| Literature DB >> 29311540 |
Chao Zhang1,2, Kai Chen3,4, Xiuxin Han1, Jiayuanyuan Fu5, Patricia Douglas5, Anna Y Morozova6, Maxim A Abakumov2, Ilya L Gubsky2, Dejin Li7, Jin Guo7, Xuening Zhang4, Guowen Wang1, Vladimir P Chekhonin2,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Post-traumatic syringomyelia (PTS) is a common disease after spinal cord injury (SCI). The present study was performed to evaluate the advantages of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in estimating SCI and prognosing PTS in SCI rats. MATERIAL AND METHODS Forty rats were divided into 3 groups based on the extent of the individual SCI and PTS: a control group (n=10), a PTS group (n=8), and an SCI group (n=22). BBB tests were performed preoperatively and postoperatively at (1 d, 3 d, 5 d, 1 w, 2 w, 1 w, 2 w, 3 w, 4 w, 5 w, and 6 w). MRI T2 scanning was conducted postoperatively at (1 w, 2 w, 3 w, 4 w, 5 w, 6 w). DTI and diffusion tensor tractography were used for analyzing neuro-fiber changes after SCI. RESULTS BBB scoring showed no differences between the PTS group and SCI group (P<0.05). PTS was found in 8 rats after SCI. MRI showed PTS formation in 3 rats at 2 w after SCI, and 5 rats showed PTS formation at postoperative 3w after SCI. Compared with the control group, ADC showed significant increase in both the PTS group (P<0.05) and the SCI group (P<0.05), FA showed significant decreases in the PTS (P<0.05) and SCI (P<0.05) groups. Compared with the SCI group, the PTS group showed an increase in ADC, but no statistical difference was found in ADC (P>0.05). The PTS group showed a significant increase in FA (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS The combination of diffusion tensor imaging and diffusion tensor tractography has characteristics of high-sensitivity and quantitation for PTS prognosis. FA is predictive in the prognosis of PTS formation after SCI.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29311540 PMCID: PMC5771161 DOI: 10.12659/msm.907955
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Figure 1Postoperative BBB scores in all the groups.
Figure 2(A–R) Post-injury MRI T2 scanning in all groups (1 w, 2 w, 3 w, 4 w, 5 w, 6 w).
ADC and FA value in groups at 1w postoperatively.
| Group | ADC (×10−6 mm2/s) | FA |
|---|---|---|
| PTS group (n=8) | 2239.44±750.97 | 0.49±0.09 |
| SCI group (n=22) | 2042.15±561.92 | 0.31±0.11 |
| Control group (n=10) | 1025.48±197.29 | 0.65±0.08 |
ADC and FA value in groups at 2 w postoperatively.
| Group | ADC (×10−6 mm2/s) | FA |
|---|---|---|
| PTS group (n=8) | 2085.91±691.72 | 0.51±0.12 |
| SCI group (n=22) | 1924.74±817.39 | 0.32±0.07 |
| Control group (n=10) | 992.34±119.28 | 0.64±0.12 |
ADC and FA value in groups at 3 w postoperatively.
| Group | ADC (×10−6 mm2/s) | FA |
|---|---|---|
| PTS group (n=8) | 1972.10±710.31 | 0.52±0.11 |
| SCI group (n=22) | 1788.72±539.47 | 0.32±0.11 |
| Control group (n=10) | 984.95±179.13 | 0.64±0.12 |
ADC and FA value in groups at 4 w postoperatively.
| Group | ADC (×10−6 mm2/s) | FA |
|---|---|---|
| PTS group (n=8) | 1716.39±662.44 | 0.52±0.08 |
| SCI group (n=22) | 1601.26±703.81 | 0.33±0.09 |
| Control group (n=10) | 995.33±162.58 | 0.64±0.09 |
ADC and FA value in groups at 5 w postoperatively.
| Group | ADC (×10−6 mm2/s) | FA |
|---|---|---|
| PTS group (n=8) | 1674.58±739.25 | 0.52±0.09 |
| SCI group (n=22) | 1588.49±610.88 | 0.34±0.08 |
| Control group (n=10) | 970.39±168.41 | 0.65±0.12 |
ADC and FA value in groups at 6 w postoperatively.
| Group | ADC (×10−6 mm2/s) | FA |
|---|---|---|
| PTS group (n=8) | 1652.39±699.55 | 0.52±0.08 |
| SCI group (n=22) | 1582.39±651.29 | 0.34±0.07 |
| Control group (n=10) | 966.35±155.35 | 0.65±0.12 |
Figure 3(A–D) Neuro-fibers tracking with spinal cord diffusion tensor tractography in the rats with/without SCI.