| Literature DB >> 35505857 |
Anish Haladi Panduranga1, Kirti Chaturvedy1, Manish Chaturvedy2, Prateek Sihag3, Girja Nandvanshi1, Sunil Vishnoi1, Abhishek Kaushik1, Asaf Ali Khammar1.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate differences in diffusion imaging parameters, including fractional anisotropy (FA) and the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), in control and diabetic subjects, and to assess changes in these parameters to patient's urine albumin/protein levels, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c). Material and methods: This is a cross-sectional analytical study involving 100 patients who underwent diffusion imaging including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the kidneys in our hospital from 2019 to 2020. Diffusion imaging parameters (ADC and FA) were obtained from the medulla and cortex of both kidneys using dedicated software. Statistical analysis was done.Entities:
Keywords: ADC; DTI; FA; diabetic nephropathy; diffusion tensor imaging; renal DTI
Year: 2022 PMID: 35505857 PMCID: PMC9047783 DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2022.114726
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pol J Radiol ISSN: 1733-134X
Figure 1Representative images of the balanced turbo field echo (BTFE) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) sequences used in the study with the region of interest (ROI) placed in the cortex and medulla
Trends of mean fractional anisotropy (FA) values of renal medulla and cortex
| Group | Medulla – mean FA values | Cortex – mean FA values | Count |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 0.42 ± 0.0239 | 0.19 ± 0.0348 | 27 |
| Normoalbuminuria | 0.38 ± 0.0275 | 0.25 ± 0.0492 | 19 |
| Microalbuminuria | 0.35 ± 0.0431 | 0.27 ± 0.0320 | 23 |
| Proteinuria | 0.32 ± 0.0370 | 0.36 ± 0.0526 | 31 |
Summary of the t-test results of all the parameters in the study subjects
| Study groups | ADC values – Cortex (× 10-3 mm2/s) | Fractional anisotropy values | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medulla | Cortex | ||||
| Control v/s | Normoalbuminuria | ||||
| Microalbuminuria | |||||
| Proteinuria | |||||
| Normoalbuminuria v/s | Microalbuminuria | ||||
| Proteinuria | |||||
| Microalbuminuria v/s | Proteinuria | ||||
| Control v/s | Diabetics with eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 | ||||
| Diabetics with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 | |||||
| Diabetics with eGFR > 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 v/s | Diabetics with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 | ||||
| Study groups | |||||
| Total study subjects | Medulla FA vs. cortex FA | < 0.001 | |||
| Control subjects | Medulla FA vs. cortex FA | < 0.001 | |||
| Diabetics | Medulla FA vs. cortex FA | < 0.001 | |||
Figure 2Increasing trend of mean fractional anisotropy (FA) values in the renal cortex and decreasing trend of FA values in the renal medulla in the various groups
Mean ADC values in renal cortex
| Groups | Mean ADC values (× 10-3 mm2/s) – cortex | Count |
|---|---|---|
| Control | 3.307 ± 0.341 | 27 |
| Normoalbuminuria | 2.724 ± 0.471 | 19 |
| Microalbuminuria | 2.534 ± 0.318 | 23 |
| Proteinuria | 1.89 ± 0.31 | 31 |
Figure 3Trends of mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values in renal cortex in different groups (control group to diabetic patients with proteinuria)
Figure 4Scatter plot showing a positive correlation between cortical apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)
Figure 5Scatter plot showing a positive correlation between medulla fractional anisotropy (FA) values and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)
Figure 6Scatter plot showing a negative correlation between cortex fractional anisotropy (FA) values and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)
Figure 7Scatter plot showing a positive correlation between cortex fractional anisotropy (FA) values with HbA1c
Figure 8Scatter plot showing a negative correlation between cortex ADC values and HbA1c
Figure 9Scatter plot showing a negative correlation between medullary fractional anisotropy (FA) values and HbA1c
Figure 10Receiver operator curve for medullary fractional anisotropy values for identifying normoalbuminuria
Different groups based on the cut-off medullary fractional aniso-tropy (FA) values along with the number of subjects in each group
| Medulla FA value | Control | Diabetics | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| ≥ 0.4 | 22 | 8 | 30 |
| ≥ 0.377 to < 0.4 | 4 | 13 | 17 |
| < 0.377 | 1 | 52 | 53 |
Summary of imaging data for all subjects
| Groups | Mean eGFR (ml/min/1.73 m2) | Mean ADC values (× 10-3 mm2/s) | Mean fractional anisotropy values | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cortex | Medulla | Cortex | Medulla | ||
| Control, n = 27 | 104.44 ± 14.52 | 3.30 ± 0.341 | 1.74 ± 0.142 | 0.19 ± 0.034 | 0.42 ± 0.0239 |
| Diabetic eGFR > 60, | 74.38 ± 7.413 | 2.66 ± 0.383 | 2.05 ± 0.225 | 0.25 ± 0.039 | 0.362 ± 0.0344 |
| Diabetic eGFR < 60, | 48.09 ± 6.054 | 1.88 ± 0.275 | 2.23 ± 0.218 | 0.35 ± 0.049 | 0.327 ± 0.0437 |
ADC – apparent diffusion coefficient, eGFR – estimated glomerular filtration rate