HAJIME YOKOTA1, TAKAYUKI SAKAI2, MASAMI YONEYAMA3, AKIYO TAKADA4, and TAKASHI UNO1
1Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan, 2Radiology, Eastern Chiba Medical Center, Togane, Japan, 3Philips Japan, Tokyo, Japan, 4Radiology, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan
Synopsis
MR neurography for the crus is
challenging because signals of the vessels and subcutaneous edema interrupt
visualization of the nerve, and the water content of the nerve is small.
Phase-cycling diffusion-sensitized driven-equilibrium (pcDSDE) can reduce
signals of the neighboring structures including the vesssels, and visualize the
nerves with diffusion contrast. pcDSDE was better than 3D-NerveVIEW for
visualizing the tibial and sural nerves in the crus. The contrast ratio between
the tibial nerve and neighboring muscle was significantly higher on pcDSDE than
on 3D-NerveVIEW in both the proximal and distal crura.
INTRODUCTION
3D-NerveVIEW is a T2-weighted image-based sequence and achieves good
visualization of the brachial and lumbosacral plexus.1,2 However,
when trying to visualize the nerves in the crus, signals of the vessels and
subcutaneous edema interrupt signals of the nerve. There are two hypothesized
reasons why the nerves in the crus are challenging to be visualized. First,
standard MR neurography sequences such as 3D-NerveVIEW cannot suppress venous
signals sufficiently. Second, the distal part of the nerves has lower
free-water content than the proximal part. Therefore, a sequence for MR
neurography with high blood signal suppression and diffusion contrast has been
desired.
Phase-cycling
diffusion-sensitized driven-equilibrium (pcDSDE) is a sequence designed to
enhance diffusion contrast.3 The purpose of the present study was to
compare the abilities to visualize the nerves in the crus between pcDSDE and
3D-NerveVIEW.METHODS
15 volunteers (median age 27,
age-range 22-49, 13 men and 2 women) were included in this study. MR
neurography with pcDSDE and 3D-NerveVIEW was acquired in the proximal part of
the crus using a trousseau coil on 3.0-Tesla MR system (Philips Ingenia 3.0T).
Also, the distal part of the right crus was scanned using a knee coil. The
scanning parameters are summarized in Figure1.
A neuroradiologist (12 years
of experience for neuroradiology) tried to detect the tibial nerves. The
contrast ratio (CR) was calculated between the nerve and neighbor muscle as
follows: CR = [SI (nerve) – SI (muscle)] / [SI (nerve) + SI (nerve)], where SI
(nerve) is the signal intensity of the nerve and SI (muscle) is the signal
intensity of the neighbor muscle.1,2 The CR was tested with the
Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Also, the CR of the right tibial nerve in the
proximal and distal crura was compared using the Mann-Whitney U test on pcDSDE
and 3D-NerveVIEW, respectively. P-values less than 0.05 were considered
significant. Moreover, visualization of the sural nerve, which runs in the calf
region of the distal crus,4,5 was checked. The nerves in the distal
crus were confirmed with axial T2-weighted image.RESULTS
In the proximal crus of all 15
cases, the bilateral tibial nerves were clearly visualized with pcDSDE, whereas
they were difficult to be recognized only with 3D-NerveVIEW due to the
remaining signals of the veins (Fig. 2). The nerves could be detected on
3D-NerveVIEW with reference to pcDSDE.
There was a significant
difference in the CR between pcDSDE and 3D-NerveVIEW (median 0.282 [IQR
0.246-0.297] vs. 0.243 [0.220-0.264], P<0.001) in the proximal crus (Fig. 3). In the distal crus, the tibial nerve and its branches, including the medial
and lateral plantar nerves, were recognized well only on pcDSDE (Fig. 4). The
CR on pcDSDE was better than that on 3D-NerveVIEW (0.291 [0.251-0.330] vs.
0.171 [0.139-0.188], P=0.002).
There was no significant
difference of the CR between the proximal and distal crura on pcDSDE (P=0.857),
whereas the CR was decreased on 3D-NerveView in the distal crus compared with
the proximal (P=0.004) (Fig. 3). The sural nerve was visualized on pcDSDE in 10
of 15 cases (66.7%), whereas it was not detected on 3D-NerveVIEW (Fig. 5).DISCUSSION
pcDSDE visualized the tibial
nerves significantly better than 3D-NerveVIEW in both the proximal and distal
crura. pcDSDE can be a standard sequence to visualize the peripheral nerves in
the crus.
pcDSDE consists of DSDE
pre-pulse and 3D phase-cycled T1 turbo field echo.3 DSDE is a
variation of motion-sensitized driven-equilibrium (MSDE) applied in
3D-NerveVIEW. MSDE uses low b-value motion probing gradient (MPG), whereas DSDE
uses high b-value MPG. The MPG pulse can suppress signals from vessels. Also,
DSDE and MSDE are based on T2 preparation pulse, so that they can suppress
muscle signals of the background. Phase cycling cancels signals derived from T1
effects, so that diffusion contrast is enhanced. Moreover, modified DSDE was
applied to this study. This DSDE pre-pulse included adiabatic refocusing
pulses, eddy-current preparation, and motion-compensated MPG. Strong MPGs were
applied perpendicular to the course of the nerves (anteroposterior and
right-left directions) to suppress signals of the vein, and week MPG was
applied parallel to the nerves (superoinferior direction) to visualize the
nerve. As a result, pcDSDE accomplished visualization of the tibial nerve in
the crus.
3D-NerveVIEW was almost
useless especially in the distal crus. This result should be according to the
low T2 value of the nerve in the distal part implying low free-water content.
Diffusion-based sequences are essential to visualize the nerve in such regions.
The sural nerve was visualized
in the majority of the cases on pcDSDE. The sural nerve is the main target for
peripheral nerve biopsy. Thus, there is a possibility that the correlation
between pathological and imaging findings is realized.
The weak points of pcDSDE are
low signal-to-noise ratio and long scan time. Spatial resolution is limited to
keep signal-to-noise ratio. Also, phase cycling is vulnerable for motion during
acquisition. However, the nerves in the crus could be visualized only with a
diffusion-based sequence and conventional diffusion-based MR neurography lose
anatomical information and the resolution is worse than pcDSDE.CONCLUSION
pcDSDE was better than
3D-NerveVIEW for visualizing the tibial and sural nerves in the crus.
Especially in the distal crus, only pcDSDE could visualize the nerves clearly.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
-
Hiwatashi
A, Togao O, Yamashita K, et al. Evaluation of chronic inflammatory
demyelinating polyneuropathy: 3D nerve-sheath signal increased with inked
rest-tissue rapid acquisition of relaxation enhancement imaging (3D SHINKEI).
Eur Radiol. European Radiology; 2017;27(2):447–453.
-
Hiwatashi A, Togao O,
Yamashita K, et al. Lumbar plexus in patients with chronic inflammatory
demyelinating polyneuropathy: Evaluation with 3D nerve-sheath signal increased
with inked rest-tissue rapid acquisition of relaxation enhancement imaging (3D
SHINKEI). Eur J Radiol; 2017;93(May):95–99.
-
Yoneyama M, Obara M, Ozawa Y,
et al. High-Resolution 3D MR Neurography of the Wrist using Phase-Cycling
Diffusion-Sensitized Driven-Equilibrium (pcDSDE). Proceeding in ISMRM2015.
-
Garagozlo
C, Kadri O, Atalla M, et al. The anatomical relationship between the sural
nerve and small saphenous vein: An ultrasound study of healthy participants.
Clin Anat. 2019;32(2):277–281.
-
Gu
H, Xiong Z, Xu J, Li G, Wang C. Clinical and anatomical study of the distally
based lesser saphenous veno-lateral sural neurocutaneous flap for lower
extremity coverage. J Orthop Sci. Elsevier Masson SAS; 2013;18(5):740–748.