Valentina Pedoia1, Matthew C Gallo1, Richard B Souza1,2, Sharmila Majumdar1. 1. Musculoskeletal Quantitative Imaging Research Group, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA. 2. Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Science, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To study the local distribution of hip cartilage T1ρ and T2 relaxation times and their association with changes in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) using a fully automatic, local, and unbiased method in subjects with and without hip osteoarthritis (OA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 3 Tesla MRI studies of the hip were obtained for 37 healthy controls and 16 subjects with radiographic hip OA. The imaging protocol included a three-dimensional (3D) SPGR sequence and a combined 3D T1ρ and T2 sequence. Quantitative cartilage analysis was compared between a traditional region of interest (ROI)-based method and a fully automatic voxel-based relaxometry (VBR) method. Additionally, VBR was used to assess local T1ρ and T2 differences between subjects with and without OA, and to evaluate the association between T1ρ and T2 and 18-month changes PROMs. RESULTS: Results for the two methods were consistent in the acetabular (R = 0.79; coefficients of variation [CV] = 2.9%) and femoral cartilage (R = 0.90; CV = 2.6%). VBR revealed local patterns of T1ρ and T2 elevation in OA subjects, particularly in the posterosuperior acetabular cartilage (T1ρ : P = 0.02; T2 : P = 0.038). Overall, higher T1ρ and T2 values at baseline, particularly in the anterosuperior acetabular cartilage (T1ρ : Rho = -0.42; P = 0.002; T2 : Rho = -0.44; P = 0.002), were associated with worsening PROMS at 18-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: VBR is an accurate and robust method for quantitative MRI analysis in hip cartilage. VBR showed the capability to detect local variations in T1ρ and T2 values in subjects with and without osteoarthritis, and voxel based correlations demonstrated a regional dependence between baseline T1ρ and T2 values and changes in PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1523-1533.
PURPOSE: To study the local distribution of hip cartilage T1ρ and T2 relaxation times and their association with changes in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) using a fully automatic, local, and unbiased method in subjects with and without hip osteoarthritis (OA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 3 Tesla MRI studies of the hip were obtained for 37 healthy controls and 16 subjects with radiographic hip OA. The imaging protocol included a three-dimensional (3D) SPGR sequence and a combined 3D T1ρ and T2 sequence. Quantitative cartilage analysis was compared between a traditional region of interest (ROI)-based method and a fully automatic voxel-based relaxometry (VBR) method. Additionally, VBR was used to assess local T1ρ and T2 differences between subjects with and without OA, and to evaluate the association between T1ρ and T2 and 18-month changes PROMs. RESULTS: Results for the two methods were consistent in the acetabular (R = 0.79; coefficients of variation [CV] = 2.9%) and femoral cartilage (R = 0.90; CV = 2.6%). VBR revealed local patterns of T1ρ and T2 elevation in OA subjects, particularly in the posterosuperior acetabular cartilage (T1ρ : P = 0.02; T2 : P = 0.038). Overall, higher T1ρ and T2 values at baseline, particularly in the anterosuperior acetabular cartilage (T1ρ : Rho = -0.42; P = 0.002; T2 : Rho = -0.44; P = 0.002), were associated with worsening PROMS at 18-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: VBR is an accurate and robust method for quantitative MRI analysis in hip cartilage. VBR showed the capability to detect local variations in T1ρ and T2 values in subjects with and without osteoarthritis, and voxel based correlations demonstrated a regional dependence between baseline T1ρ and T2 values and changes in PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1 J. MAGN. RESON. IMAGING 2017;45:1523-1533.
Authors: G E Gold; F Cicuttini; M D Crema; F Eckstein; A Guermazi; R Kijowski; T M Link; E Maheu; J Martel-Pelletier; C G Miller; J-P Pelletier; C G Peterfy; H G Potter; F W Roemer; D J Hunter Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: M C Gallo; C Wyatt; V Pedoia; D Kumar; S Lee; L Nardo; T M Link; R B Souza; S Majumdar Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2016-03-10 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Andrew J Teichtahl; Yuanyuan Wang; Sam Smith; Anita E Wluka; Graham G Giles; Kim L Bennell; Richard O'Sullivan; Flavia M Cicuttini Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2014-10-11 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: Jasmine Rossi-deVries; Valentina Pedoia; Michael A Samaan; Adam R Ferguson; Richard B Souza; Sharmila Majumdar Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-05-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: J Knox; V Pedoia; A Wang; M Tanaka; G B Joseph; J Neumann; T M Link; X Li; C B Ma Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2018-02-10 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Florian Schmaranzer; Ronja Helfenstein; Guodong Zeng; Till D Lerch; Eduardo N Novais; James D Wylie; Young-Jo Kim; Klaus A Siebenrock; Moritz Tannast; Guoyan Zheng Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Michael A Samaan; Alan L Zhang; Tijana Popovic; Valentina Pedoia; Sharmila Majumdar; Richard B Souza Journal: J Biomech Date: 2018-12-23 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Michael A Samaan; Valentina Pedoia; Alan L Zhang; Matthew C Gallo; Thomas M Link; Richard B Souza; Sharmila Majumdar Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Tzu-Chieh Liao; Hannah Jergas; Radhika Tibrewala; Emma Bahroos; Thomas M Link; Sharmila Majumdar; Richard B Souza; Valentina Pedoia Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 3.102
Authors: Michael A Samaan; Trevor Grace; Alan L Zhang; Sharmila Majumdar; Richard B Souza Journal: Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) Date: 2019-11-26 Impact factor: 2.063