Published ahead of print on September 28, 2007
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A0704
Quantitative and Diffusion MR Imaging as a New Method To Assess Osteoporosis
H.G. Hatipoglua,
A. Selvia,
D. Ciliza and
E. Yuksela
a From the Department of Radiology, Ankara Numune Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey

View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig 1. A, Graph of ADC values for normal, osteopenic, and osteoporotic subjects. The differences between groups are significant (P < .0001, Kruskal-Wallis Test). Normal versus osteopenia, P = .026; normal versus osteoporosis, P < .0001; osteopenia versus osteoporosis, P = .077 (Mann-Whitney U test). B, Graph of diffusion signal-intensity values for normal, osteopenic, and osteoporotic subjects. The differences between groups are significant (P < .0001, Kruskal-Wallis test). Normal versus osteopenia, P = .004; normal versus osteoporosis, P < .0001; osteopenia versus osteoporosis, P < .0001 (Mann-Whitney U test).
| |

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig 2. A, The correlations graphics of DEXA t-scores and T1 signal-intensity values (R = –0.559, P < .0001). B, The correlations graphics of DEXA t-scores and T2 signal intensity values (R = –0.511, P < .0001). C, The correlations graphics of DEXA t-scores and ADC values (R = 0.282, P < .0001). D, The correlations graphics of DEXA t-scores and diffusion signal-intensity values (R = 0.489, P < .0001). E, The correlations graphics of DEXA t-scores and T1/ADC values (R = –0.525, P < .0001). F, The correlations graphics of DEXA t-scores and T1/diffusion values (R = –0.654, P < .0001).
| |