%, respectively). Acceptable reliability was achieved for all metrics/levels (test-retest coefficient of variation < 5%), with T2*WI WM/GM comparing favorably with fractional anisotropy and magnetization transfer ratio. DTI with and without cardiac triggering showed no significant differences for fractional anisotropy and test-retest coefficient of variation. CONCLUSIONS: Reliable multiparametric assessment of spinal cord microstructure is possible by using clinically suitable methods. These results establish normalization procedures and pave the way for clinical studies, with the potential for improving diagnostics, objectively monitoring disease progression, and predicting outcomes in spinal pathologies.
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: Esha Datta; Nico Papinutto; Regina Schlaeger; Alyssa Zhu; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Roland G Henry Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 6.556
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
Authors: Julien Cohen-Adad; Wei Zhao; Boris Keil; Eva-Maria Ratai; Christina Triantafyllou; Robert Lawson; Christina Dheel; Lawrence L Wald; Bruce R Rosen; Merit Cudkowicz; Nazem Atassi Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2013-03-29 Impact factor: 3.217
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: D B McCoy; S M Dupont; C Gros; J Cohen-Adad; R J Huie; A Ferguson; X Duong-Fernandez; L H Thomas; V Singh; J Narvid; L Pascual; N Kyritsis; M S Beattie; J C Bresnahan; S Dhall; W Whetstone; J F Talbott Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-03-28 Impact factor: 3.825
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
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: Jan Valošek; Petr Bednařík; Miloš Keřkovský; Petr Hluštík; Josef Bednařík; Alena Svatkova Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-20 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Mahmud Mossa-Basha; Daniel J Peterson; Daniel S Hippe; Justin E Vranic; Christoph Hofstetter; Maria Reyes; Charles Bombardier; Jeffrey G Jarvik Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2020-11-18 Impact factor: 3.039
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: 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: Benjamin S Hopkins; Kenneth A Weber; Michael Brendan Cloney; Monica Paliwal; Todd B Parrish; Zachary A Smith Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2018-10-15 Impact factor: 3.241