Literature DB >> 22167383

Comparison between different implementations of the 3D FLASH sequence for knee cartilage quantification.

Martin Hudelmaier1, Christian Glaser, Christian Pfau, Felix Eckstein.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare several sequence implementations of the 3D FLASH sequence in the context of quantitative cartilage imaging.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Test-retest coronal fast low angle shot (FLASH) sequences with water excitation were acquired in knees of 12 healthy participants, using two 1.5 T scanners from the same manufacturer. On one of the scanners, the FLASH was additionally compared with a FLASH VIBE, 75% with 100% slice resolution, a non-selective with a conventional spatial pulse, and "asymmetric echo allowed" with "not allowed".
RESULTS: Implementations of the FLASH showed systematic differences of up to 3.3%, but these were not statistically significant. Precision errors were similar between protocols, but tended to be smallest for the FLASH VIBE with 100% slice resolution (0.6-6.7%). In the medial tibia cartilage volume and thickness differed significantly (P < 0.01; 6.2 and 5.9%) between the two scanners.
CONCLUSION: Using a validated FLASH sequence, one can reduce slice resolution to 75% and allow asymmetric echo without sacrificing precision, in order to reduce the total acquisition time. However, in longitudinal studies, the scanner and the specific sequence implementation should be kept constant between baseline and follow-up, in order to avoid systematic off-sets in the measurements.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22167383     DOI: 10.1007/s10334-011-0296-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  MAGMA        ISSN: 0968-5243            Impact factor:   2.310


  20 in total

1.  Magnetic resonance imaging measurement of knee cartilage volume in a multicentre study.

Authors:  S R Morgan; J C Waterton; R A Maciewicz; J E Leadbetter; S J Gandy; R J Moots; P Creamer; A F P Nash
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2003-08-15       Impact factor: 7.580

2.  [Precision MRI-based joint surface and cartilage density analysis of the knee joint using rapid water-excitation sequence and semi-automatic segmentation algorithm].

Authors:  L Heudorfer; J Hohe; S Faber; K H Englmeier; M Reiser; F Eckstein
Journal:  Biomed Tech (Berl)       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 1.411

3.  Comparison of quantitative cartilage measurements acquired on two 3.0T MRI systems from different manufacturers.

Authors:  Peter R Kornaat; Seungbum Koo; Thomas P Andriacchi; Johan L Bloem; Garry E Gold
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.813

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging-based assessment of cartilage loss in severe osteoarthritis: accuracy, precision, and diagnostic value.

Authors:  R Burgkart; C Glaser; A Hyhlik-Dürr; K H Englmeier; M Reiser; F Eckstein
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2001-09

5.  Abdominal MR imaging with a volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination.

Authors:  N M Rofsky; V S Lee; G Laub; M A Pollack; G A Krinsky; D Thomasson; M M Ambrosino; J C Weinreb
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Impact of coil design on the contrast-to-noise ratio, precision, and consistency of quantitative cartilage morphometry at 3 Tesla: a pilot study for the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  Felix Eckstein; Manuela Kunz; Martin Hudelmaier; Rebecca Jackson; Joseph Yu; Charles B Eaton; Erika Schneider
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.668

7.  Precision of 3.0 Tesla quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage morphology in a multicentre clinical trial.

Authors:  F Eckstein; R J Buck; D Burstein; H C Charles; J Crim; M Hudelmaier; D J Hunter; G Hutchins; C Jackson; V Byers Kraus; N E Lane; T M Link; L S Majumdar; S Mazzuca; P V Prasad; T J Schnitzer; M S Taljanovic; A Vaz; B Wyman; M-P Hellio Le Graverand
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2008-02-18       Impact factor: 19.103

8.  Sensitivity to change of cartilage morphometry using coronal FLASH, sagittal DESS, and coronal MPR DESS protocols--comparative data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Authors:  W Wirth; M Nevitt; M-P Hellio Le Graverand; O Benichou; D Dreher; R Y Davies; J Lee; K Picha; A Gimona; S Maschek; M Hudelmaier; F Eckstein
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 6.576

9.  One year change of knee cartilage morphology in the first release of participants from the Osteoarthritis Initiative progression subcohort: association with sex, body mass index, symptoms and radiographic osteoarthritis status.

Authors:  F Eckstein; S Maschek; W Wirth; M Hudelmaier; W Hitzl; B Wyman; M Nevitt; M-P Hellio Le Graverand
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2008-06-02       Impact factor: 19.103

10.  Quantitative assessment of cartilage status in osteoarthritis by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: technical validation for use in analysis of cartilage volume and further morphologic parameters.

Authors:  Heiko Graichen; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe; Thomas Vogl; Karl-Hans Englmeier; Felix Eckstein
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2004-03
View more
  3 in total

1.  Standardized quantitative measurements of wrist cartilage in healthy humans using 3T magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Jean-Vincent Zink; Philippe Souteyrand; Sandrine Guis; Christophe Chagnaud; Yann Le Fur; Daniela Militianu; Jean-Pierre Mattei; Michael Rozenbaum; Itzhak Rosner; Maxime Guye; Monique Bernard; David Bendahan
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-09-18

Review 2.  Imaging of cartilage and bone: promises and pitfalls in clinical trials of osteoarthritis.

Authors:  F Eckstein; A Guermazi; G Gold; J Duryea; M-P Hellio Le Graverand; W Wirth; C G Miller
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 6.576

3.  Segmentation of the lateral femoral notch sign with MRI using a new measurement technique.

Authors:  Thomas Hoffelner; Isabel Pichler; Philipp Moroder; Michael Osti; Martin Hudelmaier; Wolfgang Wirth; Herbert Resch; Alexander Auffarth
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 2.362

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.