Rachel K Surowiec1, Erin P Lucas, Charles P Ho. 1. Steadman Philippon Research Institute, 181 W Meadow Dr, Suite 1000, Vail, CO, 81657, USA, rachel.surowiec@sprivail.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Early diagnosis of cartilage degeneration and longitudinal tracking of cartilage health including repair following surgical intervention would benefit from the ability to detect and monitor changes of the articular cartilage non-invasively and before gross morphological alterations appear. METHODS: Quantitative MR imaging has shown promising results with various imaging biomarkers such as T2 mapping, T1 rho and dGEMRIC demonstrating sensitivity in the detection of biochemical alterations within tissues of interest. However, acquiring accurate and clinically valuable quantitative data has proven challenging, and the reproducibility of the quantitative mapping technique and its values are essential. Although T2 mapping has been the focus in this discussion, all quantitative mapping techniques are subject to the same issues including variability in the imaging protocol, unloading and exercise, analysis, scanner and coil, calculation methods, and segmentation and registration concerns. RESULTS: The causes for variability between time points longitudinally in a patient, among patients, and among centres need to be understood further and the issues addressed. CONCLUSIONS: The potential clinical applications of quantitative mapping are vast, but, before the clinical community can take full advantage of this tool, it must be automated, standardized, validated, and have proven reproducibility prior to its implementation into the standard clinical care routine.
PURPOSE: Early diagnosis of cartilage degeneration and longitudinal tracking of cartilage health including repair following surgical intervention would benefit from the ability to detect and monitor changes of the articular cartilage non-invasively and before gross morphological alterations appear. METHODS: Quantitative MR imaging has shown promising results with various imaging biomarkers such as T2 mapping, T1 rho and dGEMRIC demonstrating sensitivity in the detection of biochemical alterations within tissues of interest. However, acquiring accurate and clinically valuable quantitative data has proven challenging, and the reproducibility of the quantitative mapping technique and its values are essential. Although T2 mapping has been the focus in this discussion, all quantitative mapping techniques are subject to the same issues including variability in the imaging protocol, unloading and exercise, analysis, scanner and coil, calculation methods, and segmentation and registration concerns. RESULTS: The causes for variability between time points longitudinally in a patient, among patients, and among centres need to be understood further and the issues addressed. CONCLUSIONS: The potential clinical applications of quantitative mapping are vast, but, before the clinical community can take full advantage of this tool, it must be automated, standardized, validated, and have proven reproducibility prior to its implementation into the standard clinical care routine.
Authors: Kevin J Campbell; Robert E Boykin; Coen A Wijdicks; J Erik Giphart; Robert F LaPrade; Marc J Philippon Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2012-10-07 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Siegfried Trattnig; Stefan Zbýň; Benjamin Schmitt; Klaus Friedrich; Vladimir Juras; Pavol Szomolanyi; Wolfgang Bogner Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-06-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michel D Crema; Frank W Roemer; Monica D Marra; Deborah Burstein; Garry E Gold; Felix Eckstein; Thomas Baum; Timothy J Mosher; John A Carrino; Ali Guermazi Journal: Radiographics Date: 2011 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Judong Pan; Jean-Baptiste Pialat; Tom Joseph; Daniel Kuo; Gabby B Joseph; Michael C Nevitt; Thomas M Link Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-09-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: S E Domayer; F Kutscha-Lissberg; G Welsch; R Dorotka; S Nehrer; C Gäbler; T C Mamisch; S Trattnig Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2008-01-18 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: James R Slauterbeck; Petteri Kousa; Blake C Clifton; Shelly Naud; Timothy W Tourville; Robert J Johnson; Bruce D Beynnon Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Roberto Buda; Francesca Vannini; Francesco Castagnini; Marco Cavallo; Alberto Ruffilli; Laura Ramponi; Gherardo Pagliazzi; Sandro Giannini Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2015-02-08 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Carly A Lockard; Katharine J Wilson; Charles P Ho; Richard C Shin; J Christoph Katthagen; Peter J Millett Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Scott Fernquest; Antony Palmer; Bonnie Gammer; Emma Hirons; Benjamin Kendrick; Adrian Taylor; Henry De Berker; Neal Bangerter; Andrew Carr; Sion Glyn-Jones Journal: Cartilage Date: 2019-04-11 Impact factor: 4.634