Changes in lumbosacral spinal nerve roots on diffusion tensor imaging in spinal stenosis (2024)

Keywords: nerve regeneration, magnetic resonance imaging, diffusion tensor imaging, lumbosacral area, degeneration, nerve root, fractional anisotropy, neural regeneration

Subjects

A total of 20 young healthy volunteers and 93 patients with lumbosacral stenosis were verified by physical examination in the Department of Orthopedics of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, China. For healthy volunteers, there were 14 males (mean age 23.3 ± 1.7 years; range: 21–27 years) and six females (22.8 ± 1.9 years; range: 21–26 years) as a control group.

Conventional MRI

After signing informed consent, MRI scans were performed with a scanner (Signa 1.5T HDXT; General Electric, Milwaukee, WI, USA). For conventional examination, sagittal planes were oriented from the 10^th thoracic vertebra to the coccyx on T1WI and T2WI, while axial T2WI scans were performed along the intervertebral spaces from L₃ to S₁ to assess intervertebral disc changes. Axial T2WI and DTI scans were then performed in horizontal orientation from the upper-middle part of the L₂ to the inferior margin of S₁ with 8-channel cardiac array coils.

The following scanning parameters were maintained for horizontal T2WI and DTI for orientation, slice thickness, number of slices, field of view, and zero gap. For axial T2WI, the scanning parameters were repetition time of 3,720.0–3,880.0 ms, echo time of 80.1–89.6 ms, slice thickness of 3 mm, field of view of 300 × 300 mm, matrix of 256 × 256, echo length of 16, number of slices of 50, signal excitations and acquisitions of 2, and scanning time from 2’44″ to 3’22″. For DTI, the scanning parameters were repetition time of 10,000–10,400 ms, echo time of 71.8–72.1 ms, matrix of 128 × 128, signal excitations and acquisitions of 8, diffusion factors at b values of 0 s/mm² and 400 s/mm², 12 directions of diffusion gradients, and scanning time from 17’30″ to 18’12″ in echo planar imaging.

For post processing, images were processed using Functool 5.2.09 on the MRI host computer. First, on axial scans of intervertebral discs, the areas of the dural sacs were measured from L₃ to S₁ in both healthy volunteers and patients. At each level, the areas of the dural sacs were then measured three times and averaged.

Patient selection

Patients who exhibited the following symptoms were selected: intermittent claudication, numbness, and weakness that could be relieved by bed rest and bending motion or aggravated by extension of the legs. In a clinical test, patients exhibited altered sensation disturbances in the back and legs, weakening or disappearance in ankle reflection, and atrophy in the buttocks and legs. One patient exhibited cauda equina syndrome characterized by serious low back pain, radicular pain in both legs, numbness around the anus, urine retention, and fecal incontinence. With respect to accessing standards, only those patients without a metal frame of the vertebral body and dural sac area less than two-thirds of that at the corresponding normal intervertebral spaces were included in this study (Feng et al., 2000). Thirty-one patients out of 93 exhibited this requirement. The lesion group contained 18 males (mean 51.0 ± 9.1 years; range: 33–63 years) and 13 females (62.5 ± 13.9 years; range: 39–80).

DTI data analysis

In post processing of DTI data, after comparing the shape and contours of the dural sac on axial T2WI and DTI and ruling out image deformation, we selected one of 12 groups of DTI with 50 images, and then reconstructed the spinal nerves and ganglia on the maximum intensity projection. DWI neuroimaging in one direction was used as the reference for DTI tractography. To mark the nerve roots at the cauda equina and the dorsal root ganglia, the fractional anisotropy (FA) values of LSNR were measured in triplicate at each site; the positions were recorded for selecting the region of interest and tracking LSNR. The ‘seed’ and ‘target’ mode were used by referring the regions of interest of the proximal and distal ends of the LSNR on 3D axial DTI images. Images of the LSNR from L₃ to S₁ on both sides were reconstructed using an FA threshold of 0.18.

Statistical analysis

Data were analyzed using SPSS 11.5 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA). The dural sac area, between two-thirds of the normal and the narrowed lumbosacral canal, and FA values between healthy volunteers and patients in the lesion group were compared using the Student's t-test. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Dural sac area in healthy volunteers and patients with lumbosacral stenosis

In 20 healthy volunteers, the dural sac areas of the axial lumbosacral canals were 188.7 ± 45.0 mm², 174.6 ± 44.0 mm², and 156.6 ± 44.5 mm² at L_3–4, L_4–5, and L₅ to S₁, respectively, and 173.0 ± 46.1 mm² on average. The residual dural sac area of the lumbosacral canal was reduced in patients with lumbosacral stenosis (98.9 ± 25.6 mm²) to two-thirds of the dural sac area of normal persons (115.3 ± 30.7 mm²) (t = 4.719, P = 0.000).

FA values of LSNR from L₂ to S₁ between healthy volunteers and patients with lumbosacral canal stenosis

The mean FA value was higher in healthy volunteers (0.332 ± 0.074) than that in patients with lumbosacral canal stenosis (0.304 ± 0.085) (P = 0.000).

Neuroimaging and tractography of LSNR

In healthy volunteers, DWI showed symmetrical or almost symmetrical LSNR from L₃ to S₁, which was very clear from the bifurcation of the LSNR in the cauda equina to the dorsal ganglia. The LSNR from L₂ to S₁ was observed completely on DTI tractography, which corresponded to DWI neuroimaging and normal anatomy (Figure 1) (Arslan et al., 2011). Lumbosacral degeneration was seen in 74 LSNR of patients with spinal stenosis on T1WI and T2WI. On DTI tractography, 36 LSNR (49%) were thin and distorted, while 17 LSNR (23%) were ruptured (Figures 2 and 3). Morphologically, the most evident signs were asymmetry and distortion of the LSNR. Overall, these data suggest that the compression state of the ruptured LSNR on DTI was more serious than that of thinning and distortion observed with T1WI and T2WI.

Spinal degeneration and spinal stenosis

Senocak et al. (2009) reported that the cauda equina conduction time was significantly prolonged in lumbar spinal stenosis. When the central canal area was less than 1.5 cm², a delay of cauda equina conduction may occur. Demyelination was previously reported in the compressed cauda equina (Senocak et al., 2009). Feng et al. (2000) also reported that the cauda equina showed high signal on MRI, with normal axons by light microscope, but worm-eaten changes in the myelin sheath without evidence of changes in polyribosomes and rough endoplasmic reticulum by electron microscope in dogs with 25% canal stenosis at 12 weeks of recovery. In dogs with 50% canal stenosis, there was evidence of high signal on MRI, with varied axonal diameters, partial separation, and vacuolation by light microscope, and myelin degeneration, axonal atrophy, and metachromatic granules in Schwann cell membrane by electron microscope at 12 weeks of recovery. In dogs with 75% canal stenosis, there was evidence of high signal on MRI and disappearance of normal structures by light microscopy, and lamellar myelin disorders and axon loss by electron at 12 weeks of recovery. Taken together, compression leads to deterioration in the function and histology of the cauda equina.

Sensitivity of FA in detecting spinal degeneration

FA is an important indicator for describing the degree of anisotropy on DTI (Filler, 2009; Jambawalikar et al., 2010). An FA of zero represents isotropic diffusion, while an FA of 1 represents only linear diffusion. FA values in nerve fibers of the human body range from 0.2–0.8 (Jambawalikar et al., 2010). In the present study, the mean normal FA value of the LSNR was 0.332 ± 0.074. Anatomically, from the L₁ to L₅ level, the average angle was 40° (range 37–41°) between the LSNR and the dural sac. At the S₂ level, the angle sharply reduces to 22 ± 4° on average, and tends to be smaller in the following spinal nerves in the sacral canal (Cohen et al., 1990).

Previous studies have used DTI for anatomical assessment of spinal nerves. For example, spinal nerve imaging by DWI could visualize anatomical structures from the separation of the LSNR to the dorsal ganglia. FA values of the spinal nerves were also significantly lower after sciatic neuropathy compared with controls. Furthermore, FA values in the sciatic nerve were correlated with disability scores and electrophysiological parameters of axonal damage at baseline and at 6 months after the initial DTI scan (Mathys et al., 2013). The changes in FA values were strongly correlated with histological changes, including axon and myelin regeneration (Takagi et al., 2009; Morisaki et al., 2011), and indicated that axon membranes played a major role in anisotropic water diffusion and that myelination could modulate the degree of anisotropy (Takagi et al., 2009). In the present study, the FA value of the LSNR was lower in areas of lumbar stenosis, in which the LSNR is compressed over a long period with demyelination and axonal degeneration (Feng et al., 2000). These findings are consistent with previous studies (Takagi et al., 2009; Morisaki et al., 2011; Mathys et al., 2013).

Significance of tractography in assessing the changes in LSNR

Lumbosacral spine MRI clearly shows the structures of the spinal canal and characteristics of the spinal nerves on T1WI and T2WI. DWI can clearly visualize the shape of the spinal nerves and the nerve ganglia in maximum intensity projection mode (Zhang et al., 2009). In the present study, we used a group of DTI images in one direction for DWI to reduce the misregistration between DTI and DWI.

The axial scanning of the two-dimensional T2WI in our study matched that of DTI with respect to range, thickness, and orientation for comparison of the spinal structures. The separation points of the LSNR and the dorsal ganglia were visible on DWI. This allowed us to mark the slice position of the LSNR and apply it to the axial images of DTI for selecting the ‘seed’ and ‘target’ to reconstruct the LSNR. Our results confirmed that the LSNR could be displayed clearly and symmetrically in normal volunteers from L₃ to S₁ on DTI. However, in patients with lumbosacral stenosis, LSNR had a varied appearance including thinning, distortion, and abruption. Asymmetry and distortion were the main morphological changes in LSNR.

Study limitations

This study compared LSNR between normal volunteers and lumbar stenosis patients using DTI. DTI has high potential for displaying the morphology and histology of the LSNR. However, image distortion can occur with DTI as a result of eddy currents, cerebrospinal fluid motion, and physiological movement (Wang et al., 2011; Middleton et al., 2014). Simultaneously, the impact of the intervertebral discs should be considered during reconstruction of the LSNR (Yang et al., 2007), while the presence of the cauda equina will affect observation of the LSNR (Hou et al., 2013). Indeed, the finding of abruption of the LSNR on tractography does not indicate disconnection of the spinal nerves, but rather loss on tractography tracing due to the lower FA (Eguchi et al., 2010). An indicator of the dural sac area may not fully reflect the real severity of LSNR compression, as the degree of stenosis of the lateral recess plays a more important direct role, while the lateral recess on one side or both sides is difficult to evaluate quantitatively and repeatedly. Nevertheless, the dural sac area represents an aspect of the severity of compression in the cauda equina.

In clinical practice, after surgery the quality of DTI in reexamination is often diminished by the metal instrument fixed on the vertebral pedicles. In addition, scanning with DTI is time-consuming when the scanning direction is perpendicular to the spinal canal. Furthermore, the tractography findings did not totally match the changes in LSNR on T1WI and T2WI, with nearly 30% false negative results. The quality of tractography and spatial resolution of the images were based mainly on the skill and experience of the operator. Thus, to assure the quality of DTI, future studies are required to reduce the scan time and improve the reconstruction mode of tractography for assessment of LSNR.

1. Arrigo RT, Kalanithi P, Boakye M. Is cauda equina syndrome being treated within the recommended time frame? Neurosurgery. 2011;68:1520–1526. doi: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31820cd426. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Arslan M, Cömert A, Açar H, Özdemir M, Elhan A, Tekdemir Ý, Tubbs S, Attar A, Uğur H. Lumbosacral intrathecal nerve roots: an anatomical study. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2011;153:1435–1442. doi: 10.1007/s00701-011-0952-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Byun WM, Ahn SH, Ahn MW. Value of 3D MR lumbosacral radiculography in the diagnosis of symptomatic chemical radiculitis. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33:529–534. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A2813. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Cohen MS, Wall EJ, Brown RA, Rydevik B, Garfin SR. 1990 AcroMed Award in basic science. Cauda equina anatomy. II: Extrathecal nerve roots and dorsal root ganglia. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1990;15:1248–1251. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Eguchi Y, Ohtori S, Orita S, Kamoda H, Arai G, Ishikawa T, Miyagi M, Inoue G, Suzuki M, Masuda Y, Andou H, Takaso M, Aoki Y, Toyone T, Watanabe A, Takahashi K. Quantitative evaluation and visualization of lumbar foraminal nerve root entrapment by using diffusion tensor imaging: preliminary results. Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32:1824–1829. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A2681. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Eguchi Y, Ohtori S, Yamashita M, Yamauchi K, Suzuki M, Orita S, Kamoda H, Arai G, Ishikawa T, Miyagi M, Ochiai N, Kishida S, Masuda Y, Ochi S, Kikawa T, Takaso M, Aoki Y, Toyone T, Suzuki T, Takahashi K. Clinical applications of diffusion magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar foraminal nerve root entrapment. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:1874–1882. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1520-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Feng JG, Han YT, Wang F. Comparative observation of MRI and histology of delayed graded compression of the dog cauda equina. Zhonghua Fangshe Xue Zazhi. 2000;34:208–211. [Google Scholar]
8. Filippi C, Andrews T, Gonyea J, Linnell G, Cauley K. Magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging and tractography of the lower spinal cord: application to diastematomyelia and tethered cord. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:2194–2199. doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1797-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Filler A. Magnetic resonance neurography and diffusion tensor imaging: origins, history, and clinical impact of the first 50,000 cases with an assessment of efficacy and utility in a prospective 5000-patient study group. Neurosurgery. 2009;65:A29–43. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000351279.78110.00. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Hicks GE, Morone N, Weiner DK. Degenerative lumbar disc and facet disease in older adults: prevalence and clinical correlates. Spine. 2009;34:1301–1306. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a18263. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
11. Hou ZJ, Huang Y, Fan ZW, Cao BY. The research of diffusion tensor imaging of magnetic resonance imaging in normal cauda equina. Yixue Yingxiang Xue Zazhi. 2013;23:371–375. [Google Scholar]
12. Jambawalikar S, Baum J, Button T, Li H, Geronimo V, Gould E. Diffusion tensor imaging of peripheral nerves. Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39:1073–1079. doi: 10.1007/s00256-010-0974-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Jang SH, Chang PH, Kim YK, Seo JP. Anatomical location of the frontopontine fibers in the internal capsule in the human brain: a diffusion tensor tractography study. Neuroreport. 2014;25:117–121. doi: 10.1097/WNR.0000000000000076. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Li X, Chen J, Hong G, Sun C, Wu X, Peng MJ, Zeng G. In vivo DTI longitudinal measurements of acute sciatic nerve traction injury and the association with pathological and functional changes. Eur J Radiol. 2013;82:e707–e714. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.07.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Mathys C, Aissa J, Zu Hörste GM, Reichelt DC, Antoch G, Turowski B, Hartung HP, Sheikh KA, Lehmann HC. Peripheral neuropathy: assessment of proximal nerve integrity by diffusion tensor imaging. Muscle Nerve. 2013;48:889–896. doi: 10.1002/mus.23855. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Middleton DM, Mohamed FB, Barakat N, Hunter LN, Shellikeri S, Finsterbusch J, Faro SH, Shah P, Samdani AF, Mulcahey MJ. An investigation of motion correction algorithms for pediatric spinal cord DTI in healthy subjects and patients with spinal cord injury. Magn Reson Imaging. 2014;32:433–439. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2014.01.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Morisaki S, Kawai Y, Umeda M, Nishi M, Oda R, Fujiwara H, Yamada K, Higuchi T, Tanaka C, Kawata M, Kubo T. In vivo assessment of peripheral nerve regeneration by diffusion tensor imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2011;33:535–542. doi: 10.1002/jmri.22442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
18. Quint U, Wilke HJ. Grading of degenerative disk disease and functional impairment: imaging versus patho-anatomical findings. Eur Spine J. 2008;17:1705–1713. doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0787-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
19. Saleem S, Aslam HM, Rehmani MAK, Raees A, Alvi AA, Ashraf J. Lumbar disc degenerative disease: disc degeneration symptoms and magnetic resonance image findings. Asian Spine J. 2013;7:322–334. doi: 10.4184/asj.2013.7.4.322. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
20. Senocak Ö, Hürel DM, Sener U, Ugurel B, Öztura I, Ertekin C. Motor conduction time along the cauda equina in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine. 2009;34:1410–1414. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a19082. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
21. Takagi T, Nakamura M, Yamada M, Hikishima K, Momoshima S, Fujiyoshi K, Shibata S, Okano HJ, Toyama Y, Okano H. Visualization of peripheral nerve degeneration and regeneration: monitoring with diffusion tensor tractography. Neuroimage. 2009;44:884–892. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.09.022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
22. Wang ZJ, Seo Y, Chia JM, Rollins NK. A quality assurance protocol for diffusion tensor imaging using the head phantom from American College of Radiology. Med Phys. 2011;38:4415–4421. doi: 10.1118/1.3595111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
23. Yang HT, Wang RF, Wang J, Gao XL, Li FT, Zhang HD, Xia LM, Wang CY. Clinical application of MR diffusion tensor imaging in lumbar disc annulus fibrosis. Zhonghua Fangshe Xue Zazhi. 2007;41:1100–1103. [Google Scholar]
24. Zhang Z, Song L, Meng Q, Li Z, Pan B, Yang Z, Pei Z. Morphological analysis in patients with sciatica: a magnetic resonance imaging study using three-dimensional high-resolution diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance neurography techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:E245–250. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318197162e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]