B J Dardzinski1, E Schneider. 1. Department of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: T2 (spin-spin) relaxation time is frequently used for compositional assessment of articular cartilage. However little is known about the influence of magnetic resonance (MR) system components on these measurements. The reproducibility and range of cartilage T2 values were evaluated using different extremity radiofrequency (RF) coils with potential differences in flip angle uniformity and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). METHOD: Ten knees underwent 3 T MR exams using RF coils with different SNR: quadrature transmit/receive (QTR); quadrature transmit/eight-channel phased-array receive (QT8PAR). Each knee was scanned twice per coil (four exams total). T2 values were calculated for the central medial and lateral femoral (cMF, cLF) and medial and lateral tibial (MT, LT) cartilage. RESULTS: The flip angle varied across a central 40 mm diameter region-of-interest of each coil by <1.5%. However SNR was significantly higher using QT8PAR than QTR (P < 0.001). T2 values for cMF (50.7 msec/45.9 msec) and MT (48.2 msec/41.6 msec) were significantly longer with QT8PAR than QTR (P < 0.05). T2 reproducibility was improved using QT8PAR for cMF and cLF (4.8%/5.8% and 4.1%/6.5%; P < 0.001), similar for LT (3.8%/3.6%; P = 1.0), and worse for MT (3.7%/3.3%; P < 0.001). T2 varied spatially, with cLF having the longest (52.0 msec) and the LT having the shortest (40.6 msec) values. All deep cartilage had significantly longer, and less variable, T2 values using QT8PAR (higher SNR; P < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: SNR varied spatially (significant) depending upon coil, but refocusing flip angle only slightly. With higher SNR, significantly longer T2 values were measured for deep (all plates) and global (MT, cMF) cartilage. T2 values varied by depth and plate, in agreement with prior studies.
INTRODUCTION: T2 (spin-spin) relaxation time is frequently used for compositional assessment of articular cartilage. However little is known about the influence of magnetic resonance (MR) system components on these measurements. The reproducibility and range of cartilage T2 values were evaluated using different extremity radiofrequency (RF) coils with potential differences in flip angle uniformity and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). METHOD: Ten knees underwent 3 T MR exams using RF coils with different SNR: quadrature transmit/receive (QTR); quadrature transmit/eight-channel phased-array receive (QT8PAR). Each knee was scanned twice per coil (four exams total). T2 values were calculated for the central medial and lateral femoral (cMF, cLF) and medial and lateral tibial (MT, LT) cartilage. RESULTS: The flip angle varied across a central 40 mm diameter region-of-interest of each coil by <1.5%. However SNR was significantly higher using QT8PAR than QTR (P < 0.001). T2 values for cMF (50.7 msec/45.9 msec) and MT (48.2 msec/41.6 msec) were significantly longer with QT8PAR than QTR (P < 0.05). T2 reproducibility was improved using QT8PAR for cMF and cLF (4.8%/5.8% and 4.1%/6.5%; P < 0.001), similar for LT (3.8%/3.6%; P = 1.0), and worse for MT (3.7%/3.3%; P < 0.001). T2 varied spatially, with cLF having the longest (52.0 msec) and the LT having the shortest (40.6 msec) values. All deep cartilage had significantly longer, and less variable, T2 values using QT8PAR (higher SNR; P < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: SNR varied spatially (significant) depending upon coil, but refocusing flip angle only slightly. With higher SNR, significantly longer T2 values were measured for deep (all plates) and global (MT, cMF) cartilage. T2 values varied by depth and plate, in agreement with prior studies.
Authors: Timothy J Mosher; Zheng Zhang; Ravinder Reddy; Sanaa Boudhar; Barton N Milestone; William B Morrison; C Kent Kwoh; Felix Eckstein; Walter R T Witschey; Arijitt Borthakur Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-01-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: David A Reiter; Remigio A Roque; Ping-Chang Lin; Stephen B Doty; Nancy Pleshko; Richard G Spencer Journal: NMR Biomed Date: 2011-04-05 Impact factor: 4.044
Authors: Goetz H Welsch; Tallal C Mamisch; Michael Weber; Wilhelm Horger; Klaus Bohndorf; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: José G Raya; Olaf Dietrich; Annie Horng; Jürgen Weber; Maximilian F Reiser; Christian Glaser Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Vanessa A Lukas; Kenneth W Fishbein; Ping-Chang Lin; Michael Schär; Erika Schneider; Corey P Neu; Richard G Spencer; David A Reiter Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2015-03-05 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: X Li; V Pedoia; D Kumar; J Rivoire; C Wyatt; D Lansdown; K Amano; N Okazaki; D Savic; M F Koff; J Felmlee; S L Williams; S Majumdar Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 6.576
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