摘要目的 探讨轴向负荷对受检者椎间盘ADC值、各项异性(FA)值的影响.方法 腰腿痛患者45例,年龄范围25～54岁.进行常规T2WI、T1WI及轴向负荷前后DTI,负荷重量为体质量的40%～50%,负荷时间为10 min.DTI参数:TR 2500 ms,TE 89 ms,扩散方向为6个方向,b值设为400 s/m2,扫描时间4 min 10 s.利用DTI原始数据重组ADC图、FA图、b0图,测定其负荷前后椎间盘的ADC值、FA值,分析短时轴向负荷后ADC值、FA值的变化规律.椎间盘负荷前后ADC值、FA值的差异性比较,采用配对资料t检验或秩和检验.结果 45例225个椎间盘,223个纳入研究,Pfirrmann分级结果:Ⅱ级100个,Ⅲ级48个,Ⅳ级59个,Ⅴ级16个,2个椎间盘钙化未纳入研究,223个椎间盘负荷前、后椎间盘的ADC值分别是为(1666±252)×10-3、(1662±253)×10-3 mm2/s,负荷后平均ADC值减低,但差异无统计学意义(Z=-1.363,P＞0.05),负荷前、后223个椎间盘的FA值分别是(301±104)×10-3、(316±112)×10-3,负荷后平均FA值升高(Z=-2.794,P＜0.05).Pfirrmann Ⅲ级椎间盘,短时轴向负荷后ADC值减低、FA值升高,Ⅳ级椎间盘FA值升高,负荷前、后Ⅲ级椎间盘的ADC值分别是为(1685±190)×10-3、(1624±180)×10-3mm2/s,FA值分别是(300±87)×10-3、(326±87)×10-3,Ⅳ级椎间盘FA值分别是(348±67)×10-3、(351±71)×10-3,差异均有统计学意义(t值分别为3.513、-2.210、-2.006,P值均＜0.05);Pfirrmann Ⅱ级、Ⅳ级和Ⅴ级椎间盘负荷前后ADC值差异无统计学意义(P值均＞0.05);Ⅱ级、Ⅴ级椎间盘FA值负荷前后差异亦无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 短时轴向负荷可引起轻度退变椎间盘(Pfirrmann Ⅲ级)ADC值下降、椎间盘扩散能力降低;在正常(Pfirrmann Ⅱ级)和重度退变椎间盘(Pfirrmann Ⅳ级和Ⅴ级),短时轴向负荷前后椎间盘ADC值无明显变化,对椎间盘扩散能力影响不明显.

abstractsObjective To analysis the effect of axial loading to ADC value, FA of lumbar intervetebral discs. Methods Forty five patients with low back pain (age range, 25 to 54 years) were evaluated with MR T2WI, MR T1WI and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) of the lumbar spine. Following axial loading with 40% to 50% body weight for 10 minutes, a repeat DTI was performed. DTI were obtained by using an echo-planar imaging ( EPI ) sequence, TE 89 ms, TR 2500 ms, b value of 400 s/mm2,6 noncollinear diffusion directions. Scan time was approximately 4 min 10 s. An isotropic ADC map, FA map and bo map were calculated from DTI sequence. The mean ADC value, FA prior to and following axialloading were analyzed with t test and Rank Sum test. Results Forty five patients with 225 discs were evaluated and 223 discs were included in the study except for 2 calcified discs. The Pfirrmann grading results were as following: 100 Grade Ⅱ , 48 Grade Ⅲ, 59 Grade Ⅳ, and 16 Grade Ⅴ. No significant difference existed in the mean ADC value before [ ( 1666 ± 252 ) × 10-3 mm2/s ] and after [ ( 1662 ± 253 ) ×10 -3 mm2/s ] axial loading ( Z = - 1.363, P ＞ 0.05 ), but the mean FA [ ( 301 ± 104 ) × 10 -3, ( 316 ±112) × 10-3 ] value increased ( Z = - 2.794, P ＜ 0.05 ). The paired-samples t test show that the mean ADC value [ ( 1685 ± 190) × 10-3 mm2/s, ( 1624 ± 180) × 10-3mm2/s] of Grade Ⅲ discs decreased after axial loading, t=3.513, P＜0. 05, Grade Ⅲ, Ⅳdiscs mean FA value [(300±87) ×10-3, (326±87) ×10-3 for Grade Ⅲ and (348 ±67) × 10-3, (351 ± 71 ) × 10-3 for Grade Ⅳ ] increased, t = - 2. 210,- 2.006, P ＜ 0.05. No significant difference existed in Grade Ⅱ , Ⅳ and Ⅴ discs ADC value, all the P ＞0.05. No significant difference existed in Grade Ⅱ and Ⅴ discs FA value, both the P ＞ 0.05. Conclusions Short time axial loading mainly affect the mildly degenerated discs, the ADC value decreases and the disc diffusion ability decreases. No obvious change in ADC value or disc diffusion ability existed in the normal and severely degenerated discs.