ArticleThe journal of spinal cord medicine2017
Analysis of the diffusion tensor imaging parameters of a normal cervical spinal cord in a healthy population.
Article in The journal of spinal cord medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of DTI Parameter Ratios for Early Diagnosis of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Porcine Model of the Growing Spinal Cord-Changes in Diffusion Tensor Imaging Parameters.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Overcoming challenges of the human spinal cord tractography for routine clinical use: a review.Neuroradiology · 2020Review
- The Functional Relevance of Diffusion Tensor Imaging in Patients with Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Outcome factors in surgically treated patients for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2020Article
- Diffusion tensor imaging can predict surgical outcomes of patients with cervical compression myelopathy.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiffusion tensor imaging (DTI) shows great advantage in the diagnosis of brain diseases, including cervical spinal cord (CSC) disease. This study aims to obtain the normal values of the DTI parameters for a healthy population and to establish a baseline for CSC disease diagnosis using DTI.
methodsA total of 36 healthy adults were subjected to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the entire CSC using the Siemens 3.0 T MR System. Sagittal DTI acquisition was carried out with a single-shot spin-echo echo-planar imaging (EPI) sequence along 12 non-collinear directions. Fractional anisotropy (FA) and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values were determined at different cervical levels using a region of interest (ROI) method, following which they were correlated with parameters, like age and sex. Further, diffusion tensor tracking (DTT) was carried out to reconstruct the white matter fiber bundles of the CSC.
resultsThe full and complete fiber bundle structure of a normal CSC was confirmed in both the T2-weighted and DTI images. The FA and ADC values were significantly negatively correlated with each other and showed strongly negative and positive correlations with age, respectively, but not with sex. Additionally, there was no significant difference between the FA and the ADC values at different cervical levels.
conclusionThe DTI technique can act as an important supplement to the conventional MRI technique for CSC observation. Moreover, the FA and ADC values can be used as sensitive parameters in the DTI study on the CSC by taking the effects of age into consideration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.