Differences in Perfusion Parameters Between Upper and Lower Lumbar Vertebral Segments with Dynamic Contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE MRI)

Overview

Journal Eur Radiol

Specialty Radiology

Date 2008 Apr 9

PMID 18392830

Citations 9

Authors

Vasiliki Savvopoulou

Thomas G Maris

Lampros Vlahos

Lia Angela Moulopoulos

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

To investigate the influence of age, sex and spinal level on perfusion parameters of normal lumbar bone marrow with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE MRI). Sixty-seven subjects referred for evaluation of low back pain or sciatica underwent DCE MRI of the lumbar spine. After subtraction of dynamic images, a region of interest (ROI) was placed on each lumbar vertebral body of all subjects, and time intensity curves were generated. Consequently, perfusion parameters were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed to search for perfusion differences among lumbar vertebrae and in relation to age and sex. Upper (L1, L2) and lower (L3, L4, L5) vertebrae showed significant differences in perfusion parameters (p<0.05). Vertebrae of subjects younger than 50 years showed significantly higher perfusion compared to vertebrae of older ones (p<0.05). Vertebrae of females demonstrated significantly increased perfusion compared to those of males of corresponding age (p<0.05). All perfusion parameters, except for washout (WOUT), showed a mild linear correlation with age. Time to maximum slope (TMSP) and time to peak (TTPK) showed the same correlation with sex (0.22<r<0.32, p<0.05). Our results indicate increased perfusion of the upper compared to the lower lumbar spine, of younger compared to older subjects and of females compared to males.

Citing Articles

Study of bone marrow microstructure in healthy young adults using intravoxel incoherent motion diffusion-weighted MRI.

Wu W, Gong T, Niu J, Li W, Li J, Song X Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022; 13:958151.

PMID: 36440214 PMC: 9691993. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2022.958151.

Comparison of semi-quantitative and quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI evaluations of vertebral marrow perfusion in a rat osteoporosis model.

Zhu J, Xiong Z, Zhang J, Qiu Y, Hua T, Tang G BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017; 18(1):446.

PMID: 29137612 PMC: 5686959. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-017-1800-1.

Whole-body MRI, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and diffusion-weighted imaging for the staging of multiple myeloma.

Dutoit J, Verstraete K Skeletal Radiol. 2017; 46(6):733-750.

PMID: 28289855 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-017-2609-6.

Prognostic significance of increased bone marrow microcirculation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: results of a prospective DCE-MRI study.

Merz M, Moehler T, Ritsch J, Bauerle T, Zechmann C, Wagner B Eur Radiol. 2015; 26(5):1404-11.

PMID: 26215436 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-015-3928-4.

[Differentiation between acute osteoporotic and metastatic vertebral body fractures by imaging].

Geith T, Reiser M, Baur-Melnyk A Unfallchirurg. 2015; 118(3):222-9.

PMID: 25783690 DOI: 10.1007/s00113-014-2690-4.

References

Shih T, Liu H, Chang C, Wei S, Shen L, Yang P . Correlation of MR lumbar spine bone marrow perfusion with bone mineral density in female subjects. Radiology. 2004; 233(1):121-8. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2331031509. View

Rahmouni A, Montazel J, Divine M, Lepage E, Belhadj K, Gaulard P . Bone marrow with diffuse tumor infiltration in patients with lymphoproliferative diseases: dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2003; 229(3):710-7. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2293020748. View

Griffith J, Yeung D, Antonio G, Wong S, Kwok T, Woo J . Vertebral marrow fat content and diffusion and perfusion indexes in women with varying bone density: MR evaluation. Radiology. 2006; 241(3):831-8. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2413051858. View

Fleckenstein J . What's new about osteoporosis?. Radiology. 2005; 236(3):745-6. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2363050565. View

Ishijima H, Ishizaka H, Horikoshi H, Sakurai M . Water fraction of lumbar vertebral bone marrow estimated from chemical shift misregistration on MR imaging: normal variations with age and sex. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996; 167(2):355-8. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.167.2.8686603. View

Vande Berg B, Lecouvet F, Michaux L, Ferrant A, Maldague B, Malghem J . Magnetic resonance imaging of the bone marrow in hematological malignancies. Eur Radiol. 1998; 8(8):1335-44. DOI: 10.1007/s003300050548. View

Burkhardt R, Kettner G, Bohm W, Schmidmeier M, Schlag R, Frisch B . Changes in trabecular bone, hematopoiesis and bone marrow vessels in aplastic anemia, primary osteoporosis, and old age: a comparative histomorphometric study. Bone. 1987; 8(3):157-64. DOI: 10.1016/8756-3282(87)90015-9. View

Kuisma M, Karppinen J, Niinimaki J, Kurunlahti M, Haapea M, Vanharanta H . A three-year follow-up of lumbar spine endplate (Modic) changes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(15):1714-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000224167.18483.14. View

Weinreb J . MR imaging of bone marrow: a map could help. Radiology. 1990; 177(1):23-4. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.177.1.2399323. View

10.

Vande Berg B, Malghem J, Lecouvet F, Maldague B . Magnetic resonance imaging of normal bone marrow. Eur Radiol. 1998; 8(8):1327-34. DOI: 10.1007/s003300050547. View

11.

Taylor J, Tofts P, Port R, Evelhoch J, Knopp M, Reddick W . MR imaging of tumor microcirculation: promise for the new millennium. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999; 10(6):903-7. DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1522-2586(199912)10:6<903::aid-jmri1>3.0.co;2-a. View

12.

Modic M, Masaryk T, Ross J, Carter J . Imaging of degenerative disk disease. Radiology. 1988; 168(1):177-86. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.168.1.3289089. View

13.

Rahmouni A, Divine M, Mathieu D, Golli M, Dao T, Jazaerli N . Detection of multiple myeloma involving the spine: efficacy of fat-suppression and contrast-enhanced MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993; 160(5):1049-52. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.160.5.8470574. View

14.

Moulopoulos L, Varma D, Dimopoulos M, Leeds N, Kim E, Johnston D . Multiple myeloma: spinal MR imaging in patients with untreated newly diagnosed disease. Radiology. 1992; 185(3):833-40. DOI: 10.1148/radiology.185.3.1438772. View

15.

Wilkes C, VISSCHER M . Some physiological aspects of bone marrow pressure. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975; 57(1):49-57. View

16.

Banks L, Lees B, MacSweeney J, Stevenson J . Effect of degenerative spinal and aortic calcification on bone density measurements in post-menopausal women: links between osteoporosis and cardiovascular disease?. Eur J Clin Invest. 1994; 24(12):813-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.1994.tb02024.x. View

17.

Duda S, Laniado M, Schick F, Strayle M, Claussen C . Normal bone marrow in the sacrum of young adults: differences between the sexes seen on chemical-shift MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995; 164(4):935-40. DOI: 10.2214/ajr.164.4.7726052. View

18.

Griffith J, Yeung D, Antonio G, Lee F, Hong A, Wong S . Vertebral bone mineral density, marrow perfusion, and fat content in healthy men and men with osteoporosis: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging and MR spectroscopy. Radiology. 2005; 236(3):945-51. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2363041425. View

19.

Kiel D, Kauppila L, Cupples L, Hannan M, ODonnell C, Wilson P . Bone loss and the progression of abdominal aortic calcification over a 25 year period: the Framingham Heart Study. Calcif Tissue Int. 2001; 68(5):271-6. DOI: 10.1007/BF02390833. View

20.

Mazess R, Barden H, Ettinger M, Johnston C, Dawson-Hughes B, Baran D . Spine and femur density using dual-photon absorptiometry in US white women. Bone Miner. 1987; 2(3):211-9. View