| Literature DB >> 32545639 |
Daniel L Belavy1, Helena Brisby2, Benjamin Douglas3, Hanna Hebelka2, Matthew J Quittner1, Patrick J Owen1, Timo Rantalainen4, Guy Trudel5, Kerstin M Lagerstrand2.
Abstract
(1) Background: Assessments of intervertebral disc (IVD) changes, and IVD tissue adaptations due to physical activity, for example, remains challenging. Newer magnetic resonance imaging techniques can quantify detailed features of the IVD, where T2-mapping and T2-weighted (T2w) and Dixon imaging are potential candidates. Yet, their relative utility has not been examined. The performances of these techniques were investigated to characterize IVD differences in asymptomatic individuals with distinct physical activity histories. (2)Entities:
Keywords: Dixon; T2-mapping; intervertebral disc; magnetic resonance imaging; sport medicine
Year: 2020 PMID: 32545639 PMCID: PMC7357091 DOI: 10.3390/jcm9061841
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
Figure 1Graphical illustration of the segmentation of the IVD into five subregions from (1) anterior to (5) posterior aspect of the disc.
Differences between T2-mapping, T2w imaging and Dixon imaging according to physical activity histories.
| Participant Group (Number of IVDs) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sedentary ( | High-Volume Cycling ( | Running: 20–40 km ( | Running: >50 km ( | |
|
| ||||
| T2-mapping (ms) | 104.4 (1.7) | 121.6 (1.7) ‡ | 115.6 (1.5) ‡ | 117.9 (1.6) ‡ |
| T2w-SI (no unit) | 326.9 (4.9) | 329.7 (5.1) | 317.6 (4.4) | 320.5 (4.8) |
| Dixon (%) | 86.0 (0.6) | 87.1 (0.7) | 87.1 (0.6) | 88.1 (0.6) * |
|
| ||||
| T2-mapping (ms) | 111.4 (3.0) | 137.7 (3.1) ‡ | 129.8 (2.7) ‡ | 132.6 (2.9) ‡ |
| T2w-SI (no unit) | 423.6 (8.9) | 434.0 (9.3) | 426.4 (7.9) | 421.6 (8.7) |
| Dixon (%) | 87.2 (0.6) | 88.1 (0.7) | 88.1 (0.6) | 89.4 (0.6) * |
|
| ||||
| T2-mapping (ms) | 1.40 (0.03) | 1.49 (0.03) * | 1.48 (0.02) * | 1.51 (0.03) † |
| T2w-SI (no unit) | 3.31 (0.07) | 3.29 (0.07) | 3.46 (0.06) | 3.27 (0.07) |
| Dixon (%) | 1.01 (0.00) | 1.00 (0.00) | 1.01 (0.00) | 1.01 (0.00) |
Values are mean (SD). *: p < 0.05; †: p < 0.01; ‡: p < 0.001 and indicate significance of difference to the sedentary group. Data from all IVDs, T12/L1 to L5/S1, are presented. IVD: intervertebral disc; T2: relaxation time; T2w-SI: T2-weighted signal intensity.
Figure 2Differences of each MRI technique in quantifying the intervertebral disc. Data are relative differences in physical activity histories compared to the sedentary group. See Table 1 for statistical comparisons.
Figure 3Graphical representations of the IVDs in terms of 3D plots for T2-mapping, T2w imaging and Dixon imaging. Values are averaged across each Pfirrmann grade for all IVDs, T12/L1 to L5/S1 (606 IVDs from 101 subjects). Color keys indicate range of values.
T2-mapping and T2w imaging reflected the IVD Pfirrmann grades, but Dixon imaging was less sensitive.
| Pfirrmann Grade (Number of IVDs) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 ( | 2 ( | 3 ( | 4 ( | |
|
| ||||
| T2-mapping (ms) | 133.9 (17.3) | 118.1 (56.8) ‡ | 94.4 (26.2) ‡ | 86.8 (23.9) ‡ |
| T2w-SI (no unit) | 368 (42) | 337 (138) ‡ | 266 (63) ‡ | 201 (58) ‡ |
| Dixon (%) | 87.0 (7.3) | 87.8 (24.0) | 84.8 (11.1) | 82.4 (10.1) † |
|
| ||||
| T2-mapping (ms) | 166.0 (25.0) | 137.1 (81.8) ‡ | 103.9 (37.7) ‡ | 89.0 (34.4) ‡ |
| T2w-SI (no unit) | 551 (72) | 492 (236) ‡ | 377 (109) ‡ | 271 (99) ‡ |
| Dixon (%) | 87.2 (7.9) | 88.1 (25.9) | 84.8 (11.9) | 81.9 (10.9) † |
|
| ||||
| T2-mapping (ms) | 1.8 (0.3) | 1.5 (0.9) ‡ | 1.3 (0.4) ‡ | 1.0 (0.4) ‡ |
| T2w-SI (no unit) | 3.7 (0.7) | 3.5 (2.3) | 2.7 (1.1) ‡ | 2.0 (1.0) ‡ |
| Dixon (%) | 1.00 (0.03) | 1.01 (0.10) | 1.00 (0.05) | 0.99 (0.04) |
Values are mean (SD). †: p < 0.01; ‡: p < 0.001 and indicate significance of difference in mean to the Pfirrmann grade 1 category. Data from all IVDs, T12/L1 to L5/S1, (606 discs from 101 subjects) are presented. IVD: intervertebral disc; T2: relaxation time; T2w-SI: T2-weighted signal intensity.
Figure 4Differences of each MRI technique in quantifying the intervertebral disc. Data are relative differences in Pfirrmann grades 2, 3 and 4 compared to grade 1. See Table 2 for statistical comparisons.
Quantification of the IVD by T2-mapping correlated moderately with T2w-SI and weakly with Dixon.
| Whole IVD | Nucleus | Nucleus/Annulus Ratio | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T2-mapping | Dixon | T2w-SI | T2-mapping | Dixon | T2w-SI | T2-mapping | Dixon | T2w-SI | ||
|
| T2-mapping | 0.10 * | 0.5 ‡ | 0.93 ‡ | 0.10 * | 0.46 ‡ | 0.43 ‡ | 0.05 | 0.24 ‡ | |
| Dixon | 0.2 ‡ | 0.13 † | 0.99 ‡ | 0.25 ‡ | 0.16 ‡ | 0.38 ‡ | 0.16 ‡ | |||
| T2w-SI | 0.56 ‡ | 0.29 ‡ | 0.92 ‡ | 0.56 ‡ | 0.16 ‡ | 0.49 ‡ | ||||
|
| T2-mapping | 0.13 † | 0.61 ‡ | 0.69 ‡ | 0.03 | 0.41 ‡ | ||||
| Dixon | 0.26 ‡ | 0.16 ‡ | 0.51 ‡ | 0.16 ‡ | ||||||
| T2w-SI | 0.73 ‡ | 0.13 † | 0.74 ‡ | |||||||
|
| T2-mapping | 0.03 | 0.66 ‡ | |||||||
| Dixon | 0.05 | |||||||||
| T2w-SI | ||||||||||
Values are Pearson’s correlation co-efficient. Data from all IVDs, T12/L1 to L5/S1, (606 discs from 101 subjects) are presented. Significance of the correlation was indicated as *: p < 0.05; †: p < 0.01; ‡: p < 0.001. IVD: intervertebral disc; T2: relaxation time; T2w-SI: T2-weighted signal intensity.