ABSTRACT
A better knowledge of the NMR relaxation behavior of bone tissue can improve the definition of imaging protocols to detect bone diseases like osteoporosis. The six rat lumbar vertebrae, from L1 to L6, were analyzed by means of both transverse (T(2)) and longitudinal (T(1)) relaxation of (1)H nuclei at 20 MHz and 30 degrees C. Distributions of relaxation times, computed using the multiexponential inversion software uniform penalty inversion, extend over decades for both T(2) and T(1) relaxation. In all samples, the free induction decay (FID) from an inversion-recovery (IR) T(1) measurement shows an approximately Gaussian (solid-like) component, exp[-1/2(t/T(GC))2], with T(GC) approximately 12 micros (GC for Gaussian component) and a liquid-like component (LLC) with initially simple-exponential decay. Averaging and smoothing procedures are adopted to obtain the ratio alpha between GC and LLC signals and to get separate T(1) distributions for GC and LLC. Distributions of T(1) for LLC show peaks centered at 300-500 ms and shoulders going down to 10 ms, whereas distributions of T(1) for GC are single broad peaks centered at roughly 100 ms. The T(2) distributions by Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill at 600 micros echo spacing are very broad and extend from 1 ms to hundreds of ms. This long echo spacing does not allow one to see a peak in the region of hundreds of micros, which is better seen by single spin-echo T(2) measurements. Results of the relaxation analysis were then compared with densitometric data. From the study, a clear picture of the intratrabecular and intertrabecular (1)H signals emerges. In particular, the GC is presumed to be due to (1)H in collagen, LLC due to all the fluids in the bone including water and fat, and the very short T(2) peak due to the intratrabecular water. Overall, indications of some trends in composition and in pore-space distributions going from L1 to L6 appeared. Published results on rat vertebrae obtained by fitting the curves by discrete two-component models for both T(2) and T(1) are consistent with our results and can be better interpreted in light of the shown distributions of relaxation times.
