Literature DB >> 25436618

Sodium magnetic resonance imaging of ankle joint in cadaver specimens, volunteers, and patients after different cartilage repair techniques at 7 T: initial results.

Štefan Zbýň1, Martin O Brix, Vladimir Juras, Stephan E Domayer, Sonja M Walzer, Vladimir Mlynarik, Sebastian Apprich, Kai Buckenmaier, Reinhard Windhager, Siegfried Trattnig.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The goal of cartilage repair techniques such as microfracture (MFX) or matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) is to produce repair tissue (RT) with sufficient glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content. Sodium magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) offers a direct and noninvasive evaluation of the GAG content in native cartilage and RT. In the femoral cartilage, this method was able to distinguish between RTs produced by MFX and MACT having different GAG contents. However, it needs to be clarified whether sodium MRI can be useful for evaluating RT in thin ankle cartilage. Thus, the aims of this 7-T study were (1) to validate our sodium MRI protocol in cadaver ankle samples, (2) to evaluate the sodium corrected signal intensities (cSI) in cartilage of volunteers, (3) and to compare sodium values in RT between patients after MFX and MACT treatment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five human cadaver ankle samples as well as ankles of 9 asymptomatic volunteers, 6 MFX patients and 6 MACT patients were measured in this 7-T study. Sodium values from the ankle samples were compared with histochemically evaluated GAG content. In the volunteers, sodium cSI values were calculated in the cartilages of ankle and subtalar joint. In the patients, sodium cSI in RT and reference cartilage were measured, morphological appearance of RT was evaluated using the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) scoring system, and clinical outcome before and after surgery was assessed using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score and Modified Cincinnati Knee Scale. All regions of interest were defined on morphological images and subsequently transferred to the corresponding sodium images. Analysis of variance, t tests, and Pearson correlation coefficients were evaluated.
RESULTS: In the patients, significantly lower sodium cSI values were found in RT than in reference cartilage for the MFX (P = 0.007) and MACT patients (P = 0.008). Sodium cSI and MOCART scores in RT did not differ between the MFX and MACT patients (P = 0.185). No significant difference in sodium cSI was found between reference cartilage of the volunteers and the patients (P = 0.355). The patients showed significantly higher American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society and Modified Cincinnati scores after treatment than they did before treatment. In the volunteers, sodium cSI was significantly higher in the tibial cartilage than in the talar cartilage of ankle joint (P = 0.002) and in the talar cartilage than in the calcaneal cartilage of subtalar joint (P < 0.001). Data from the cadaver ankle samples showed a strong linear relationship between the sodium values and the histochemically determined GAG content (r = 0.800; P < 0.001; R = 0.639).
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of in vivo quantification of sodium cSI, which can be used for GAG content evaluation in thin cartilages of ankle and subtalar joints at 7 T. A strong correlation observed between the histochemically evaluated GAG content and the sodium values proved the sufficient sensitivity of sodium MRI to changes in the GAG content of cartilages in the ankle. Both MFX and MACT produced RT with lower sodium cSI and, thus, of lower quality compared with reference cartilage in the patients or in the volunteers. Our results suggest that MFX and MACT produce RT with similar GAG content and similar morphological appearance in patients with similar surgery outcome. Sodium MRI at 7 T allows a quantitative evaluation of RT quality in the ankle and may thus be useful in the noninvasive assessment of new cartilage repair procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25436618      PMCID: PMC4365439          DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000117

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  39 in total

1.  Comparison of amounts and properties of collagen and proteoglycans in condylar, costal and nasal cartilages.

Authors:  K Pietilä; T Kantomaa; P Pirttiniemi; A Poikela
Journal:  Cells Tissues Organs       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 2.481

2.  T1(Gd) gives comparable information as Delta T1 relaxation rate in dGEMRIC evaluation of cartilage repair tissue.

Authors:  Siegfried Trattnig; Dehorah Burstein; Pavol Szomolanyi; Katja Pinker; Goetz H Welsch; Tallal C Mamisch
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 6.016

3.  A rationale for assessing sports activity levels and limitations in knee disorders.

Authors:  F R Noyes; S D Barber; L A Mooar
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Arthroscopic treatment of osteochondral lesions of the ankle with matrix-associated chondrocyte implantation: early clinical and magnetic resonance imaging results.

Authors:  Matthias Aurich; Harvinder S Bedi; Peter J Smith; Bernd Rolauffs; Thomas Mückley; James Clayton; Mark Blackney
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  23Na MR imaging at 7 T after knee matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation preliminary results.

Authors:  Siegfried Trattnig; Goetz H Welsch; Vladimir Juras; Pavol Szomolanyi; Marius E Mayerhoefer; David Stelzeneder; Tallal C Mamisch; Oliver Bieri; Klaus Scheffler; Stefan Zbýn
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Improved assessment of cartilage repair tissue using fluid-suppressed ²³Na inversion recovery MRI at 7 Tesla: preliminary results.

Authors:  Gregory Chang; Guillaume Madelin; Orrin H Sherman; Eric J Strauss; Ding Xia; Michael P Recht; Alexej Jerschow; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-02-18       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Microfracture for chondral defects of the talus: maintenance of early results at midterm follow-up.

Authors:  Christoph Becher; Arne Driessen; Thomas Hess; Umile Giuseppe Longo; Nicola Maffulli; Hajo Thermann
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  Cartilage degeneration in different human joints.

Authors:  K E Kuettner; A A Cole
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.576

9.  Cartilage T2 assessment at 3-T MR imaging: in vivo differentiation of normal hyaline cartilage from reparative tissue after two cartilage repair procedures--initial experience.

Authors:  Goetz H Welsch; Tallal C Mamisch; Stephan E Domayer; Ronald Dorotka; Florian Kutscha-Lissberg; Stefan Marlovits; Lawrence M White; Siegfried Trattnig
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Differentiating normal hyaline cartilage from post-surgical repair tissue using fast gradient echo imaging in delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI (dGEMRIC) at 3 Tesla.

Authors:  Siegfried Trattnig; Tallal C Mamisch; Katja Pinker; Stephan Domayer; Pavol Szomolanyi; Stefan Marlovits; Florian Kutscha-Lissberg; Goetz H Welsch
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-02-02       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  MR Imaging of the Musculoskeletal System Using Ultrahigh Field (7T) MR Imaging.

Authors:  Hamza Alizai; Gregory Chang; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2018-10

Review 2.  [Biochemical cartilage imaging-update 2019].

Authors:  S Trattnig; M Raudner; M Schreiner; F Roemer; K Bohndorf
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 3.  New Technology in Imaging Cartilage of the Ankle.

Authors:  Markus M Schreiner; Vladimir Mlynarik; Štefan Zbýň; Pavol Szomolanyi; Sebastian Apprich; Reinhard Windhager; Siegfried Trattnig
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  A Review of Non-1H RF Receive Arrays in Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Spectroscopy.

Authors:  Matthew Wilcox; Steven M Wright; Mary McDougall
Journal:  IEEE Open J Eng Med Biol       Date:  2020-10-13

Review 5.  [Advanced cartilage imaging for detection of cartilage injuries and osteochondral lesions].

Authors:  A S Gersing; B J Schwaiger; K Wörtler; P M Jungmann
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 6.  High-performance radiofrequency coils for (23)Na MRI: brain and musculoskeletal applications.

Authors:  Graham C Wiggins; Ryan Brown; Karthik Lakshmanan
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 4.044

7.  Can sodium MRI be used as a method for mapping of cartilage stiffness?

Authors:  Sander Brinkhof; Martijn Froeling; Rob P A Janssen; Keita Ito; Dennis W J Klomp
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 8.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Musculoskeletal System at 7T: Morphological Imaging and Beyond.

Authors:  Vladimir Juras; Vladimir Mlynarik; Pavol Szomolanyi; Ladislav Valkovič; Siegfried Trattnig
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-06

9.  Imaging articular cartilage in osteoarthritis using targeted peptide radiocontrast agents.

Authors:  Milan M Fowkes; Patricia Das Neves Borges; Fernando Cacho-Nerin; Paul E Brennan; Tonia L Vincent; Ngee H Lim
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Quantification of Sodium Relaxation Times and Concentrations as Surrogates of Proteoglycan Content of Patellar CARTILAGE at 3T MRI.

Authors:  Benedikt Kamp; Miriam Frenken; Jan M Henke; Daniel B Abrar; Armin M Nagel; Lena V Gast; Georg Oeltzschner; Lena M Wilms; Sven Nebelung; Gerald Antoch; Hans-Jörg Wittsack; Anja Müller-Lutz
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-08
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.