Tobias Hesper1, Evgeny Bulat1, Sarah Bixby2, Alireza Akhondi-Asl3,4, Onur Afacan2, Patricia Miller1, Garrett Bowen1, Simon Warfield2, Young-Jo Kim5. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Boston Children's Hospital, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Boston Children's Hospital, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. young-jo.kim@childrens.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In addition to case reports of gadolinium-related toxicities, there are increasing theoretical concerns about the use of gadolinium for MR imaging. As a result, there is increasing interest in noncontrast imaging techniques for biochemical cartilage assessment. Among them, T2 mapping holds promise because of its simplicity, but its biophysical interpretation has been controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We sought to determine whether (1) 3-T delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) and T2 mapping are both capable of detecting cartilage damage at the chondrolabral junction in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI); and (2) whether there is a correlation between these two techniques for acetabular and femoral head cartilage assessment. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with hip-related symptoms resulting from FAI underwent a preoperative 3-T MRI of their hip that included dGEMRIC and T2 mapping (symptomatic group, 16 women, 15 men; mean age, 27 ± 8 years). Ten volunteers with no symptoms according to the WOMAC served as a control (asymptomatic group, seven women, three men; mean age, 28 ± 3 years). After morphologic cartilage assessment, acetabular and femoral head cartilages were graded according to the modified Outerbridge grading criteria. In the midsagittal plane, single-observer analyses of precontrast T1 values (volunteers), the dGEMRIC index (T1Gd, patients), and T2 mapping values (everyone) were compared in acetabular and corresponding femoral head cartilage at the chondrolabral junction of each hip by region-of-interest analysis. RESULTS: In the symptomatic group, T1Gd and T2 values were lower in the acetabular cartilage compared with corresponding femoral head cartilage (T1Gd: 515 ± 165 ms versus 650 ± 191 ms, p < 0.001; T2: 39 ± 8 ms versus 46 ± 10 ms, p < 0.001). In contrast, the asymptomatic group demonstrated no differences in T1 and T2 values for the acetabular and femoral cartilages with the numbers available (T1: 861 ± 130 ms versus 860 ± 182 ms, p = 0.98; T2: 43 ± 7 ms versus 42 ± 6 ms, p = 0.73). No correlation with the numbers available was noted between the modified Outerbridge grade and T1, T1Gd, or T2 as well as between T2 and either T1 or T1Gd. CONCLUSIONS: Without the need for contrast media application, T2 mapping may be a viable alternative to dGEMRIC when assessing hip cartilage at the chondrolabral junction. However, acquisition-related phenomena as well as regional variations in the microstructure of hip cartilage necessitate an internal femoral head cartilage control when interpreting these results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, diagnostic study.
BACKGROUND: In addition to case reports of gadolinium-related toxicities, there are increasing theoretical concerns about the use of gadolinium for MR imaging. As a result, there is increasing interest in noncontrast imaging techniques for biochemical cartilage assessment. Among them, T2 mapping holds promise because of its simplicity, but its biophysical interpretation has been controversial. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We sought to determine whether (1) 3-T delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) and T2 mapping are both capable of detecting cartilage damage at the chondrolabral junction in patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI); and (2) whether there is a correlation between these two techniques for acetabular and femoral head cartilage assessment. METHODS: Thirty-one patients with hip-related symptoms resulting from FAI underwent a preoperative 3-T MRI of their hip that included dGEMRIC and T2 mapping (symptomatic group, 16 women, 15 men; mean age, 27 ± 8 years). Ten volunteers with no symptoms according to the WOMAC served as a control (asymptomatic group, seven women, three men; mean age, 28 ± 3 years). After morphologic cartilage assessment, acetabular and femoral head cartilages were graded according to the modified Outerbridge grading criteria. In the midsagittal plane, single-observer analyses of precontrast T1 values (volunteers), the dGEMRIC index (T1Gd, patients), and T2 mapping values (everyone) were compared in acetabular and corresponding femoral head cartilage at the chondrolabral junction of each hip by region-of-interest analysis. RESULTS: In the symptomatic group, T1Gd and T2 values were lower in the acetabular cartilage compared with corresponding femoral head cartilage (T1Gd: 515 ± 165 ms versus 650 ± 191 ms, p < 0.001; T2: 39 ± 8 ms versus 46 ± 10 ms, p < 0.001). In contrast, the asymptomatic group demonstrated no differences in T1 and T2 values for the acetabular and femoral cartilages with the numbers available (T1: 861 ± 130 ms versus 860 ± 182 ms, p = 0.98; T2: 43 ± 7 ms versus 42 ± 6 ms, p = 0.73). No correlation with the numbers available was noted between the modified Outerbridge grade and T1, T1Gd, or T2 as well as between T2 and either T1 or T1Gd. CONCLUSIONS: Without the need for contrast media application, T2 mapping may be a viable alternative to dGEMRIC when assessing hip cartilage at the chondrolabral junction. However, acquisition-related phenomena as well as regional variations in the microstructure of hip cartilage necessitate an internal femoral head cartilage control when interpreting these results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, diagnostic study.
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
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: Bernd Bittersohl; Harish S Hosalkar; Young-Jo Kim; Stefan Werlen; Klaus A Siebenrock; Tallal C Mamisch Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Florian Schmaranzer; Larissa Arendt; Emanuel F Liechti; Katja Nuss; Brigitte von Rechenberg; Patrick R Kircher; Moritz Tannast Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 4.176
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: 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
Authors: Fernando M Comba; Pablo A Slullitel; Pedro Bronenberg; Gerardo Zanotti; Martin A Buttaro; Francisco Piccaluga Journal: J Hip Preserv Surg Date: 2017-04-12
Authors: Nicholas J Murphy; Jillian Eyles; Kim L Bennell; Megan Bohensky; Alexander Burns; Fraser M Callaghan; Edward Dickenson; Camdon Fary; Stuart M Grieve; Damian R Griffin; Michelle Hall; Rachel Hobson; Young Jo Kim; James M Linklater; David G Lloyd; Robert Molnar; Rachel L O'Connell; John O'Donnell; Michael O'Sullivan; Sunny Randhawa; Stephan Reichenbach; David J Saxby; Parminder Singh; Libby Spiers; Phong Tran; Tim V Wrigley; David J Hunter Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2017-09-26 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Alison A Dallich; Ehud Rath; Ran Atzmon; Joshua R Radparvar; Andrea Fontana; Zachary Sharfman; Eyal Amar Journal: J Hip Preserv Surg Date: 2019-04-16