| Literature DB >> 28073368 |
Torsten Lowitz1, Oleg Museyko1, Valérie Bousson2,3, Christine Chappard2,3, Liess Laouisset2,3, Jean-Denis Laredo2,3, Klaus Engelke4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A change of loading conditions in the knee causes changes in the subchondral bone and may be a cause of osteoarthritis (OA). However, quantification of trabecular architecture in vivo is difficult due to the limiting spatial resolution of the imaging equipment; one approach is the use of texture parameters. In previous studies, we have used digital models to simulate changes of subchondral bone architecture under OA progression. One major result was that, using computed tomography (CT) images, subchondral bone mineral density (BMD) in combination with anisotropy and global homogeneity could characterize this progression. The primary goal of this study was a comparison of BMD, entropy, anisotropy, variogram slope, and local and global inhomogeneity measurements between high-resolution peripheral quantitative CT (HR-pQCT) and CT using human cadaveric knees. The secondary goal was the verification of the spatial resolution dependence of texture parameters observed in the earlier simulations, two important prerequisites for the interpretation of in vivo measurements in OA patients.Entities:
Keywords: Computed tomography; High-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography; Knee OA; Subchondral bone; Texture
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28073368 PMCID: PMC5223490 DOI: 10.1186/s13075-016-1210-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthritis Res Ther ISSN: 1478-6354 Impact factor: 5.156
Fig. 1Axial slice of one specimen obtained from clinical CT using a high-resolution kernel (a) and from HR-pQCT (b)
Fig. 2Multi-planar reformations: transversal (left), coronal (center) and sagittal (right). Top CT dataset with segmented periosteal/articular surface (red) and analysis VOIs (blue); for the CT reconstruction, the high-resolution kernel U70u was applied. Bottom HR-pQCT dataset of the same knee (repositioned) with periosteal/articular surface registered (red) and analysis VOIs (blue) transferred from the CT dataset. The names of the analyses VOIs are only indicated in the femur (top, center) but apply to the tibia as well. For the purpose of illustration, the HR-pQCT was downsampled to the same size as the CT dataset. Each CT image has 512 × 512 pixels with a size of 254 × 254 μm2 each, while the HR-pQCT image consists of 1352 × 1484 pixels with a size of 82 × 82 μm2. Navigation lines were added to every image in order to indicate the relative positions of the reformed slices. cort cortical, mid-epi mid-epiphyseal, sub epi subchondral epiphyseal
Fig. 3a Measured BMD across VOIs for CT and HR-pQCT in tibia and femur with error bars as standard deviations from 57 cadavers. b HR-pQCT results unchanged, CT results corrected by the equation obtained from linear regression in (c). c Linear regression analysis of BMD results. d Bland-Altman plots for corrected trabecular BMD. Upper (lower) LOA: 95% upper (lower) confidence limit (LOA = 1.96 × standard deviation of difference). %err = LOA divided by the mean BMDHR-pQCT. med medial, lat lateral, LOA limit of agreement, S1 subchondral epiphyseal, S2 mid-epiphyseal, S3 juxtaphyseal
Fig. 4Texture parameters measured with CT or HR-pQCT in the VOIs shown in Fig. 2
Texture analysis
| Tibia | Femur | |
|---|---|---|
| Bone mineral density | 1.00 (<0.001) [1.0, 3.64] | 1.00 (<0.001) [0.99, 5.10] |
| Entropy | 0.79 (0.002) [0.93, 0.16] | 0.89 (0.001) [0.86, 0.24] |
| Global inhomogeneity | 0.96 (<0.001) [1.31, –11.0] | 0.68 (0.012) [0.98, 56.0] |
| Local inhomogeneity | 0.67 (0.012) [0.96, 13.0] | 0.22 (0.265) [–0.72, 121]a |
| Anisotropy | 0.96 (<0.001) [0.43, 39.3] | 0.70 (0.011) [0.93, 4.66] |
| Variogram slope | 0.72 (0.008) [0.54, 8.37] | 0.34 (0.136) [0.37, 13.6]a |
Results are shown as R 2 values (p values) [slope, intercept] of linear regression analyses between CT and HR-pQCT results
aNon-significant linear regressions
Fig. 5Comparison (using Bland-Altman plots) of texture parameters measured with CT and HR-pQCT. MEAN mean of CT and HR-pQCT measurements, DIFFERENCE CT measurement in CT – HR-pQCT measurement
Fig. 6Texture parameter ratios D between HR-pQCT and CT measurements. Bars are mean values for 40 digital models simulating a wide variety of trabecular architectures and mean values from twelve trabecular VOIs of 57 cadaveric datasets, respectively. Error bars represent the respective standard deviations. A value of 1 means that the texture parameter does not depend on spatial resolution within the investigated range from about 100 μm (HR-pQCT) to 400 μm (CT)