Diffusion Tensor Imaging Correlates with the Clinical Assessment of Disease Severity in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy and Predicts Outcome following Surgery

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Bernhardt M,
   2. Hynes RA,
   3. Blume HW,
   4. et al

   . Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993;75:119–28

   PubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Boden SD,
   2. McCowin PR,
   3. Davis DO,
   4. et al

   . Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the cervical spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990;72:1178–84

   PubMed
3. 3.↵
   1. Levine DN

   . Pathogenesis of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1997;62:334–40

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Budzik J,
   2. Balbi V,
   3. Le Thuc V,
   4. et al

   . Diffusion tensor imaging and fibre tracking in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Radiol 2010;21:426–33

   PubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Kara B,
   2. Celik A,
   3. Karadereler S,
   4. et al

   . The role of DTI in early detection of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a preliminary study with 3-T MRI. Neuroradiology 2011;53:609–16

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Mamata H,
   2. Jolesz FA,
   3. Maier SE

   . Apparent diffusion coefficient and fractional anisotropy in spinal cord: age and cervical spondylosis-related changes. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005;22:38–43

   CrossRefPubMed
7. 7.↵
   1. Jones J,
   2. Lerner A,
   3. Kim PE,
   4. et al

   . Diffusion tensor imaging in the assessment of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a report on preliminary results in 3 cases and review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus 2011;30:E14

   PubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Beaulieu C

   . The basis of anisotropic water diffusion in the nervous system—a technical review. NMR Biomed 2002;15:435–55

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Tsuchiya K,
   2. Katase S,
   3. Fujikawa A,
   4. et al

   . Diffusion-weighted MRI of the cervical spinal cord using a single-shot fast spin-echo technique: findings in normal subjects and in myelomalacia. Neuroradiology 2003;45:90–94

   PubMedWeb of Science
10. 10.↵
    1. Song SK,
    2. Sun SW,
    3. Ramsbottom MJ,
    4. et al

    . Dysmyelination revealed through MRI as increased radial (but unchanged axial) diffusion of water. Neuroimage 2002;17:1429–36

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    1. Fernandez de Rota JJ,
    2. Meschian S,
    3. Fernandez de Rota A,
    4. et al

    . Cervical spondylotic myelopathy due to chronic compression: the role of signal intensity changes in magnetic resonance images. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;6:17–22

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
12. 12.↵
    1. Suri A,
    2. Chabbra RP,
    3. Mehta VS,
    4. et al

    . Effect of intramedullary signal changes on the surgical outcome of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine J 2003;3:33–45

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Hori M,
    2. Okubo T,
    3. Aoki S,
    4. et al

    . Line scan diffusion tensor MRI at low magnetic field strength: feasibility study of cervical spondylotic myelopathy in an early clinical stage. J Magn Reson Imaging 2006;23:183–88

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Demir A,
    2. Ries M,
    3. Moonen CT,
    4. et al

    . Diffusion-weighted MR imaging with apparent diffusion coefficient and apparent diffusion tensor maps in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Radiology 2003;229:37–43

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Healy JF,
    2. Healy BB,
    3. Wong WH,
    4. et al

    . Cervical and lumbar MRI in asymptomatic older male lifelong athletes: frequency of degenerative findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1996;20:107–12

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Kang M,
    2. Anderer E,
    3. Elliott R,
    4. et al

    . Diffusion tensor imaging of the spondylotic cervical spinal cord: a preliminary study of quantifiable markers in the evaluation for surgical decompression. Internet J Head Neck Surg 2011;5
17. 17.↵
    1. Parker SL,
    2. Adogwa O,
    3. Paul AR,
    4. et al

    . Utility of minimum clinically important difference in assessing pain, disability, and health state after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine 2011;14:598–604

    PubMedWeb of Science
18. 18.↵
    1. Nurick S

    . The pathogenesis of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain 1972;95:87–100

    FREE Full Text
19. 19.↵
    1. Benzel EC,
    2. Lancon J,
    3. Kesterson L,
    4. et al

    . Cervical laminectomy and dentate ligament section for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord 1991;4:286–95

    PubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Vernon H,
    2. Mior S

    . The Neck Disability Index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1991;14:409–15

    PubMedWeb of Science
21. 21.↵
    1. Ware JE,
    2. Sherbourne CD

    . The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473–83

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
22. 22.↵
    1. King JT Jr.,
    2. McGinnis KA,
    3. Roberts MS

    . Quality of life assessment with the medical outcomes study short form-36 among patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery 2003:52:113–20; discussion 121

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    1. King JT,
    2. Roberts MS

    . Validity and reliability of the Short Form-36 in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg 2002;97:180–85

    PubMed
24. 24.↵
    1. Wetzel SG,
    2. Cha S,
    3. Johnson G,
    4. et al

    . Relative cerebral blood volume measurements in intracranial mass lesions: interobserver and intraobserver reproducibility study. Radiology 2002;224:797–803

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Wada E,
    2. Ohmura M,
    3. Yonenobu K

    . Intramedullary changes of the spinal cord in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:2226–32

    CrossRef
26. 26.↵
    1. Kang Y,
    2. Lee JW,
    3. Koh YH,
    4. et al

    . New MRI grading system for the cervical canal stenosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:W134–40

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Henderson L,
    2. Kulik G,
    3. Richarme D,
    4. et al

    . Is spinal stenosis assessment dependent on slice orientation? A magnetic resonance imaging study. Eur Spine J 2011 [Epub ahead of print]
28. 28.↵
    1. Mayrent SL

    . Epidemiology in Medicine. Boston: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1987:287–304
29. 29.↵
    1. Law MD,
    2. Bernhardt M,
    3. White AA

    . Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a review of surgical indications and decision making. Yale J Biol Med 1993;66:165–77

    PubMed
30. 30.↵
    1. Kerkovský M,
    2. Bednarík J,
    3. Dušek L,
    4. et al

    . Magnetic resonance diffusion tensor imaging in patients with cervical spondylotic spinal cord compression: correlations between clinical and electrophysiological findings. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:48–56

    CrossRef
31. 31.↵
    1. Facon D,
    2. Ozanne A,
    3. Fillard P,
    4. et al

    . MR diffusion tensor imaging and fiber tracking in spinal cord compression. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2005;26:1587–94

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
32. 32.↵
    1. Guleria S,
    2. Gupta RK,
    3. Saksena S,
    4. et al

    . Retrograde wallerian degeneration of cranial corticospinal tracts in cervical spinal cord injury patients using diffusion tensor imaging. J Neurosci Res 2008;86:2271–80

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Saritas EU,
    2. Cunningham CH,
    3. Lee JH,
    4. et al

    . DWI of the spinal cord with reduced FOV single-shot EPI. Magn Reson Med 2008;60:468–73

    CrossRefPubMed
34. 34.↵
    1. Zaharchuk G,
    2. Saritas EU,
    3. Andre JB,
    4. et al

    . Reduced field-of-view diffusion imaging of the human spinal cord: comparison with conventional single-shot echo-planar imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:813–20

    Abstract/FREE Full Text