Abdullah Asiri1,2, Charles Watson3, Shalini Nair4, Gary Cowin1, Marc Ruitenberg5, and Nyoman Kurniawan1
1Centre for Advanced Imaging, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, 2Najran University, Najran, Saudi Arabia, 3Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia, 4National University Hospital Systems, Kent Ridge, Singapore, 5School of Biomedical sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
Synopsis
Imaging the spinal cord is
normally performed at lower magnetic field with limited resolution. In this
study, 13 ex-vivo cervical spinal cords have been scanned at 9.4T to provide high-resolution
images. A variation of the position of the rostral brachial motorneurons among
the cords was used to classify the samples into normal and pre-fixed types. For each segment,
the length and GM/WM total areas were measured. A high resolution MRI template of the normal
type samples was created to assist registration and delineation
of spinal cord structures and improve the accuracy of diagnostic radiology. Target audience
Neuroimaging scientists focusing on the human spinal cord.
Purpose
To date, the only complete
histological atlas of human cervical spinal cord was created by Bruce (1901).1 This atlas contains high
quality myelin and Nissl histology sections of every level human spinal cord segments
created from a single sample. The assignment of distinct motor neuron clusters of
the GM ventral horn, responsible to control specific limb and axial muscles, were
made in the absence of neuromuscular connectivity data. Since then a number of studies have mapped the
topography of the motorneuron clusters in relation to the limb muscles they
control.
While there are differences
in the findings of these studies, they demonstrate a remarkable consistency in
the pattern of forelimb and hindlimb muscle innervation in vertebrates.2,3 Among the cervical
motorneurons, these common features include the position of the phrenic nucleus
at C4, the biceps and deltoid groups at C5 and C6, the forearm, triceps and
pectoral groups at C7 and C8, and the manus muscle groups at C8 and T1.3,4
The aim of this study is to
create a high-resolution MRI atlas of the cervical spinal cord using ex-vivo samples. This atlas will be important
to delineate grey and white matter structures that are normally invisible in in-vivo clinical imaging and that enables
individual segments to be distinguished from one another with confidence.
Methods
Image
acquisition: 13 ex-vivo cervical spinal cord
specimens were scanned using 9.4T Bruker MRI. 0.2% Magnevist (Schering AG,
Germany) was added to the specimens’ solutions for ~4 days prior to scanning.
Glass tubes filled with Solvay Solexis Fomblin were utilised for imaging the
specimen. High-resolution
MRI data were acquired using a 3D fast low angle shot (FLASH) sequence with (TR/TE)=36/20ms,
with an isotropic resolution of 80 μm with the scan time
of 1.5 hours. Specimens were imaged with an overlap twice in order to obtain a
full coverage within the homogenous RF coil and optimal gradients linearity.
Image
processing and template: the start and end
slices of each cervical segment were identified using the pattern of nerve
roots from both ventral and dorsal sides, then the centre slice for each
segments was identified accordingly using Osirix-generated 3D rendered volume (Figure1). The
segment length and GM/WN areas were measured using Osirix. Spinal
cord samples were classified into normal and pre-fixed types based on the
positions of the rostral brachial motor neurons in the cervical levels. Finally, a high-resolution atlas of the
normal-type samples was created using the protocol described in Figure 2.
Results
From the examined spinal cords, 8 cords were classified as normal, and 5 cords were
classified as pre-fixed. An average of
T1 MRI, encompassing C3-C8 cervical segments, was created using four samples of
normal-type cords (Figure 3). This
average MRI template was compared with a histology cervical spinal cord atlas.1 Comparison with the histology data shows the clarity of the visualisation of
anatomical structures obtained by ex-vivo
MRI.
Human anatomy textbooks routinely state
that the most rostral brachial motor neurons are found in the C5 segment.5 However, we have found that there are contributions of these rostral motor
neurons founded in the C4 segment, at the same level as the main group of
phrenic motor neurons. A comparison between the pre-fixed samples with Bruce
1901 histology atlas can be seen in (Figure 4).
Physical
measurements of the lengths and areas were made to identify distinct variations
between segments. It was found that the segment lengths and areas increased
gradually from C1 to C6 and then declined steeply at C8 through the beginning
of the thoracic segments (Figure5).
Discussion
The
assessment of
ex-vivo human spinal
cords shows significant variations between the segments. The variability in the position of human
brachial motor neurons has been reported by many anatomical dissection studies.
Approximately 21-48% of human population has prefixed cervical spinal cord
6-10,
where the rostral part of the brachial plexus arises from the C4 nerve instead
of C5. In comparison, the normal-type cervical spinal cord has the brachial
plexus arises from C5 to T1. Physical measurements show that as the cross
section area in the spinal cord increases, the length of the segments and the
areas of both gray and white matters increase accordingly. This information will be useful clinically to determine affected functions and aid in measuring atrophy
associated with spinal cord injury.
Conclusion
We
have created a high-resolution MRI atlas of the cervical spinal cord, which
will be useful as a template for registration and delineation of
structures to improve diagnostic accuracy of clinical imaging.
Acknowledgements
Research reported in this study is supported by the National
Health and Medical Research Council, Australia.References
1. Bruce, A. (1901). A
topographical atlas of the spinal cord.
2. Ryan, J., Cushman, J., & Baier, C. (1997).
Organization of forelimb motoneuron pools in two bat species (Eptesicus fuscus
and Myotis lucifugus). Cells Tissues
Organs, 158(2), 121-129.
3. Watson, C., Paxinos, G., & Kayalioglu, G. (2009). The spinal cord: a Christopher and Dana Reeve
Foundation text and atlas: Academic press.
4. Sengul, G., Watson, C., Tanaka, I., & Paxinos,
G. (2013). Atlas of the Spinal Cord of
the Rat, Mouse, Marmoset, Rhesus, and Human: Academic Press.
5.
Mahan, M. A., & Spinner, R. J. (2015). Chapter 44 - Clinical Importance of
Anatomic Variation of the Nerves of the Upper Extremity. In R. S. T. R. M. S.
L. B. J. Spinner (Ed.), Nerves and Nerve
Injuries (pp. 589-605). San Diego: Academic Press.
6.
Matejcik, V. (2003). Aberrant formation and clinical picture of brachial plexus
from the point of view of a neurosurgeon. Bratislavske
Lekarske Listy, 104(10), 291-299.
7.
Uzun, A., & Bilgic, S. (1999). Some variations in the formation of the
brachial plexus in infants. Turkish
Journal of Medical Sciences, 29, 573-578.
8. Fazan, V. P. S., Amadeu, A. d. S., Caleffi, A. L.,
& Rodrigues Filho, O. A. (2003). Brachial plexus variations in its
formation and main branches. Acta
Cirurgica Brasileira, 18, 14-18.
9. Uysal, I. I., Seker, M., Karabulut, A. K.,
Büyükmumcu, M., & Ziylan, T. (2003). Brachial plexus variations in human
fetuses. Neurosurgery, 53(3),
676-684.
10.
Lee, H. Y., Chung, I. H., Seok, W., Kang, H. S., Lee, H. S., Ko, J. S., . . .
Park, S. S. (1992). Variations of the ventral rami of the brachial plexus. Journal of Korean medical science, 7(1),
19-24.