RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Improved Inter-Subject Alignment of the Lumbosacral Cord for Group-Level In Vivo Gray and White Matter Assessments: A Scan-Rescan MRI Study at 3T
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2023.10.19.23297188
DO 10.1101/2023.10.19.23297188
A1 Büeler, Silvan
A1 Freund, Patrick
A1 Kessler, Thomas M.
A1 Liechti, Martina D.
A1 David, Gergely
YR 2023
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2023/10/20/2023.10.19.23297188.abstract
AB Introduction Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) enables the investigation of pathological changes in gray and white matter at the lumbosacral enlargement (LSE) and conus medullaris (CM). However, conducting group-level analyses of MRI metrics in the lumbosacral spinal cord is challenging due to variability in CM size, lack of established image-based landmarks, and unknown scan-rescan reliability. This study aimed to improve inter-subject alignment of the lumbosacral cord to facilitate group-level analyses of MRI metrics. Additionally, we evaluated the scan-rescan reliability of MRI-based cross-sectional area (CSA) measurements and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) metrics.Methods Fifteen participants (10 healthy volunteers and 5 patients with spinal cord injury) underwent axial T2*-weighted and diffusion MRI at 3T. We assessed (i) the reliability of spinal cord and gray matter based landmarks for consistent inter-subject alignment of the lumbosacral cord, (ii) the inter-subject variability of MRI metrics before and after adjusting for the CM length, (iii) the intra- and inter-rater reliability of CSA measurements, and (iv) the scan-rescan reliability of CSA measurements and DTI metrics.Results The slice with the largest gray matter CSA as an LSE landmark exhibited the highest reliability, both within and across raters. Adjusting for the CM length greatly reduced the inter-subject variability of MRI metrics. The intra-rater, inter-rater, and scan-rescan reliability of MRI metrics were the highest at and around the LSE (scan-rescan coefficient of variation <3% for CSA measurements and <7% for DTI metrics within the white matter) and decreased considerably caudal to it.Conclusion To facilitate group-level analysis of corresponding spinal cord levels, we recommend using the slice with the largest gray matter CSA as a reliable LSE landmark, along with an adjustment for the CM length. We also stress the significance of the anatomical location within the lumbosacral cord in relation to the reliability of MRI metrics. The scan-rescan reliability values serve as valuable guides for power and sample size calculations in future longitudinal studies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical TrialNCT03965299Clinical Protocols https://github.com/NeuroimagingBalgrist/LumbosacralCordMRI Funding StatementThis work is financially supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) (33IC30_179644). PF is funded by a SNSF Eccellenza Professorial Fellowship grant (PCEFP3_181362/1).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Ethics committee of Kantonale Ethikkommission Zurich gave ethical approval for this work.I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.YesData and scripts used to generate the results may be shared with other research groups pending a formal data sharing agreement.