Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Medicine

ISSN 2095-0217

ISSN 2095-0225(Online)

CN 11-5983/R

Postal Subscription Code 80-967

2018 Impact Factor: 1.847

Front. Med.    2014, Vol. 8 Issue (4) : 471-476     DOI: 10.1007/s11684-014-0365-8
RESEARCH ARTICLE |
In vivo evaluation of renal function using diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion tensor imaging in type 2 diabetics with normoalbuminuria versus microalbuminuria
Xiaoyan Chen1,*(),Wenxia Xiao1,Xinchun Li2,Jianxun He1,Xiaochun Huang1,Yuyu Tan1
1. Department of Endocrinology, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120, China
2. Department of Radiology, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510120,China
Download: PDF(273 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract  

This work aims to estimate the value of diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) and diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) in detecting early-stage kidney injury in type 2 diabetic patients with normoalbuminuria (NAU) versus microalbuminuria (MAU) prospectively. A total of 30 T2DM patients with normal kidney function were recruited and assigned to the NAU group (n = 14) or MAU group (n = 16) according to 8 h overnight urinary albuminuria excretion rate (AER) results. A contemporary cohort of health check-up recipients were included as controls (n = 12). DWI and DTI scans were performed on bilateral kidney using SE single-shot EPI, and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fractional anisotropy (FA) of the renal parenchyma was determined from ADC and FA maps of the three groups. ADC and FA values were compared among the three groups. According to DWI with a b value of 400 s/mm2, the MAU and NAU groups showed significantly lowered mean ADC values compared with the healthy controls (P<0.01). The mean ADC in the MAU group [(2.22±0.07)×10–3 mm2/s] was slightly lower than that of the NAU group [(2.31±0.22)×10–3 mm2/s], but this difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). The FA value in the MAU group was higher than that in the control group (0.45±0.07 vs. 0.39±0.03, P = 0.004) but did not differ from that in the NAU group (0.42±0.03) (P>0.05). ADC and FA values may be more sensitive than urine AER in reflecting early-stage kidney injury and, hence, may facilitate earlier detection and quantitative evaluation of kidney injury in T2DM patients. Combined evaluation of ADC and FA values may provide a better quantitative approach for identifying diabetic nephropathy at early disease stages.

Keywords type 2 diabetes mellitus      microalbuminuria      diffusion weighted imaging      diffusion tensor imaging      early-stage kidney injury     
Corresponding Authors: Xiaoyan Chen   
Online First Date: 28 October 2014    Issue Date: 18 December 2014
URL:  
http://academic.hep.com.cn/fmd/EN/10.1007/s11684-014-0365-8     OR     http://academic.hep.com.cn/fmd/EN/Y2014/V8/I4/471
Fig.1  Axial T1WI images of both kidneys in the (A) NC group, (B) NAU group, and (C) MAU group. A clear border between the renal cortex and the renal medulla can be seen, and no difference was observed between the two kidneys in terms of dimension and structure.
Fig.2  Axial T2WI images of both kidneys in the (A) NC group, (B) NAU group, and (C) MAU group. A clear border between the renal cortex and the renal medulla can be seen, and no difference was observed between the two kidneys in terms of dimension and structure.
b = 400 s/mm2 b = 500 s/mm2 b = 600 s/mm2 b = 800 s/mm2
NC group (n = 12) 2.51±0.16 2.32±0.07 2.15±0.04 1.95±0.05
NAU group (n = 14) 2.31±0.22* 2.14±0.10* 2.06±0.08* 1.88±0.08*
MAU group (n = 16) 2.22±0.07* 2.11±0.10* 2.00±0.09* 1.84±0.08*
Tab.1  Comparison of renal ADC values among the three groups (×10-3mm2/s)
FA values of the renal cortex FA values of the renal medulla
NC group (n = 12) 0.16±0.03 0.39±0.03
NAU group (n = 14) 0.16±0.02 0.42±0.03
MAU group (n = 16) 0.17±0.05 0.45±0.07*
Tab.2  Comparison of FA values of the renal cortex and medulla among three groups
1 Mogensen CE, Keane WF, Bennett PH, Jerums G, Parving HH, Passa P, Steffes MW, Striker GE, Viberti GC. Prevention of diabetic renal disease with special reference to microalbuminuria. Lancet1995; 346(8982): 1080-1084
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(95)91747-0 pmid: 7564792
2 Al-Agha AE, Ocheltree A, Hakeem A. Occurrence of microalbuminuria among children and adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl2013; 24(6): 1180-1188
doi: 10.4103/1319-2442.121276 pmid: 24231481
3 Weir MR. Microalbuminuria in type2 diabetics: an important, overlooked cardiovascular risk factor. Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)2004; 6(3): 142-143
4 Lane JT. Microalbuminuria as a marker of cardiovascular and renal risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a temporal perspective. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol2004; 286(3): F442-F450
doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.00247.2003 pmid: 14761931
5 Chen XY. Prediction and multifactorial intervention for subclinical arteriosclerosis in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. Central South China University. 2004. (in Chinese)
6 Cheng SQ. NIU MC. Value of microalbuminuria in early diagnosis of diabetic renopathy. Chin J Lab Med (Zhonghua Jian Yan Yi Xue Za Zhi)2005; 28(7): 740-741 (in Chinese)
7 Yang W, Lu J, Weng J, Jia W, Ji L, Xiao J, Shan Z, Liu J, Tian H, Ji Q, Zhu D, Ge J, Lin L, Chen L, Guo X, Zhao Z, Li Q, Zhou Z, Shan G, He J; China National Diabetes and Metabolic Disorders Study Group.. Prevalence of diabetes among men and women in China. N Engl J Med2010; 362(12): 1090-1101
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0908292 pmid: 20335585
8 Ries M, Basseau F, Tyndal B, Jones R, Deminière C, Catargi B, Combe C, Moonen CWT, Grenier N. Renal diffusion and BOLD MR I in experimental diabetic nephropathy. Magn Reson Imaging2003; 17(1): 104-113
doi: 10.1002/jmri.10224
9 Atkins RC, Polkinghorne KR, Briganti EM, Shaw JE, Zimmet PZ, Chadban SJ. Prevalence of albuminuria in Australia: the Ausdiab kidney study. Kidney Int Suppl2004; 66(92): S22-S24
doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1755.2004.09206.x pmid: 15485411
10 Goyal A, Sharma R, Bhalla AS, Gamanagatti S, Seth A. Diffusion-weighted MRI in assessment of renal dysfunction. Indian J Radiol Imaging2012; 22(3): 155-159
doi: 10.4103/0971-3026.107169 pmid: 23599561
11 Ries M, Basseau F, Tyndal B, Jones R, Deminière C, Catargi B, Combe C, Moonen CW, Grenier N. Renal diffusion and BOLD MRI in experimental diabetic nephropathy. Blood oxygen level-dependent. J Magn Reson Imaging2003; 17(1): 104-113
doi: 10.1002/jmri.10224 pmid: 12500279
12 Thoeny HC, De Keyzer F, Oyen RH, Peeters RR. Diffusion-weighted MR imaging of kidneys in healthy volunteers and patients with parenchymal diseases: initial experience. Radiology2005; 235(3): 911-917
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2353040554 pmid: 15845792
13 Michaely HJ, Schoenberg SO, Ittrich C, Dikow R, Bock M, Guenther M. Renal disease: value of functional magnetic resonance imaging with flow and perfusion measurements. Invest Radiol2004; 39(11): 698-705
doi: 10.1097/00004424-200411000-00008 pmid: 15486531
14 Lu L, Sedor JR, Gulani V, Schelling JR, O’Brien A, Flask CA, MacRae Dell K. Use of diffusion tensor MRI to identify early changes in diabetic nephropathy. Am J Nephrol2011; 34(5): 476-482
doi: 10.1159/000333044 pmid: 22024476
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed