Literature DB >> 16428992

Quantitative assessment of patellar cartilage volume and thickness at 3.0 tesla comparing a 3D-fast low angle shot versus a 3D-true fast imaging with steady-state precession sequence for reproducibility.

Sabine Weckbach1, Thomas Mendlik, Wilhelm Horger, Susi Wagner, Maximilian F Reiser, Christian Glaser.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare patellar cartilage volume and thickness measurement between 3D-FLASH and 3D-True fast imaging with steady-state precession (FISP) image data at 3.0 T.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: One knee each of 6 healthy adults was examined by axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed with a 3D-fast flow angle shot (FLASH) water-excitation sequence and a 3D-TrueFISP water-excitation sequence (spatial resolution 0.31 x 0.31 x 1.5 mm3). Patellar cartilage volume and mean/maximum thickness were calculated. Intraindividual/average reproducibility and interindividual variability were determined from 3 consecutive data sets acquired for each volunteer and sequence.
RESULTS: Patellar cartilage volume and thickness as well as reproducibility was slightly but not significantly lower for the 3D-TrueFISP data than for the 3D-FLASH data (volume: 3.4-6.3 mL (3D-FLASH)/3.1-6.0 mL (3D-TrueFISP), average reproducibility 1.8% (3D-FLASH)/4.4% (3D-TrueFISP); mean thickness: 2.1-2.8 mm (3D-FLASH)/1.9-2.6 mm (3D-TrueFISP), average reproducibility 2.8% (3D-FLASH)/3.8% (3D-TrueFISP); maximum thickness: 4.7-6.6 mm (3D-FLASH)/4.5-6.2 mm (3D-TrueFISP), average reproducibility 2.6% (3D-FLASH)/4.1% (3D-TrueFISP)). Interindividual variability was comparable for both sequence techniques.
CONCLUSION: At 3.0 T, the 3D-FLASH sequence showed tendency to be slightly superior to the 3D-TrueFISP sequence considering robust and valid assessment of quantitative cartilage parameters in young healthy adults, although there was found no significant statistical difference between both imaging techniques. However, in patients suffering from osteoarthritis (OA), the 3D-TrueFISP sequence might prove advantageous for monitoring of disease progression and evaluation of therapy success, particularly because the substantially higher signal to noise ratio/contrast to noise ratio values might allow for higher spatial resolution and hence for improvement of the accuracy of segmentation process especially at the articular surface.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16428992     DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000195837.32417.f9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  8 in total

Review 1.  Segmentation of joint and musculoskeletal tissue in the study of arthritis.

Authors:  Valentina Pedoia; Sharmila Majumdar; Thomas M Link
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 2.310

2.  Mapping tibiofemoral gonarthrosis: an MRI analysis of non-traumatic knee cartilage defects.

Authors:  D S Evangelopoulos; M Huesler; S S Ahmad; E Aghayev; M Neukamp; C Röder; A Exadaktylos; H Bonel; S Kohl
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-06-17       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  [3-Tesla MRI vs. arthroscopy for diagnostics of degenerative knee cartilage diseases: preliminary clinical results].

Authors:  L V von Engelhardt; A Schmitz; B Burian; P H Pennekamp; H H Schild; C N Kraft; M von Falkenhausen
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  High-resolution morphological and biochemical imaging of articular cartilage of the ankle joint at 3.0 T using a new dedicated phased array coil: in vivo reproducibility study.

Authors:  Goetz H Welsch; Tallal C Mamisch; Michael Weber; Wilhelm Horger; Klaus Bohndorf; Siegfried Trattnig
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Diagnosis of temporomandibular dysfunction syndrome--image quality at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Martina Schmid-Schwap; Wolfgang Drahanowsky; Margit Bristela; Michael Kundi; Eva Piehslinger; Soraya Robinson
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-01-10       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Water Selective Imaging and bSSFP Banding Artifact Correction in Humans and Small Animals at 3T and 7T, Respectively.

Authors:  Emeline J Ribot; Didier Wecker; Aurélien J Trotier; Benjamin Dallaudière; William Lefrançois; Eric Thiaudière; Jean-Michel Franconi; Sylvain Miraux
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Cartilage Repair: A Review.

Authors:  Siegfried Trattnig; Carl S Winalski; Stephan Marlovits; Jukka S Jurvelin; Goetz H Welsch; Hollis G Potter
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Accuracy of cartilage-specific 3-Tesla 3D-DESS magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of chondral lesions: comparison with knee arthroscopy.

Authors:  Sandro Kohl; Simon Meier; Sufian S Ahmad; Harald Bonel; Aristomenis K Exadaktylos; Anna Krismer; Dimitrios Stergios Evangelopoulos
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.359

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.