OBJECT: Our objective was to use 7 T MRI to compare cartilage morphology (thickness) and collagen composition (T2 values) in cartilage repair patients and healthy controls. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We scanned the knees of 11 cartilage repair patients and 11 controls on a 7 T MRI scanner using a high-resolution, gradient-echo sequence to measure cartilage thickness and a multi-echo spin-echo sequence to measure cartilage T2 values. We used two-tailed t tests to compare cartilage thickness and T2 values in: repair tissue (RT) versus adjacent cartilage (AC); RT versus healthy control cartilage (HC); AC versus HC. RESULTS: Mean thickness in RT, AC, HC were: 2.2±1.4, 3.6±1.1, 3.3±0.7 mm. Differences in thickness between RT-AC (p=0.01) and RT-HC (p=0.02) were significant, but not AC-HC (p=0.45). Mean T2 values in RT, AC, HC were: 51.6±7.6, 40.0±4.7, 45.9±3.7 ms. Differences in T2 values between RT-AC (p=0.0005), RT-HC (p=0.04), and AC-HC (p=0.004) were significant. CONCLUSION: 7 T MRI allows detection of differences in morphology and collagen architecture in: (1) cartilage repair tissue compared to adjacent cartilage and (2) cartilage repair tissue compared to cartilage from healthy controls. Although cartilage adjacent to repair tissue may be normal in thickness, it can demonstrate altered collagen composition.
OBJECT: Our objective was to use 7 T MRI to compare cartilage morphology (thickness) and collagen composition (T2 values) in cartilage repair patients and healthy controls. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We scanned the knees of 11 cartilage repair patients and 11 controls on a 7 T MRI scanner using a high-resolution, gradient-echo sequence to measure cartilage thickness and a multi-echo spin-echo sequence to measure cartilage T2 values. We used two-tailed t tests to compare cartilage thickness and T2 values in: repair tissue (RT) versus adjacent cartilage (AC); RT versus healthy control cartilage (HC); AC versus HC. RESULTS: Mean thickness in RT, AC, HC were: 2.2±1.4, 3.6±1.1, 3.3±0.7 mm. Differences in thickness between RT-AC (p=0.01) and RT-HC (p=0.02) were significant, but not AC-HC (p=0.45). Mean T2 values in RT, AC, HC were: 51.6±7.6, 40.0±4.7, 45.9±3.7 ms. Differences in T2 values between RT-AC (p=0.0005), RT-HC (p=0.04), and AC-HC (p=0.004) were significant. CONCLUSION: 7 T MRI allows detection of differences in morphology and collagen architecture in: (1) cartilage repair tissue compared to adjacent cartilage and (2) cartilage repair tissue compared to cartilage from healthy controls. Although cartilage adjacent to repair tissue may be normal in thickness, it can demonstrate altered collagen composition.
Authors: Roland Krug; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Suchandrima Banerjee; Robert Stahl; Lucas Carvajal; Duan Xu; Dan Vigneron; Douglas A C Kelley; Thomas M Link; Sharmila Majumdar Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Suchandrima Banerjee; Roland Krug; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Douglas A C Kelley; Duan Xu; Daniel B Vigneron; Sharmila Majumdar Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Roland Krug; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Suchandrima Banerjee; Andrew J Burghardt; Thomas M Link; Sharmila Majumdar Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Goetz H Welsch; Tallal C Mamisch; Timothy Hughes; Christoph Zilkens; Sebastian Quirbach; Klaus Scheffler; Oliver Kraff; Mark E Schweitzer; Pavol Szomolanyi; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2008-09 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Andrea Lazik; Jens M Theysohn; Christina Geis; Sören Johst; Mark E Ladd; Harald H Quick; Oliver Kraff Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Pia M Jungmann; Thomas Baum; Jan S Bauer; Dimitrios C Karampinos; Benjamin Erdle; Thomas M Link; Xiaojuan Li; Siegfried Trattnig; Ernst J Rummeny; Klaus Woertler; Goetz H Welsch Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2014-05-04 Impact factor: 3.411