Ilkka Hannila1,2, Eveliina Lammentausta3,4, Osmo Tervonen3,5,4, Miika Tapio Nieminen3,5,4. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital (OYS), Kajaanintie, POB 50, 90029, Oulu, Finland. ilkka.hannila@ppshp.fi. 2. Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. ilkka.hannila@ppshp.fi. 3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Oulu University Hospital (OYS), Kajaanintie, POB 50, 90029, Oulu, Finland. 4. Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland. 5. Center for Medical Imaging, Physics and Technology, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess short- and long-term repeatability of T2 relaxation time measurements of the knee articular cartilage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The right knees of nine asymptomatic volunteers (age 30-38 years, five male, four female) were imaged at 1.5 T in three sessions 1 and 2 weeks apart. To observe short-term repeatability, the measurements were repeated three times within one of the three imaging sessions for each volunteer. T2 relaxation time was mapped using a multi-slice multi-echo spin echo sequence in axial and sagittal planes. Cartilage was manually segmented and repeatability, as measured by root-mean-square coefficient of variation (CVRMS) was evaluated both for the entire bulk cartilage of each joint surface in the slice and separately for each region of interest (ROI) at different topographical locations and separately for the superficial and deep half of each ROI. RESULTS: For bulk T2, the long-term repeatability was 3.2, 5.4, and 3.7%, and the short-term reproducibility was 3.9, 3.9, and 3.4% for bulk femoral, tibial, and patellar cartilage, respectively. There were no significant differences between long-term and short-term repeatability in superficial or deep cartilage when comparing CVRMS values (p = 0.338 and 0.700, respectively). For individual ROIs, the repeatability varied between 2.5 and 22.2% depending on the topographical location. CONCLUSION: The current results show mostly good repeatability. However, there were remarkable variations of T2 between bulk cartilage and different ROIs, bulk cartilage showing better repeatability. With careful patient positioning T2 can be accurately determined for different cartilage surfaces.
OBJECTIVES: To assess short- and long-term repeatability of T2 relaxation time measurements of the knee articular cartilage. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The right knees of nine asymptomatic volunteers (age 30-38 years, five male, four female) were imaged at 1.5 T in three sessions 1 and 2 weeks apart. To observe short-term repeatability, the measurements were repeated three times within one of the three imaging sessions for each volunteer. T2 relaxation time was mapped using a multi-slice multi-echo spin echo sequence in axial and sagittal planes. Cartilage was manually segmented and repeatability, as measured by root-mean-square coefficient of variation (CVRMS) was evaluated both for the entire bulk cartilage of each joint surface in the slice and separately for each region of interest (ROI) at different topographical locations and separately for the superficial and deep half of each ROI. RESULTS: For bulk T2, the long-term repeatability was 3.2, 5.4, and 3.7%, and the short-term reproducibility was 3.9, 3.9, and 3.4% for bulk femoral, tibial, and patellar cartilage, respectively. There were no significant differences between long-term and short-term repeatability in superficial or deep cartilage when comparing CVRMS values (p = 0.338 and 0.700, respectively). For individual ROIs, the repeatability varied between 2.5 and 22.2% depending on the topographical location. CONCLUSION: The current results show mostly good repeatability. However, there were remarkable variations of T2 between bulk cartilage and different ROIs, bulk cartilage showing better repeatability. With careful patient positioning T2 can be accurately determined for different cartilage surfaces.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cartilage; Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); Repeatability; T2
Authors: M T Nieminen; J Töyräs; J Rieppo; J M Hakumäki; J Silvennoinen; H J Helminen; J S Jurvelin Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Hans Liebl; Gabby Joseph; Michael C Nevitt; Nathan Singh; Ursula Heilmeier; Karupppasamy Subburaj; Pia M Jungmann; Charles E McCulloch; John A Lynch; Nancy E Lane; Thomas M Link Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2014-03-10 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: M T Nieminen; J Rieppo; J Töyräs; J M Hakumäki; J Silvennoinen; M M Hyttinen; H J Helminen; J S Jurvelin Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: R B Souza; D Kumar; N Calixto; J Singh; J Schooler; K Subburaj; X Li; T M Link; S Majumdar Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2014-04-30 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: E Lammentausta; P Kiviranta; M J Nissi; M S Laasanen; I Kiviranta; M T Nieminen; J S Jurvelin Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: J M Jordan; M F Sowers; S P Messier; J Bradley; G Arangio; J N Katz; E Losina; L Rovati; N Bachtell; C Cooper; T Spector; W Zhang; J Gardiner; M Wahba Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2011-03-23 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Yun Jiang; Dan Ma; Kathryn E Keenan; Karl F Stupic; Vikas Gulani; Mark A Griswold Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2016-10-27 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Salvador Israel Macías-Hernández; Antonio Miranda-Duarte; Isabel Ramírez-Mora; Socorro Cortés-González; Juan Daniel Morones-Alba; Andrea Olascoaga-Gómez; Roberto Coronado-Zarco; María de Los Angeles Soria-Bastida; Tania Inés Nava-Bringas; Eva Cruz-Medina Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2016-06-23 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Oliver Kraff; Andrea Lazik-Palm; Rahel Heule; Jens M Theysohn; Oliver Bieri; Harald H Quick Journal: MAGMA Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 2.310