OBJECTIVES: To use T2 and T2* mapping in patients after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) of the knee, and to compare and correlate both methodologies. METHODS: 3.0-Tesla MRI was performed on 30 patients (34.6 +/- 9.9 years) with a follow-up period of 28.1 +/- 18.8 months after MACT. Multi-echo, spin-echo-based T2 mapping using six echoes and gradient-echo-based T2* mapping using six echoes were prepared. T2 and T2* maps were obtained using a pixel-wise, mono-exponential, non-negative least-squares fit analysis. Region-of-interest analysis was performed for mean (full-thickness) as well as deep and superficial aspects of the cartilage repair tissue and control cartilage sites. RESULTS: Mean T2 values (ms) were comparable for the control cartilage (53.4 +/- 11.7) and the repair tissue (55.5 +/- 11.6) (p > 0.05). Mean T2* values (ms) for control cartilage (30.9 +/- 6.6) were significantly higher than those of the repair tissue (24.5 +/- 8.1) (p < 0.001). Zonal stratification was more pronounced for T2* than for T2. The correlation between T2 and T2* was highly significant (p < 0.001), with a Pearson coefficient between 0.276 and 0.433. CONCLUSION: T2 and T2* relaxation time measurements in the evaluation of cartilage repair tissue and its zonal variation show promising results, although the properties visualised by T2 and T2* may differ.
OBJECTIVES: To use T2 and T2* mapping in patients after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) of the knee, and to compare and correlate both methodologies. METHODS: 3.0-Tesla MRI was performed on 30 patients (34.6 +/- 9.9 years) with a follow-up period of 28.1 +/- 18.8 months after MACT. Multi-echo, spin-echo-based T2 mapping using six echoes and gradient-echo-based T2* mapping using six echoes were prepared. T2 and T2* maps were obtained using a pixel-wise, mono-exponential, non-negative least-squares fit analysis. Region-of-interest analysis was performed for mean (full-thickness) as well as deep and superficial aspects of the cartilage repair tissue and control cartilage sites. RESULTS: Mean T2 values (ms) were comparable for the control cartilage (53.4 +/- 11.7) and the repair tissue (55.5 +/- 11.6) (p > 0.05). Mean T2* values (ms) for control cartilage (30.9 +/- 6.6) were significantly higher than those of the repair tissue (24.5 +/- 8.1) (p < 0.001). Zonal stratification was more pronounced for T2* than for T2. The correlation between T2 and T2* was highly significant (p < 0.001), with a Pearson coefficient between 0.276 and 0.433. CONCLUSION: T2 and T2* relaxation time measurements in the evaluation of cartilage repair tissue and its zonal variation show promising results, although the properties visualised by T2 and T2* may differ.
Authors: H E Smith; T J Mosher; B J Dardzinski; B G Collins; C M Collins; Q X Yang; V J Schmithorst; M B Smith Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Timothy J Mosher; Christopher M Collins; Harvey E Smith; Lauren E Moser; Rebecca T Sivarajah; Bernard J Dardzinski; Michael B Smith Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Goetz H Welsch; Tallal C Mamisch; Stephan E Domayer; Ronald Dorotka; Florian Kutscha-Lissberg; Stefan Marlovits; Lawrence M White; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Radiology Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Goetz H Welsch; Sebastian Apprich; Stefan Zbyn; Tallal C Mamisch; Vladimir Mlynarik; Klaus Scheffler; Oliver Bieri; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2010-12-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Goetz Hannes Welsch; Siegfried Trattnig; Tatjana Paternostro-Sluga; Klaus Bohndorf; Sabine Goed; David Stelzeneder; Tallal Charles Mamisch Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2010-09-28 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: S Apprich; T C Mamisch; G H Welsch; H Bonel; K A Siebenrock; Y-J Kim; S Trattnig; M Dudda Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2011-11-06 Impact factor: 2.199