Zihao Xu1, Qinhe Zhang1, Chao Liang1, Shuangyi Li1, Yaru You1, Jiazheng Wang2, Liangjie Lin2, Ailian Liu1, and Qingwei Song1
1Department of Radiology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Dalian Medical University, Dalian Liaoning, China, 2Philips Healthcare, Beijing, China
Synopsis
This study measured the ADC
and T2 values of the pancreas in T2DM patients and control subjects. Distribution of T2 values were
uneven in different locations of pancreas
in both T2DM patients and control
subjects , and the T2 values in head and neck were higher
than those of body and tail. While distribution of ADC values was even in both
of the two groups (P>0.05). ADC values of pancreas in T2DM patients were lower
than those of control subjects, and it is inversed for T2 values .
It may indicate that pancreatic cells are more closely arranged with reduced
cell gaps.
Introduction
This study measured the ADC and
T2 values of the pancreas in T2DM patients and control subjects. Distribution of T2 values were uneven in
different locations of pancreas in
both T2DM patients and control subjects
(P<0.05), and the T2 values in head and neck were higher than those of body
and tail. While distribution of ADC values was even in both of the two groups
(P>0.05). ADC values of pancreas in T2DM patients were lower than those of
control subjects, and it is inversed for T2 values (all P<0.05). It may indicate that
pancreatic cells are more closely arranged with reduced cell gaps, and water
diffusion is limited in T2DM patients. And in T2DM patients, inflammatory cell
recruitment induces parenchymal changes, including edema that may lengthen the
T2 relaxation time.Materials and methods
Patients
with 1) T2DM; 2) complete records of laboratory indicators and clinical
parameters, including both clinical history and laboratory examination results;
3) DWI and/or T2 mapping sequences included in upper abdomen MRI examination
were included. Patients with 1) evidence of alcohol consumption: ≥20 g
alcohol/day for female and ≥30 g alcohol/day for male; 2) a history of
pancreatic disease; 3) weight change by more than 5% (within one month); 4) low
MRI images quality were excluded. A total of 20 patients (12 males and 8
females) with T2DM were included in the study. In addition, 44 control subjects
(33 males and 11 females) were enrolled from inpatient department. All
patients/subjects underwent MR scans on a 3.0 T MR scanner (Ingenia CX, Philips
Healthcare). T2 mapping scan parameters included:FOV= 400 mm, TR/TE=100 /1.2 ms, slice thick
7.0/2.0 mm. DWI scan parameters included:FOV=450 mm, TR/TE=7700/74 ms, voxel size
3.7×6.3 mm2, slice thick 6.0/0 mm. On the ISP workstation (Philips Healthcare), 2D regions
of interest (ROIs) were placed by two radiologists on the head, body and tail
regions of pancreas in DWI and T2 mapping, respectively (Fig.1). Mean value of three ROIs was calculated as the value of
the whole pancreas. ROIs area were approximately 25-100 mm2. All
ROIs were placed within the interested tissue by avoiding blood vessels,
pancreatic duct and abdominal adipose tissue as much as possible. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to
check the consistency between the two observers. Quantitative metrics were compared among different
pancreatic locations by Frideman test. The
significance of the inter-group difference of continuous data between T2DM
patients and control subjects were determined using two-sided t-tests or the
nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test for normally or non-normally distributed
data. This study has been
approved by the local IRB.Results
The patients' age, sex,
body mass index (BMI), blood pressure and fasting
blood glucose are listed in Table 1, and ICC results for
evaluation of two-observer
measurement consistency are presented in Table 2.
Distribution of age, sex, BMI, SBP and DBP were similar in T2DM patients and
control subjects (P=0.910, 0.178, 0.104 and 0.528). The distribution of T2
values in head and neck, body, and tail were uneven in both T2DM patients and
control subjects (P<0.05), and the T2 values in head and neck were significantly
higher than those of body and tail (P<0.05). But the distribution of ADC values
was even among different locations of pancreas for both of the two
group (P>0.05) (Table 3). ADC values of pancreas in
T2DM patients were significantly lower than those of control subjects
(P<0.05) (Table 4) (Fig 2). And, T2 values of pancreas in T2DM patients were
significantly higher than those of control subjects (P<0.05) (Table 4) (Fig 3).Discussion
This study viewed that the distribution of T2
values in head and neck, body, and tail of pancreas was uneven, and the T2
values in head and neck were higher than those of body and tail. ADC values of
pancreas in T2DM patients were lower than those of control subjects. And, T2
values of pancreas in T2DM patients were higher than those of control subjects.
These results may reveal that pancreatic cells are more closely arranged
with reduced cell gaps, and water diffusion is limited in pancreas of T2DM
patients, which may be resulted from the infiltration of mononuclear
cells into the pancreas [1]. In addition, inflammatory
cell recruitment induces parenchymal changes, including edema that may lengthen
the T2 relaxation time in pancreas of T2DM patients [2].Conclusion
This
study measured the ADC and T2 values of the pancreas in T2DM patients and
control subjects. The distribution of T2 values in head and neck,
body, and tail of pancreas was uneven,
and the T2 values in head and neck were higher than those of body and tail. ADC
values of pancreas in T2DM patients were lower than those of control subjects.
And, T2 values of pancreas in T2DM patients were higher than those of control
subjects.Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement foundReferences
1.Lavdas
I, Rockall AG, Castelli F, et al. Apparent Diffusion Coefficient of Normal
Abdominal Organs and Bone Marrow From Whole-Body DWI at 1.5 T: The Effect of
Sex and Age. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205(2):242-250.
2.Vietti
Violi N, Hilbert T, Bastiaansen JAM, et al. Patient respiratory-triggered
quantitative T2 mapping in the pancreas. J Magn Reson Imaging.
2019;50(2):410-416.