Literature DB >> 27506970

T1ρ Hip Cartilage Mapping in Assessing Patients With Cam Morphology: How Can We Optimize the Regions of Interest?

Helen Anwander1, Kawan S Rakhra2,3, Gerd Melkus2,3, Paul E Beaulé4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: T1ρ MRI has been shown feasible to detect the biochemical status of hip cartilage, but various region-of-interest strategies have been used, compromising the reproducibility and comparability between different institutions and studies. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were (1) to determine representative regions of interest (ROIs) for cartilage T1ρ mapping in hips with a cam deformity; and (2) to assess intra- and interobserver reliability for cartilage T1ρ mapping in hips with a cam deformity.
METHODS: The local ethics committee approved this prospective study with written informed consent obtained. Between 2010 and 2013, in 54 hips (54 patients), T1ρ 1.5-T MRI was performed. Thirty-eight hips (38 patients; 89% male) with an average age of 35 ± 7.5 years (range, 23-51 tears) were diagnosed with a cam deformity; 16 hips (16 patients; 87% male) with an average age of 34 ± 7 years (range, 23-47 years) were included in the control group. Of the 38 patients with a cam deformity, 20 were pain-free and 18 symptomatic patients underwent surgery after 6 months of failed nonsurgical management of antiinflammatories and physical therapy. Exclusion criteria were radiologic sings of osteoarthritis with Tönnis Grade 2 or higher as well as previous hip surgery. Three region-of-interest (ROI) selections were analyzed: Method 1: as a whole; Method 2: as 36 to 54 small ROIs (sections of 30° in the sagittal plane and 3 mm in the transverse plane); Method 3a: as six ROIs (sections of 90° in the sagittal plane and one-third of the acetabular depth in the transverse plane: the anterosuperior and posterosuperior quadrants, divided into lateral, intermediate, and medial thirds); and Method 3b: as the ratio (anterosuperior over posterosuperior quadrant). ROIs in Method 3 represent the region of macroscopic cartilage damage, described in intraoperative findings. To asses interobserver reliability, 10 patients were analyzed by two observers (HA, GM). For intraobserver reliability, 20 hip MRIs were analyzed twice by one observer (HA). To assess interscan reliability, three patients underwent two scans within a time period of 2 weeks and were analyzed twice by one observer (HA). T1ρ values were compared using Student's t test. Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and root mean square coefficient of variation (RMS-CV) were used to analyze intraobserver, interobserver, and interscan reliability.
RESULTS: Patients with a cam deformity showed increased T1ρ values in the whole hip cartilage (mean: 34.0 ± 3.8 ms versus 31.4 ± 3.0 ms; mean difference: 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.7-0.4; p = 0.019; Method 1), mainly anterolateral (2), in the lateral and medial thirds of the anterosuperior quadrant (mean: 32.3 ± 4.9 ms versus 29.4 ± 4.1 ms; mean difference: 3.0; 95% CI, 5.8-0.2; p = 0.039 and mean 36.5 ± 5.6 ms versus 32.6 ± 3.8 ms; mean difference: 3.8; 95% CI, 6.9-0.8; p = 0.014), and in the medial third of the posterosuperior quadrant (mean: 34.4 ± 5.5 ms versus 31.1 ± 3.9 ms; mean difference: 3.1; 95% CI, 6.2-0.1; p = 0.039) (3a). The ratio was increased in the lateral third (mean: 1.00 ± 0.12 versus 0.90 ± 0.15; mean difference: 0.10; 95% CI, 0.18-0.2; p = 0.018) (3b). ICC and RMS-CV were 0.965 and 4% (intraobserver), 0.953 and 4% (interobserver), and 0.988 (all p < 0.001) and 9% (inter-MR scan), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Cartilage T1ρ MRI mapping in hips is feasible at 1.5 T with strong inter-, intraobserver, and inter-MR scan reliability. The six ROIs (Method 3) showed a difference of T1ρ values anterolateral quadrant, consistent with the dominant area of cartilage injury in cam femoroacetabular impingement, and antero- and posteromedial, indicating involvement of the entire hip cartilage health. The six ROIs (Method 3) have been shown feasible to assess cartilage damage in hips with a cam deformity using T1ρ MRI. We suggest applying this ROI selection for further studies using quantitative MRI for assessment of cartilage damage in hips with a cam deformity to achieve better comparability and reproducibility between different studies. The application of this ROI selection on hips with other deformities (eg, pincer deformity, developmental dysplasia of the hip, and acetabular retroversion) has to be analyzed and potentially adapted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27506970      PMCID: PMC5339114          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-5011-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  30 in total

1.  Radial dGEMRIC in developmental dysplasia of the hip and in femoroacetabular impingement: preliminary results.

Authors:  S E Domayer; T C Mamisch; I Kress; J Chan; Y J Kim
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 6.576

2.  Clinical and radiographic predictors of intra-articular hip disease in arthroscopy.

Authors:  Jeffrey J Nepple; John C Carlisle; Ryan M Nunley; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 6.202

3.  Localized cartilage assessment with three-dimensional dGEMRIC in asymptomatic hips with normal morphology and cam deformity.

Authors:  T C B Pollard; E G McNally; D C Wilson; D R Wilson; B Mädler; M Watson; H S Gill; A J Carr
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2010-11-03       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Comparison of T2 Values in the Lateral and Medial Portions of the Weight-Bearing Cartilage of the Hip for Patients With Symptomatic Femoroacetabular Impingement and Asymptomatic Volunteers.

Authors:  Fernando P Ferro; Charles P Ho; Grant J Dornan; Rachel K Surowiec; Marc J Philippon
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2015-04-18       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage (dGEMRIC) in Femoacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Tallal Charles Mamisch; Micheal Sean Hillega Kain; Bernd Bittersohl; Sebastian Apprich; Stefan Werlen; Martin Beck; Klaus Arno Siebenrock
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.494

6.  Subclinical cartilage degeneration in young athletes with posterior cruciate ligament injuries detected with T1ρ magnetic resonance imaging mapping.

Authors:  Ken Okazaki; Yukihisa Takayama; Kanji Osaki; Yoshio Matsuo; Hideki Mizu-Uchi; Satoshi Hamai; Hiroshi Honda; Yukihide Iwamoto
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-12-07       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Can the alpha angle assessment of cam impingement predict acetabular cartilage delamination?

Authors:  Paul E Beaulé; Kelly Hynes; Gillian Parker; Kyle A Kemp
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Relationship between offset angle alpha and hip chondral injury in femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  Todd L Johnston; Mara L Schenker; Karen K Briggs; Marc J Philippon
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2008-03-17       Impact factor: 4.772

9.  Hip damage occurs at the zone of femoroacetabular impingement.

Authors:  M Tannast; D Goricki; M Beck; S B Murphy; K A Siebenrock
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-01-10       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  T1rho relaxation mapping in human osteoarthritis (OA) cartilage: comparison of T1rho with T2.

Authors:  Ravinder R Regatte; Sarma V S Akella; J H Lonner; J B Kneeland; Ravinder Reddy
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 4.813

View more
  7 in total

1.  Does Cartilage Degenerate in Asymptomatic Hips With Cam Morphology?

Authors:  George Grammatopoulos; Gerd Melkus; Kawan Rakhra; Paul E Beaulé
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Editorial Comment: The Bernese Hip Symposium and CORR®-Sharing the Latest and Best in Hip Surgery Research.

Authors:  Seth S Leopold
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Study of the interactions between proximal femur 3d bone shape, cartilage health, and biomechanics in patients with hip Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Valentina Pedoia; Michael A Samaan; Gaurav Inamdar; Matthew C Gallo; Richard B Souza; Sharmila Majumdar
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Simultaneous bilateral T1 , T2 , and T relaxation mapping of the hip joint with magnetic resonance fingerprinting.

Authors:  Azadeh Sharafi; Marcelo V W Zibetti; Gregory Chang; Martijn A Cloos; Ravinder R Regatte
Journal:  NMR Biomed       Date:  2021-11-26       Impact factor: 4.478

5.  What Is the Correlation Among dGEMRIC, T1p, and T2* Quantitative MRI Cartilage Mapping Techniques in Developmental Hip Dysplasia?

Authors:  Gerd Melkus; Paul E Beaulé; Geoffrey Wilkin; Kawan S Rakhra
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Understanding Preoperative Demographics and Risk Factors for Early Revision Surgery in Patients Undergoing Hip Arthroscopic Surgery: A Large Database Study.

Authors:  Miranda J Rogers; Temitope F Adeyemi; Jaewhan Kim; Travis G Maak
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2019-06-26

7.  Periacetabular osteotomy with or without arthroscopic management in patients with hip dysplasia: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Geoffrey P Wilkin; Stéphane Poitras; John Clohisy; Etienne Belzile; Ira Zaltz; George Grammatopoulos; Gerd Melkus; Kawan Rakhra; Tim Ramsay; Kednapa Thavorn; Paul E Beaulé
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2020-08-18       Impact factor: 2.279

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.