祝捷 梁英杰
[摘要]目的 探討彌散張量成像(DTI)技術(shù)在脊髓型頸椎病手術(shù)療效評價中的應(yīng)用價值。方法 對2010年1月~2016年12月在我院診斷為脊髓型頸椎病并行手術(shù)治療的94例患者進行回顧性分析,所有患者術(shù)前、術(shù)后(6個月)進行3.0 T磁共振DTI序列掃描,并采集DTI量化數(shù)據(jù)[表觀張量系數(shù)(ADC)、各向異性分數(shù)(FA)、軸向彌散率(AD)及垂直彌散率(VD)]。采用改良日本骨科學會(JOA)脊髓損害功能評定標準進行術(shù)前、術(shù)后脊髓功能評分并采用Hirabayashi 方法計算脊髓神經(jīng)功能改善率,將改善率≥50%納入恢復(fù)良好組,共58例;將改善率<50%納入恢復(fù)欠佳組,共36例。比較兩組術(shù)前、術(shù)后的JOA評分、ADC、FA、AD及VD。結(jié)果 恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的JOA評分高于術(shù)前,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05);恢復(fù)欠佳組術(shù)前、術(shù)后的JOA評分比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05);恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)前、術(shù)后的JOA評分均高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)。在DTI序列方面,恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的ADC、VD值低于本組術(shù)前,F(xiàn)A、AD值高于本組術(shù)前,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)?;謴?fù)欠佳組術(shù)前與術(shù)后的ADC、FA、AD、VD值比較,差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)。兩組術(shù)前的ADC值比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05);恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)前的FA、AD值高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,VD值低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05);恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的FA、AD高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,ADC、VD低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)。結(jié)論 DTI能量化分析脊髓型頸椎病的頸髓微結(jié)構(gòu)改變,F(xiàn)A、AD、VD量化有助于脊髓型頸椎病的療效評估。
[關(guān)鍵詞]頸髓型頸椎病;磁共振成像;彌散張量成像;表觀張量系數(shù);各向異性分數(shù);軸向擴散率;垂直擴散率
[中圖分類號] R445.2? ? ? ? ? [文獻標識碼] A? ? ? ? ? [文章編號] 1674-4721(2019)7(c)-0040-05
[Abstract] Objective To explore the application value of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in surgical curative effect evaluation of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Methods Retrospective analysis was performed on 94 patients diagnosed with cervical spondylotic myelopathy and treated by operation in our hospital from January 2010 to December 2016. All patients underwent 3.0 T magnetic resonance DTI sequence scanning before and 6 months after operation, and the quantitative data of DTI (apparent diffusion coefficient [ADC], fractional anisotropy [FA], axial diffusivity [AD], vertical diffusivity [VD]) were collected. The preoperative and postoperative spinal cord function score were evaluated by the spinal cord injury function evaluation standard of modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA). The recovery rate of spinal cord nerve function were calculated using Hirabayashi method. A total of 58 patients with no less than 50% recovery rate were included in the good recovery group, and 36 patients with less than 50% recovery rate were included in the poor recovery group. The JOA score, the value of ADC, FA, AD and VD were compared between the two groups before and after operation. Results In the good recovery group, the JOA score after operation was higher than that before operation, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05), whereas in the poor recovery group, there was no significant difference between the preoperative and the postoperative JOA score (P>0.05). Both preoperative and postoperative JOA score in the good recovery group were significantly higher than those of the poor recovery group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). In terms of DTI sequences, the value of ADC and VD in the good recovery group after operation were significantly lower than those before operation, the value of FA and AD in the good recovery group after operation were higher than those before operation, and all the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). As regards to the poor recovery group, there were no significant difference between before and after operation in the value of ADC, FA, AD and VD (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in preoperative ADC value between the two groups (P>0.05). The preoperative FA and AD value of the good recovery group were significantly higher than those of the poor recovery group, and the preoperative VD value of the good recovery group was lower than that of the poor recovery group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The postoperative FA and AD value of the good recovery group were significantly higher that those of the poor recovery group, and the postoperative ADC and VD of the good recovery group was lower than that of the poor recovery group, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusion DTI can quantitatively analyze the changes of cervical spinal cord microstructure of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Besides, the quantified FA, AD, VD are conducive to evaluating the curative effect of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.
[Key words] Cervical spondylotic myelopathy; Magnetic resonance imaging; Diffusion tensor imaging; Apparent diffusion coefficient; Fractional anisotropy; Axial diffusivity; Vertical diffusivity
脊髓型頸椎?。╟ervical spondylotic myelopathy,CSM)是頸椎退變導(dǎo)致脊髓受壓和(或)脊髓供血障礙產(chǎn)生脊髓功能不同程度損害的疾病,是頸椎病的常見嚴重類型[1],發(fā)病率為12%~30%,占頸椎病的10%~15%。隨著生活水平的提高及工作方式的變化,頸椎病的發(fā)病率逐年升高,且呈年輕化趨勢[2]。該病由于起病隱匿、早期癥狀個體差異大、脊髓受損后期出現(xiàn)不可逆的改變,導(dǎo)致治療難度大,保守治療效果較差,因此,CSM的早期確診至關(guān)重要,尤其是頸脊髓損傷程度及功能評估對治療方案制定及預(yù)后預(yù)判具有重要的臨床意義[3]。磁共振(magnetic resonance imaging,MRI)是目前公認的診斷頸椎病最有價值的檢查手段之一,其可以直觀顯示退變椎間盤和脊髓受壓程度,但在顯示脊髓病變方面的敏感性、特異性均不高,判斷主觀性較強且缺少量化指標[4-5]。近年來,MRI擴散張量成像(diffusion tensor imaging,DTI)技術(shù)作為無創(chuàng)影像學手段,能夠量化揭示治療前后頸髓微觀結(jié)構(gòu)的變化,在醫(yī)學研究和臨床診斷中得到了越來越廣泛的應(yīng)用[6]。本研究通過回顧性分析探討DTI量化指標對CSM術(shù)后脊髓功能恢復(fù)的預(yù)測價值,現(xiàn)報道如下。
1資料與方法
1.1一般資料
對2010年1月~2016年12月在廣州市第一人民醫(yī)院脊柱外科診斷為CSM并行手術(shù)治療的患者進行回顧性分析。納入標準:①患者年齡45~75歲;②具有頸脊髓壓迫性損害臨床表現(xiàn)及相應(yīng)體征,X線、MRI等證實頸脊髓受壓;③入選患者手術(shù)方式包括前路(頸椎前路減壓植骨融合內(nèi)固定術(shù))、后路(頸椎后路單開門椎板成形術(shù))或前后路聯(lián)合術(shù)式,所有術(shù)式均充分減壓或充分擴充椎管容積。排除標準:①合并頸椎外傷性骨折脫位;②合并頸椎感染性病變;③合并頸椎腫瘤;④術(shù)后出現(xiàn)新發(fā)頸椎管狹窄。本研究方案經(jīng)廣州市第一人民醫(yī)院醫(yī)學倫理委員會審查批準并得到參與研究者知情同意。隨訪時間為術(shù)后6個月。
采用改良日本骨科學會(Japanese Orthopedic Association,JOA)脊髓損害功能評定標準[4]對所有患者進行術(shù)前及術(shù)后(6個月)功能評分,并采用Hirabayashi方法計算脊髓神經(jīng)功能改善率。將改善率≥50%的病例納入為恢復(fù)良好組,改善率<50%病例納入為恢復(fù)欠佳組。共納入研究94例患者,其中男61例,女33例;年齡(56.19±9.56)歲。其中恢復(fù)良好組(改善率≥50%)58例,恢復(fù)欠佳組(改善率<50%)36例。兩組患者的年齡、性別、受壓最嚴重節(jié)段、手術(shù)方式等一般資料比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)(表l),具有可比性。
1.2方法
所有納入研究患者均采用3.0 T磁共振儀(西門子,MAGNETOM Verio 3.0)于術(shù)前及術(shù)后(6個月)各行1次頸椎常規(guī)序列和DTI序列掃描(采用頸部八通道線圈)。MRI平掃采用自旋回波序列和快速回波序列,掃描參數(shù)為矢狀位 T1WI(TR/TE,600/15 ms)、T2WI(TR/TE,5200/140 ms)及軸位T2WI(TR/TE/IR,9000/120/2100 ms),層厚3 mm,間距1.0 mm;FOV為240 mm×240 mm,矩陣512×512。DTI序列采用兩次激發(fā)平面回波序列、并行采集技術(shù)、GRAPPA模式,掃描參數(shù)為TR/TE 8300/74 ms,層厚3 mm,間距0 mm;FOV為230 mm×230 mm,矩陣98×98;b值為800 s/mm2;施加20個擴散梯度方向、前后方向施加2個飽和帶。掃描時間約6.5 min,掃描范圍為顱底至第一胸椎。取T2WI矢狀位脊髓高信號部位(若脊髓無高信號改變則取受壓最嚴重部位)5 mm2作為感興趣區(qū)(region of interest,ROI)(大小為10~18個體素,盡可能包含整個頸髓,避免腦脊液及相關(guān)偽影等影響),得到術(shù)前和術(shù)后的DTI原始數(shù)據(jù),后者經(jīng)西門子Sygno工作站以及NEURO3D軟件處理后得出患者的表觀張量系數(shù)(apparent diffusion coefficient,ADC)圖、各向異性分數(shù)(fractional anisotropy,F(xiàn)A)圖、軸向彌散率(axial diffusivity,AD)圖及垂直擴散率(vertical Diffusivity,VD)圖。
1.3觀察指標及評價標準
測定并分析兩組患者術(shù)前、術(shù)后6個月的JOA評分與DTI數(shù)據(jù)(ADC、FA、AD、VD值),具體內(nèi)容如下。①JOA評分:用于計算患者術(shù)后脊髓神經(jīng)功能改善率,計算公式為改善率=(隨訪JOA評分-術(shù)前JOA評分)/(17-術(shù)前JOA評分)×100%,當改善率≥50%時視為恢復(fù)良好,改善率<50%時視為恢復(fù)欠佳。②ADC值:彌散梯度磁場施加方向上所掃描組織中水分子在各個方向上的平均彌散張量,且ADC值越大,代表所掃描的組織內(nèi)含的自由水分子越多、活動度越大。③FA值:組成彌散張量整體中的各個不同方向彌散張量分量之間的比重,其范圍為0~1,當FA值趨近于1時,各向異性最大,當FA值趨近于0時,各向同性。④AD值:自由水分子沿神經(jīng)纖維白質(zhì)縱軸方向上的彌散強度,反映軸突的完整性,而VD值為自由水分子垂直神經(jīng)纖維白質(zhì)方向上的彌散強度,反映髓鞘的完整性;AD值和VD值呈現(xiàn)負相關(guān)關(guān)系,在神經(jīng)元水腫、脫髓鞘、壞死等病變,細胞膜半通透性喪失,水分子各向活動異性喪失中,表現(xiàn)為AD明顯下降,而VD明顯增加[5-7]。
1.4統(tǒng)計學方法
采用SPSS 13.0統(tǒng)計學軟件進行數(shù)據(jù)分析,計量資料以均數(shù)±標準差(x±s)來表示,組內(nèi)術(shù)前與術(shù)后比較、組間比較采用LSD-t檢驗,計數(shù)資料以率(%)表示,采用χ2檢驗,檢驗水準α值取雙側(cè)0.05,以P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計學意義。
2結(jié)果
2.1兩組手術(shù)前后JOA評分的比較
恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的JOA評分顯著高于本組術(shù)前,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05);但恢復(fù)欠佳組術(shù)前和術(shù)后的JOA評分比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)?;謴?fù)良好組術(shù)前、術(shù)后的JOA評分均顯著高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)(表2)。
2.2兩組手術(shù)前后ADC、FA、AD、VD值的比較
恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的ADC、VD值明顯低于本組術(shù)前,而FA、AD值則明顯高于術(shù)前,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)。恢復(fù)欠佳組術(shù)前和術(shù)后的各項指標量值比較,差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)。兩組術(shù)前的ADC值比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)?;謴?fù)良好組術(shù)前的FA、AD值明顯高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,術(shù)前VD值明顯低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)。恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的FA、AD值顯著高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,而術(shù)后的ADC、VD值則顯著低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)(表3)。
3討論
目前學界對CSM的研究認為,頸脊髓慢性壓迫早期以神經(jīng)元水腫、萎縮、脫髓鞘等可逆的病理改變?yōu)橹鳎趬浩冉獬罂色@得良好的神經(jīng)功能恢復(fù);而隨著壓迫的加重和病程的延長,逐漸出現(xiàn)軸索變性、囊性變、神經(jīng)元壞死、空洞出現(xiàn)、脊髓軟化等不可逆性的病理改變,即使手術(shù)解除壓迫后脊髓功能也難于恢復(fù)[8],因此如何識別可逆性、不可逆性頸髓損傷對CSM診療具有重要意義。MRI是目前最有價值的檢查方式之一,其中T2WI高信號能提示頸脊髓受壓后出現(xiàn)的脊髓病理改變,但其發(fā)生率在不同的研究報道中變化較大,自22.7%~76.0%不等[9],而對T2WI高信號提示神經(jīng)組織發(fā)生可逆還是提示發(fā)生不可逆的病理變化,至今更是無統(tǒng)一定論[7],因此依據(jù)MRI難以準確評價脊髓神經(jīng)纖維的細微病理改變以及預(yù)測脊髓功能的恢復(fù)情況。MRI彌散成像技術(shù)是一種能在活體上測量水分子彌散運動與成像的理想方法,在此基礎(chǔ)上發(fā)展的DTI技術(shù)更能無損、直接、三維任意層面、任意角度地顯示脊髓神經(jīng)纖維束顯微結(jié)構(gòu),因此,相比MRI-T2WI高信號預(yù)測脊髓損傷的不定性,DTI技術(shù)是臨床目前可用于判斷脊髓病變病理生理狀態(tài)的有效措施[10]。DTI利用多個不同方向的擴散敏感梯度對水分子的擴散方向性進行量化,其通過施加多個不同方向的擴散敏感梯度磁場來觀察水分子在不同方向上的擴散能力并進行量化測值,從細胞及分子水平提供脊髓組織白質(zhì)束完整性的重要信息[11]。常見的DTI指標有ADC、FA、AD及VD。
本研究結(jié)果顯示,恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的JOA評分高于術(shù)前,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05),提示脊髓功能產(chǎn)生可逆性恢復(fù);而恢復(fù)欠佳組脊髓功能發(fā)生不可逆性改變,因此本組術(shù)前與術(shù)后的JOA評分相比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)。DTI量化指標中,恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的ADC、VD圖信號顯著低于本組術(shù)前,F(xiàn)A、AD圖信號顯著高于本組術(shù)前,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)。恢復(fù)欠佳組術(shù)前和術(shù)后的ADC、FA、AD、VD圖信號比較,差異均無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05)?;謴?fù)良好組術(shù)前、術(shù)后DTI量化結(jié)果的變化提示與功能的恢復(fù)有相當?shù)念A(yù)測性,這與目前眾多學術(shù)報告一致[12-14]。頸脊髓在慢性壓迫狀態(tài)下早期神經(jīng)細胞萎縮,細胞漿減少,細胞外水腫、間隙增大、脫髓鞘改變,細胞外自由水分子彌散活動加快而ADC值升高,頸脊髓局部測量FA值隨各向水分子彌散活動增強而下降,AD因軸突損傷而下降,VD因細胞膜生理功能受損而增加;減壓術(shù)后細胞膜半透膜的正常解剖結(jié)構(gòu)和生理功能恢復(fù)良好,脊髓神經(jīng)元軸突、髓鞘功能恢復(fù)良好,因此自由水分子AD值升高、速度加快,而VD值減緩、活性降低。脊髓壓迫后期發(fā)生不可逆性改變,減壓術(shù)后病理狀態(tài)不能逆轉(zhuǎn)至正常的形態(tài)、結(jié)構(gòu)、功能,故ADC、FA、AD 、VD圖信號變化不大。
另外,恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)前的FA、AD值顯著高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,VD值顯著低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05);恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的FA、AD值高于恢復(fù)欠佳組,VD值低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異均有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05)。兩組術(shù)前的ADC值比較,差異無統(tǒng)計學意義(P>0.05),但恢復(fù)良好組術(shù)后的ADC值低于恢復(fù)欠佳組,差異有統(tǒng)計學意義(P<0.05),提示FA、AD、VD相對ADC對判斷脊髓功能更有價值。Ellingson等[15]認為,脊髓DTI是一種臨床可行的連續(xù)監(jiān)測CSM患者的成像技術(shù),ADC同時受自由水彌散和各向異性的雙重影響,但兩方面可部分抵消,因此FA對神經(jīng)功能的敏感性更高,比ADC測量更穩(wěn)定。目前學者均認為CSM患者脊髓最大壓迫水平的FA值與術(shù)前、術(shù)后的JOA評分顯著相關(guān)[16-17]。相當多學者報道ADC、AD、VD值與臨床表現(xiàn)顯著相關(guān),有明顯相關(guān)性[18-19],甚至有學者報道ADC值與臨床表現(xiàn)無明顯相關(guān)性[20]。也有學者認為AD和VD值在DTI中是一個有用的指標,不能專門判斷脊髓功能的可靠方法[21]。
綜上所述,對研究對象進行手術(shù)前后的DTI掃描與量化評價,可用于頸髓損傷程度的判定以及手術(shù)預(yù)后分析,其有著重要的臨床應(yīng)用價值和廣泛的應(yīng)用前景。
[參考文獻]
[1]Iyer A,Azad TD,Tharin S.Cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J].Clin Spine Surg,2016,29(10):408-414.
[2]Cuellar J,Passias P.Cervical spondylotic myelopathy a review of clinical diagnosis and treatment[J].Bull Hosp Jt Dis,2017,75(1):21-29.
[3]Tang Y,Jia ZW,Wu JH,et al.Factors of prognosis in cervical spondylotic myelopathy:a review[J].Zhongguo Gu Shang,2016,29(3):216-219.
[4]Nouri A,Martin AR,Mikulis D,et al.Fehlings.Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of degenerative cervical myelopathy:a review of structural changes and measurement techniques[J].Neurosurg Focus,2016,40(6):E5.
[5]余博飛,徐杰,鄭武.脊髓型頸椎病MRI T2髓內(nèi)高信號與臨床表現(xiàn)嚴重程度的關(guān)系[J].福建醫(yī)藥雜志,2018,40(6):29-32.
[6]Banaszek A,Bladowska J,Podgórski P,et al.Role of diffusion tensor MR imaging in degenerative cervical spine disease:a review of the literature[J].Clin Neuroradiol,2016,26(3):265-276.
[7]梁英杰.脊髓型頸椎病術(shù)后臨床轉(zhuǎn)歸及其動物模型與相應(yīng)MRI DTI量化指標之間的相關(guān)性研究[D].廣州:南方醫(yī)科大學,2015:82-95.
[8]Karadimas SK,Erwin WM,Ely CG,et al.Pathophysiology and natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J].Spine,2013,38(22 Suppl 1):S21-S36.
[9]李宏,李淳德,邑曉東,等.伴髓內(nèi)MRI T2WI高信號脊髓型頸椎病的臨床特點及手術(shù)效果[J].中國脊柱脊髓雜志,2009,19(4):250-254.
[10]王宇鳴,鄒海波,李中實.磁共振彌散張量成像技術(shù)在頸椎外科應(yīng)用的研究進展[J].中國脊柱脊髓雜志,2017,27(6):561-565.
[11]周斌,張惠南,高文,等.磁共振擴散張量成像在急性隱匿性頸髓損傷中的診斷價值[J].中華診斷學電子雜志,2018,6(2):119-123.
[12]Nukala M,Abraham J,Khandige G,et al.Efficacy of diffusion tensor imaging in identification of degenerative cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J].Eur J Radiol Open,2018,12(6):16-23.
[13]Rao A,Soliman H,Kaushal M,et al.Diffusion tensor imaging in a large longitudinal series of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy correlated with long-term functional outcome[J].Neurosurgery,2018,83(4):753-760.
[14]Edlow BL,Copen WA,Izzy S,et al.Longitudinal diffusion tensor imaging detects recovery of fractional anisotropy within traumatic axonal injury lesions[J].Neurocrit Care,2016, 24(3):342-352.
[15]Ellingson BM,Salamon N,Woodworth DC,et al.Reproducibility,temporal stability,and functional correlation of diffusion MR measurements within the spinal cord in patients with asymptomatic cervical stenosis or cervical myelopathy[J].J Neurosurg Spine,2018,28(5):472-480.
[16]倪豐,丁陽,唐天澤,等.磁共振擴散張量成像評估早期脊髓型頸椎病的價值[J].江蘇醫(yī)藥,2017,43(10):700-702.
[17]孔超,陳學明,關(guān)驊,等.脊髓型頸椎病患者頸脊髓磁共振擴散張量成像的特點及臨床意義[J].中國脊柱脊髓雜志,2016,26(11):977-983.
[18]Dong F,Wu Y,Song P,et al.A preliminary study of 3.0-T magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging in cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J].Eur Spine J,2018,27(8):1839-1845.
[19]Saksena S,Mohamed FB,Middleton DM,et al.Diffusion tensor imaging assessment of regional white matter changes in the cervical and thoracic spinal cord in pediatric subjects[J].J Neurotrauma,2019,36(6):853-861.
[20]Ying J,Zhou X,Zhu M,et al.The contribution of diffusion tensor imaging to quantitative assessment on multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J].Eur Neurol,2016,75(1-2):67-74.
[21]Zaninovich OA,Avila MJ,Kay M,et al.The role of diffusion tensor imaging in the diagnosis,prognosis,and assessment of recovery and treatment of spinal cord injury:a systematic review[J].Neurosurg Focus,2019,46(3):E7.
(收稿日期:2019-03-06? 本文編輯:祁海文)