Nathan P Skinner1,2,3, Sean D McGarry4, Shekar N Kurpad3,5, Brian D Schmit6, and Matthew D Budde3,5
1Biophysics Graduate Program, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States, 2Medical Scientist Training Program, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States, 3Department of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States, 4Neuroscience Doctoral Program, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, United States, 5Clement J. Zablocki Veteran's Affairs Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, United States, 6Department of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University, Milwaukee, WI, United States
Synopsis
A rat model of graded spinal cord injury was used to evaluate
several diffusion models for the ability to detect injury at acute and chronic
time points. Parameters from diffusion
tensor imaging, free water estimation, diffusion kurtosis imaging, and white
matter tract integrity models demonstrated that higher order modeling showed
better separation of injury severity, especially in the chronic time
point. Furthermore, parameters sensitive
to volume changes associated with edema and inflammation demonstrated the
greatest separation of these injury groups, indicating the importance of these
processes in altering diffusion characteristics in spinal cord injury.Purpose
Diffusion weighted imaging is a
powerful tool for investigating changes resulting from spinal cord injury (SCI). Many models have been derived to characterize
the various tissue components present in the signal in order to more accurately
identify injury processes. This work compares
measurements of several of these models in an in-vivo model of rat spinal cord
injury at multiple time points to demonstrate the ability of each to detect
injury.
Methods
A weight drop spinal cord
contusion injury was induced at the T10 vertebral level in rats for severe
(n=4), moderate (n=3), mild (n=3), and sham (n=4) injuries. Two in-vivo scanning sessions occurred
post-injury: 2 days (acute) and 30 days (chronic).
Standard PGSE diffusion weighted
images were acquired using a Bruker 9.4T Biospec Imaging system with a commercial
4-channel surface coil array (Bruker). A
respiratory-gated EPI sequence was used with a TR/TE of >1500 / 28 ms. 30
diffusion directions were acquired with a gradient duration/separation of 8.25 /
12.5 ms for 3 b-values (500, 1000, 2000 s/mm2) and 15 B0
averages. 12 axial slices were collected with an in-plane resolution of 0.20 mm2
(128x128) and a slice thickness of 1.0 mm, which took approximately 65 minutes
to collect. A sagittal FLASH sequence
was used to center the slices over the T10 injury epicenter.
Images were corrected for motion
and eddy currents using the Spinal Cord Toolbox1. Custom Matlab
routines were used for diffusion modeling.
Standard Diffusion Tensor Imaging2 (DTI) analysis was used to
derive metrics of mean diffusivity (MDDTI), axial diffusivity (ADDTI),
radial diffusivity (RDDTI), and fractional anisotropy (FADTI). These metrics were further utilized with the
Free Water Estimation3 (FWE) model to calculate corrected values of MDFWE,
ADFWE, RDFWE, and FAFWE through removal of the
free water fraction (FWF). Diffusion kurtosis
fitting4 was implemented to calculate diffusivity parameters with
corresponding values of mean, axial, and radial kurtosis. These were applied in the White Matter Tract
Integrity5 (WMTI) model to determine the axonal water fraction
(AWF), axonal diffusivity (Da), extracellular parallel diffusivity
(DEpar), and extracellular perpendicular diffusivity (DEperp). Parameter means were taken from the 6 slices
centered over the lesion epicenter using an automated, region-growing method in
Matlab to derive whole-cord masks for each slice. Automated masks were examined for accuracy,
with failed slices being excluded from the analysis (total of 8 slices out of
84).
Results
Representative parameter maps
from each model are given in Figure 1. Means
obtained from automated ROIs closely matched those from hand-drawn masks (not
shown).
Figure 2 shows a comparison of
axial and radial diffusivity metrics at the acute and chronic time points. While no trends with injury severity were evident
in the acute period, chronic diffusivity values showed that ADFWE
scales roughly with injury severity.
This same trend was seen in Da from the WMTI model. On the other hand, RDDTI showed
better separation of injury groups before FWE correction. DEperp
from WMTI showed the strongest separation of injury groups.
FA measurements with FWE
correction (Fig. 3) demonstrated better association with injury severity in both
acute and chronic data. While an overall
trend of increasing FWF is seen in the chronic data, AWF shows more consistency
in its change with injury severity through both time points.
Discussion
Edema and inflammation are major
factors in SCI that alter volume fractions within tissues and lead to diffusivity
changes. Parameters such as RD
DTI,
and D
Eperp demonstrate increased diffusivity values in injury likely
associated with the increased extracellular volume
6. The decreased sensitivity of the RD
FWE
metric reflects the removal of the edema component that serves as an injury
marker. Free water removal does improve
separation of injury groups for AD and FA, but the more advanced WMTI model
shows stronger relationships with injury severity in the metrics of D
a,
D
Eperp, and AWF. Thus while
FWE can be used to improve DTI modeling, the kurtosis-based metrics demonstrate
better potential for separating injury severity. This is especially true in the chronic time
point, where inflammatory and glial responses to injury are more extensively
developed following injury.
Conclusions
Detection of injury severity with
diffusion metrics shows that more advanced kurtosis-based parameters can better
separate injury groups in a rat model of SCI.
Metrics related to increased extracellular water show the strongest
relationship with injury severity, especially in the chronic period,
demonstrating the importance of edema and inflammation in driving
diffusion-sensitive changes following injury.
Acknowledgements
This project was partially funded through the Research and
Education Initiative Fund, a component of the Advancing a Healthier Wisconsin
endowment at the Medical College of Wisconsin, the Craig H. Neilsen Foundation,
and the Department of Veterans Affairs. NS is a member of the Medical Scientist
Training Program at MCW, which is partially supported by a training grant from
NIGMS T32-GM080202. Support from the Bryon Riesch Paralysis Foundation is
gratefully acknowledged. We thank Kyle Stehlik and Natasha Beucher for
experimental assistance.References
1. Cohen-Adad et al. OHBM Conf
Proc 2014.
2. Basser et al. J MRI B 1994.
3. Pasternak et al. Magn Reson
Med 2009.
4. Jensen et al. NMR Biomed 2010.
5. Fieremans et al. Am J
Neuroradiol 2013.
6. Skinner et al. NMR Biomed
2015.