Literature DB >> 17560813

Two year longitudinal change and test-retest-precision of knee cartilage morphology in a pilot study for the osteoarthritis initiative.

F Eckstein1, M Kunz, M Schutzer, M Hudelmaier, R D Jackson, J Yu, C B Eaton, E Schneider.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Fast low angle shot (FLASH) and double echo steady state (DESS) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) acquisitions were recently cross-calibrated for quantification of cartilage morphology at 3T. In this pilot study for the osteoarthritis (OA) initiative we compare their test-retest-precision and sensitivity to longitudinal change.
METHOD: Nine participants with mild to moderate clinical OA were imaged twice each at baseline, year 1 (Y1) and year 2 (Y2). Coronal 1.5mm FLASH and sagittal 0.7mm DESS sequences were acquired; 1.5mm coronal multiplanar reformats (MPR) were obtained from the DESS. Patellar, femoral and tibial cartilage plates were quantified in a paired fashion, with blinding to time point.
RESULTS: In the weight-bearing femorotibial joint, average precision errors across plates were 1.8% for FLASH, 2.6% for DESS, and 3.0% for MPR-DESS. Volume loss at Y1 was not significant; at Y2 the average change across the femorotibial cartilage plates was -1.7% for FLASH, -2.8% for DESS, and -0.3% for MPR-DESS. Volume change in the lateral tibia (-5.5%; P<0.03), and in the medial (-2.9%; P<0.04) and lateral femorotibial compartments (-3.8%; P<0.03) were significant for DESS.
CONCLUSIONS: FLASH, DESS and MPR-DESS all displayed adequate test-retest precision. Although the comparison between protocols is limited by the small number of participants and by the relatively small longitudinal change in cartilage morphology in this pilot study, the data suggest that significant change can be detected with MRI in a small sample of OA subjects over 2 years.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17560813      PMCID: PMC2704340          DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.04.007

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


  26 in total

1.  Long-term and resegmentation precision of quantitative cartilage MR imaging (qMRI).

Authors:  F Eckstein; L Heudorfer; S C Faber; R Burgkart; K-H Englmeier; M Reiser
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 2.  Imaging of the disease process.

Authors:  Charles G Peterfy
Journal:  Curr Opin Rheumatol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.006

Review 3.  New MRI techniques for imaging cartilage.

Authors:  Deborah Burstein; Martha Gray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Role of MR imaging in clinical research studies.

Authors:  C G Peterfy
Journal:  Semin Musculoskelet Radiol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.777

5.  Comparison of fixed-flexion positioning with fluoroscopic semi-flexed positioning for quantifying radiographic joint-space width in the knee: test-retest reproducibility.

Authors:  C Peterfy; J Li; S Zaim; J Duryea; J Lynch; Y Miaux; W Yu; H K Genant
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2003-02-06       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  The determinants of change in tibial cartilage volume in osteoarthritic knees.

Authors:  Anita E Wluka; Stephen Stuckey; Judith Snaddon; Flavia M Cicuttini
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2002-08

7.  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

8.  Longitudinal study of changes in tibial and femoral cartilage in knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  F M Cicuttini; A E Wluka; Y Wang; S L Stuckey
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2004-01

9.  Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of knee osteoarthritis progression over two years and correlation with clinical symptoms and radiologic changes.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Raynauld; Johanne Martel-Pelletier; Marie-Josée Berthiaume; Françoys Labonté; Gilles Beaudoin; Jacques A de Guise; Daniel A Bloch; Denis Choquette; Boulos Haraoui; Roy D Altman; Marc C Hochberg; Joan M Meyer; Gary A Cline; Jean-Pierre Pelletier
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2004-02

10.  Femoro-tibial cartilage metrics from coronal MR image data: Technique, test-retest reproducibility, and findings in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Christian Glaser; Rainer Burgkart; Andrea Kutschera; Karl-Hans Englmeier; Maximilian Reiser; Felix Eckstein
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.668

View more
  41 in total

1.  Magnitude and regional distribution of cartilage loss associated with grades of joint space narrowing in radiographic osteoarthritis--data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Authors:  F Eckstein; W Wirth; D J Hunter; A Guermazi; C K Kwoh; D R Nelson; O Benichou
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2010-02-18       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 2.  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

3.  Comparison of 1-year vs 2-year change in regional cartilage thickness in osteoarthritis results from 346 participants from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

Authors:  W Wirth; S Larroque; R Y Davies; M Nevitt; A Gimona; F Baribaud; J H Lee; O Benichou; B T Wyman; M Hudelmaier; S Maschek; F Eckstein
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2010-10-31       Impact factor: 6.576

4.  Morphometric differences between the medial and lateral meniscus in healthy men - a three-dimensional analysis using magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  K Bloecker; W Wirth; M Hudelmaier; R Burgkart; R Frobell; F Eckstein
Journal:  Cells Tissues Organs       Date:  2011-06-28       Impact factor: 2.481

5.  How do short-term rates of femorotibial cartilage change compare to long-term changes? Four year follow-up data from the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  F Eckstein; C E Mc Culloch; J A Lynch; M Nevitt; C K Kwoh; S Maschek; M Hudelmaier; L Sharma; W Wirth
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2012-07-16       Impact factor: 6.576

6.  Evaluation of a dynamic bayesian belief network to predict osteoarthritic knee pain using data from the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  Emily W Watt; Emily Watt; Alex A T Bui; Alex At Bui
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2008-11-06

Review 7.  Novel contrast mechanisms at 3 Tesla and 7 Tesla.

Authors:  Ravinder R Regatte; Mark E Schweitzer
Journal:  Semin Musculoskelet Radiol       Date:  2008-10-10       Impact factor: 1.777

8.  Regional analysis of femorotibial cartilage loss in a subsample from the Osteoarthritis Initiative progression subcohort.

Authors:  W Wirth; M-P Hellio Le Graverand; B T Wyman; S Maschek; M Hudelmaier; W Hitzl; M Nevitt; F Eckstein
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2008-09-11       Impact factor: 6.576

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.  Relationship of compartment-specific structural knee status at baseline with change in cartilage morphology: a prospective observational study using data from the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  Felix Eckstein; Wolfgang Wirth; Martin I Hudelmaier; Susanne Maschek; Wolfgang Hitzl; Bradley T Wyman; Michael Nevitt; Marie-Pierre Hellio Le Graverand; David Hunter
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2009-06-17       Impact factor: 5.156

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.