| Purpose: Preliminary discussion in patients with chronic renal failurevertebral bone changes of the proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy(1H-MRS) features and diagnostic value.Methods:1, Under the condition of meet the inclusion criteria and exclusioncriteria, selection of clinically diagnosed as experimental group,64patientswith chronic renal failure and30healthy volunteers as control group.2, Using GE Signa Excite1.5T superconducting whole-body MRIscanner for the two groups of subjects were first scan lumbar conventionalMR imaging, then collected the1H-MRS of the L2vertebral body. Lumbarconventional MR imaging sequences using MR phase arrayed total spine coil,MRS using body coil.1H-MRS acquisition using point resolved spectroscopy.Scan parameters: TR=1500ms, TE=35ms, number of excitation=8,volume of interest (VOI)=2.0cm×2.0cm×2.0cm. Automatic shimming andcomplete the acquisition, spectrum scanning time is84seconds.3, Used the Saker software analysis of the1H-MRS. Measured the areaunder the peak of the water peak and the lipid, and use it to calculate thepercentage of fat and lipid-water ratio. Analyze the differences of the FF%and the LWR between the two groups using the independent sample t-test.Analyze the correlation of the FF%, the LWR and eGFR using Spearman’srank correlation analysis, and for the ROC curve.Results: L2vertebral body,the mean FF%of chronic renal failure groupwas(52.56±10.74)%and the mean LWR was(1.25±0.68); the mean FF%of control group was(43.24±12.19)%and the mean LWR was(0.85±0.44). Themean FF%and the mean LWR of chronic renal failure group were higher thanthe control group, the difference of between groups was statisticallysignificant(t=-3.752,P=0.000and t=-3.512,P=0.001).The FF%with eGFRwas negatively related(r=-0.264,P=0.035),The LWR with eGFR wasnegatively related(r=-0.264,P=0.035).The ROC areas of FF%is0.706(95%CI0.591-0.821), diagnostic critical value is33.29%, the Sensitivity is0.984, the specificity is0.296.And The ROC areas of LWR is0.706(95%CI0.591-0.821), diagnostic critical value is50.00%, the Sensitivity is0.984, thespecificity is0.296.Conclusion:1,1H-MRS can be non-invasive analysis the FF%and LWR of vertebral.2, Can use the FF%and LWR indirect assessment of the vertebral bonechanges in patients with chronic renal failure. Purpose: To analyze the difference of the apparent diffusion coefficientvalues of lumbar vertebral body between the chronic renal failure patients andnormal volunteers, and analyze the cause of its possibilityMethods:1, Under the condition of meet the inclusion criteria and exclusioncriteria, selection of clinically diagnosed as experimental group,64patientswith chronic renal failure and30healthy volunteers as control group.2, Using GE Signa Excite1.5T superconducting whole-body MRIscanner for the two groups of subjects were first scan lumbar conventionalMR imaging, then scan the DWI images of the lumbar spine.The lumbarconventional MR imaging and the DWI imaging sequences using MR phasearrayed total spine coil. Using the single spin echo diffusion weightedsequence obtain the lumbar sagittal diffusion weighted images. Scanparameters: Thickness is5mm, and the layer spacing is1mm, TR=3000ms,TE=70ms, FOV=30cm×30cm, Matrix is256×192, number of excitation=4, Proliferation-sensitive coefficient (b value)=0、300and500s/mm2.3, These images were processed on the ADW4.4worker-station by usingthe GE-Functool DWI software measured the ADC values of the each lumbarvertebral body. The region of interest was respectively took the100,200and300mm2. ROI in different size, measured, and the measurement3timesabove, finally take the average value for each ADC values of lumbar vertebralbody. Analyze the differences of the lumbar average ADC values between the two groups using the independent sample t-test. When take different b values,using Pearson correlation analysis method to analyze the association betweenthe lumbar average ADC values of CRF patients and eGFR.Results: When b value is0,300s/mm2, region of interest wasrespectively took the100,200and300mm2, the mean lumbar ADC values ofCRF group were less than the control group, and the differences betweengroups were statistically significant (t=2.79, P=0.006; t=2.64, P=0.009andt=2.20, P=0.029). When b value is0,500s/mm2, region of interest wasrespectively took the100,200and300mm2, the mean lumbar ADC values ofCRF group were less than the control group, and the differences betweengroups were statistically significant (t=2.33, P=0.020; t=3.17, P=0.002andt=3.78, P=0.000). when b value is0,300and0,500s/mm2, the lumbar ADCvalues of CRF patients has a certain relevance with the eGFR (r=0.379,P=0.002and r=0.367, P=0.003).Conclusion: The lumbar ADC value of CRF patients is slightly smallerthan the normal volunteers, but the specific reason is worth further discussing. |
PDF Full Text Request