PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to compare semiquantitative assessment of focal cartilage damage using the dual echo at steady state (DESS)- and intermediate-weighted (IW) fat suppressed (fs) sequences at 3T MRI. METHODS: Included were 201 subjects aged 35-65 with frequent knee pain. MRI was performed with the same sequence protocol as in the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI): sagittal IW fs, triplanar DESS and coronal IW sequences. Cartilage status was scored according to the WORMS system using all five sequences. A total of 243 focal defects were detected. In an additional consensus reading, the lesions were evaluated side-by-side using only the sagittal DESS and IW fs sequences. Lesion conspicuity was graded from 0 to 3, intrachondral signal changes adjacent to the defect were recorded and the sequence that depicted the lesion with larger diameter was noted. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, controlled for clustering by person, were used to examine differences between the sequences. RESULTS: 37 (17.5%) of the scorable lesions were located in the medial tibio-femoral (TF), 48 (22.7%) in the lateral TF and 126 (59.7%) in the patello-femoral compartment. 82.5% were superficial and 17.5% full-thickness defects. Conspicuity was superior for the IW sequence (p<0.001). The DESS sequence showed more associated intrachondral signal changes (p<0.001). In 103 (48.8%) cases, the IW fs sequence depicted the lesions as being larger (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The IW fs sequence detected more and larger focal cartilage defects than the DESS. More intrachondral signal changes were observed with the DESS.
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to compare semiquantitative assessment of focal cartilage damage using the dual echo at steady state (DESS)- and intermediate-weighted (IW) fat suppressed (fs) sequences at 3T MRI. METHODS: Included were 201 subjects aged 35-65 with frequent knee pain. MRI was performed with the same sequence protocol as in the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI): sagittal IW fs, triplanar DESS and coronal IW sequences. Cartilage status was scored according to the WORMS system using all five sequences. A total of 243 focal defects were detected. In an additional consensus reading, the lesions were evaluated side-by-side using only the sagittal DESS and IW fs sequences. Lesion conspicuity was graded from 0 to 3, intrachondral signal changes adjacent to the defect were recorded and the sequence that depicted the lesion with larger diameter was noted. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, controlled for clustering by person, were used to examine differences between the sequences. RESULTS: 37 (17.5%) of the scorable lesions were located in the medial tibio-femoral (TF), 48 (22.7%) in the lateral TF and 126 (59.7%) in the patello-femoral compartment. 82.5% were superficial and 17.5% full-thickness defects. Conspicuity was superior for the IW sequence (p<0.001). The DESS sequence showed more associated intrachondral signal changes (p<0.001). In 103 (48.8%) cases, the IW fs sequence depicted the lesions as being larger (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The IW fs sequence detected more and larger focal cartilage defects than the DESS. More intrachondral signal changes were observed with the DESS.
Authors: F W Roemer; D J Hunter; M D Crema; C K Kwoh; E Ochoa-Albiztegui; A Guermazi Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Lindsey A MacFarlane; Heidi Yang; Jamie E Collins; Mohamed Jarraya; Ali Guermazi; Lisa A Mandl; Scott D Martin; John Wright; Elena Losina; Jeffrey N Katz Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2018-11-29 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Akshay S Chaudhari; Kathryn J Stevens; Bragi Sveinsson; Jeff P Wood; Christopher F Beaulieu; Edwin H G Oei; Jarrett K Rosenberg; Feliks Kogan; Marcus T Alley; Garry E Gold; Brian A Hargreaves Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-12-23 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: D J Hunter; A Guermazi; G H Lo; A J Grainger; P G Conaghan; R M Boudreau; F W Roemer Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2011-05-23 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Andrea Lazik-Palm; Oliver Kraff; Christina Geis; Sören Johst; Juliane Goebel; Mark E Ladd; Harald H Quick; Jens M Theysohn Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-02-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Benedikt J Schwaiger; Alexandra S Gersing; John Mbapte Wamba; Michael C Nevitt; Charles E McCulloch; Thomas M Link Journal: Radiology Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jeffrey N Katz; Christine E Chaisson; Brian Cole; Ali Guermazi; David J Hunter; Morgan Jones; Bruce A Levy; Lisa A Mandl; Scott Martin; Robert G Marx; Clare Safran-Norton; Frank W Roemer; Debra Skoniecki; Daniel H Solomon; Kurt P Spindler; John Wright; Rick W Wright; Elena Losina Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 2.226