Literature DB >> 17188525

Novel fast semi-automated software to segment cartilage for knee MR acquisitions.

J Duryea1, G Neumann, M H Brem, W Koh, F Noorbakhsh, R D Jackson, J Yu, C B Eaton, P Lang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Validation of a new fast software technique to segment the cartilage on knee magnetic resonance (MR) acquisitions. Large studies of knee osteoarthritis (OA) will require fast and reproducible methods to quantify cartilage changes for knee MR data. In this report we document and measure the reproducibility and reader time of a software-based technique to quantify the volume and thickness of articular cartilage on knee MR images.
METHODS: The software was tested on a set of duplicate sagittal three-dimensional (3D) dual echo steady state (DESS) acquisitions from 15 (8 OA, 7 normal) subjects. The repositioning, inter-reader, and intra-reader reproducibility of the cartilage volume (VC) and thickness (ThC) were measured independently as well as the reader time for each cartilage plate. The root-mean square coefficient of variation (RMSCoV) was used as metric to quantify the reproducibility of VC and mean ThC.
RESULTS: The repositioning RMSCoV was as follows: VC=2.0% and ThC=1.2% (femur), VC=2.9% and ThC=1.6% (medial tibial plateau), VC=5.5% and ThC=2.4% (lateral tibial plateau), and VC=4.6% and ThC=2.3% (patella). RMSCoV values were higher for the inter-reader reproducibility (VC: 2.5-8.6%) (ThC: 1.9-5.2%) and lower for the intra-reader reproducibility (VC: 1.6-2.5%) (ThC: 1.2-1.9%). The method required an average of 75.4min per knee.
CONCLUSIONS: We have documented a fast reproducible semi-automated software method to segment articular cartilage on knee MR acquisitions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17188525      PMCID: PMC4175990          DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2006.11.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage        ISSN: 1063-4584            Impact factor:   6.576


  14 in total

Review 1.  Toward imaging biomarkers for osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Martha L Gray; Felix Eckstein; Charles Peterfy; Leif Dahlberg; Young-Jo Kim; A Gregory Sorensen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Classification of osteoarthritis biomarkers: a proposed approach.

Authors:  D C Bauer; D J Hunter; S B Abramson; M Attur; M Corr; D Felson; D Heinegård; J M Jordan; T B Kepler; N E Lane; T Saxne; B Tyree; V B Kraus
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2006-06-02       Impact factor: 6.576

3.  Measurement of localized cartilage volume and thickness of human knee joints by computer analysis of three-dimensional magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  A A Kshirsagar; P J Watson; J A Tyler; L D Hall
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 6.016

4.  The use of active shape models for making thickness measurements of articular cartilage from MR images.

Authors:  S Solloway; C E Hutchinson; J C Waterton; C J Taylor
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 4.668

5.  Comparison and reproducibility of fast and conventional spoiled gradient-echo magnetic resonance sequences in the determination of knee cartilage volume.

Authors:  F Cicuttini; A Forbes; A Asbeutah; K Morris; S Stuckey
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.494

6.  Risk factors for progressive cartilage loss in the knee: a longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study in forty-three patients.

Authors:  Sandip Biswal; Trevor Hastie; Thomas P Andriacchi; Gabrielle A Bergman; Michael F Dillingham; Philipp Lang
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2002-11

7.  Interobserver reproducibility of quantitative cartilage measurements: comparison of B-spline snakes and manual segmentation.

Authors:  T Stammberger; F Eckstein; M Michaelis; K H Englmeier; M Reiser
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 2.546

8.  Reexamining the sarcopenia hypothesis. Muscle mass versus muscle strength. Health, Aging, and Body Composition Study Research Group.

Authors:  M Visser; A B Newman; M C Nevitt; S B Kritchevsky; E B Stamm; B H Goodpaster; T B Harris
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.691

9.  Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS) of the knee in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  C G Peterfy; A Guermazi; S Zaim; P F J Tirman; Y Miaux; D White; M Kothari; Y Lu; K Fye; S Zhao; H K Genant
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  Quantification of articular cartilage in the knee with pulsed saturation transfer subtraction and fat-suppressed MR imaging: optimization and validation.

Authors:  C G Peterfy; C F van Dijke; D L Janzen; C C Glüer; R Namba; S Majumdar; P Lang; H K Genant
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  16 in total

1.  Quantitative measurement of medial femoral knee cartilage volume - analysis of the OA Biomarkers Consortium FNIH Study cohort.

Authors:  L F Schaefer; M Sury; M Yin; S Jamieson; I Donnell; S E Smith; J A Lynch; M C Nevitt; J Duryea
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 6.576

2.  Intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of volume measurement of knee cartilage segmented from the OAI MR image set using a novel semi-automated segmentation method.

Authors:  K T Bae; H Shim; C Tao; S Chang; J H Wang; R Boudreau; C K Kwoh
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 6.576

3.  Quantitative measurement of femoral condyle cartilage in the knee by MRI: validation study by multireaders.

Authors:  Yasunari Fujinaga; Hiroshi Yoshioka; Toshinori Sakai; Yoko Sakai; Felipe Souza; Philipp Lang
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Non-traumatic anterior cruciate ligament abnormalities and their relationship to osteoarthritis using morphological grading and cartilage T2 relaxation times: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Authors:  Keegan K Hovis; Hamza Alizai; Seng-Choe Tham; Richard B Souza; Michael C Nevitt; Charles E McCulloch; Thomas M Link
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2012-02-25       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 5.  Favourable alignment outcomes with MRI-based patient-specific instruments in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Martijn G M Schotanus; Elke Thijs; Marion Heijmans; Rein Vos; Nanne P Kort
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Comparison of radiographic joint space width with magnetic resonance imaging cartilage morphometry: analysis of longitudinal data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

Authors:  Jeffrey Duryea; Gesa Neumann; Jingbo Niu; Saara Totterman; Jose Tamez; Christine Dabrowski; Marie-Pierre Hellio Le Graverand; Monica Luchi; Chan R Beals; David J Hunter
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.794

7.  Quantification of cartilage loss in local regions of knee joints using semi-automated segmentation software: analysis of longitudinal data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Authors:  T Iranpour-Boroujeni; A Watanabe; R Bashtar; H Yoshioka; J Duryea
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2010-12-10       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 8.  The evolution of articular cartilage imaging and its impact on clinical practice.

Authors:  Carl S Winalski; Prabhakar Rajiah
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 9.  The osteoarthritis initiative: report on the design rationale for the magnetic resonance imaging protocol for the knee.

Authors:  C G Peterfy; E Schneider; M Nevitt
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  Patient specific guides for total knee arthroplasty are ready for primetime.

Authors:  Martijn Gm Schotanus; Bert Boonen; Nanne P Kort
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-01-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.