Akshay S Chaudhari1,2, Marianne S Black1,3, Susanne Eijgenraam4, Wolfgang Wirth5,6, Susanne Maschek5,6, Bragi Sveinsson1, Felix Eckstein5,6, Edwin H G Oei4, Garry E Gold1,2, Brian A Hargreaves1,2,7. 1. Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA. 2. Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA. 3. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA. 4. Department of Radiology & Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands. 5. Institute of Anatomy, Paracelsus Medical University Salzburg and Nuremberg, Salzburg, Austria. 6. Chondrometrics GmbH, Ainring, Germany. 7. Department of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biomarkers for assessing osteoarthritis activity necessitate multiple MRI sequences with long acquisition times. PURPOSE: To perform 5-minute simultaneous morphometry (thickness/volume measurements) and T2 relaxometry of both cartilage and meniscus, and semiquantitative MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Scoring (MOAKS). STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Fifteen healthy volunteers for morphometry and T2 measurements, and 15 patients (five each Kellgren-Lawrence grades 0/2/3) for MOAKS assessment. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 5-minute double-echo steady-state (DESS) sequence was evaluated for generating quantitative and semiquantitative osteoarthritis biomarkers at 3T. ASSESSMENT: Flip angle simulations evaluated tissue signals and sensitivity of T2 measurements. Morphometry and T2 reproducibility was compared against morphometry-optimized and relaxometry-optimized sequences. Repeatability was assessed by scanning five volunteers twice. MOAKS reproducibility was compared to MOAKS derived from a clinical knee MRI protocol by two readers. STATISTICAL TESTS: Coefficients of variation (CVs), concordance confidence intervals (CCI), and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared morphometry and relaxometry measurements with their reference standards. DESS MOAKS positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percentage agreement (NPA), and interreader agreement was calculated using the clinical protocol as a reference. Biomarker variations between Kellgren-Lawrence groups were evaluated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: Cartilage thickness (P = 0.65), cartilage T2 (P = 0.69), and meniscus T2 (P = 0.06) did not significantly differ from their reference standard (with a 20° DESS flip angle). DESS slightly overestimated meniscus volume (P < 0.001). Accuracy and repeatability CVs were <3.3%, except the meniscus T2 accuracy (7.6%). DESS MOAKS had substantial interreader agreement and high PPA/NPA values of 87%/90%. Bone marrow lesions and menisci had slightly lower PPAs. Cartilage and meniscus T2 , and MOAKS (cartilage surface area, osteophytes, cysts, and total score) was higher in Kellgren-Lawrence groups 2 and 3 than group 0 (P < 0.05). DATA CONCLUSION: The 5-minute DESS sequence permits MOAKS assessment for a majority of tissues, along with repeatable and reproducible simultaneous cartilage and meniscus T2 relaxometry and morphometry measurements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1328-1341.
BACKGROUND: Biomarkers for assessing osteoarthritis activity necessitate multiple MRI sequences with long acquisition times. PURPOSE: To perform 5-minute simultaneous morphometry (thickness/volume measurements) and T2 relaxometry of both cartilage and meniscus, and semiquantitative MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Scoring (MOAKS). STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Fifteen healthy volunteers for morphometry and T2 measurements, and 15 patients (five each Kellgren-Lawrence grades 0/2/3) for MOAKS assessment. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A 5-minute double-echo steady-state (DESS) sequence was evaluated for generating quantitative and semiquantitative osteoarthritis biomarkers at 3T. ASSESSMENT: Flip angle simulations evaluated tissue signals and sensitivity of T2 measurements. Morphometry and T2 reproducibility was compared against morphometry-optimized and relaxometry-optimized sequences. Repeatability was assessed by scanning five volunteers twice. MOAKS reproducibility was compared to MOAKS derived from a clinical knee MRI protocol by two readers. STATISTICAL TESTS: Coefficients of variation (CVs), concordance confidence intervals (CCI), and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared morphometry and relaxometry measurements with their reference standards. DESS MOAKS positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percentage agreement (NPA), and interreader agreement was calculated using the clinical protocol as a reference. Biomarker variations between Kellgren-Lawrence groups were evaluated using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS:Cartilage thickness (P = 0.65), cartilage T2 (P = 0.69), and meniscus T2 (P = 0.06) did not significantly differ from their reference standard (with a 20° DESS flip angle). DESS slightly overestimated meniscus volume (P < 0.001). Accuracy and repeatability CVs were <3.3%, except the meniscus T2 accuracy (7.6%). DESS MOAKS had substantial interreader agreement and high PPA/NPA values of 87%/90%. Bone marrow lesions and menisci had slightly lower PPAs. Cartilage and meniscus T2 , and MOAKS (cartilage surface area, osteophytes, cysts, and total score) was higher in Kellgren-Lawrence groups 2 and 3 than group 0 (P < 0.05). DATA CONCLUSION: The 5-minute DESS sequence permits MOAKS assessment for a majority of tissues, along with repeatable and reproducible simultaneous cartilage and meniscus T2 relaxometry and morphometry measurements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2018;47:1328-1341.
Authors: Ali Guermazi; Frank W Roemer; Daichi Hayashi; Michel D Crema; Jingbo Niu; Yuqing Zhang; Monica D Marra; Avinash Katur; John A Lynch; George Y El-Khoury; Kristin Baker; Laura B Hughes; Michael C Nevitt; David T Felson Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2010-12-27 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Marita Cross; Emma Smith; Damian Hoy; Sandra Nolte; Ilana Ackerman; Marlene Fransen; Lisa Bridgett; Sean Williams; Francis Guillemin; Catherine L Hill; Laura L Laslett; Graeme Jones; Flavia Cicuttini; Richard Osborne; Theo Vos; Rachelle Buchbinder; Anthony Woolf; Lyn March Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Ernesto Staroswiecki; Kristin L Granlund; Marcus T Alley; Garry E Gold; Brian A Hargreaves Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Caroline D Jordan; Manojkumar Saranathan; Neal K Bangerter; Brian A Hargreaves; Garry E Gold Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Akshay S Chaudhari; Kathryn J Stevens; Bragi Sveinsson; Jeff P Wood; Christopher F Beaulieu; Edwin H G Oei; Jarrett K Rosenberg; Feliks Kogan; Marcus T Alley; Garry E Gold; Brian A Hargreaves Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-12-23 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Jonathan I Tamir; Valentina Taviani; Marcus T Alley; Becki C Perkins; Lori Hart; Kendall O'Brien; Fidaa Wishah; Jesse K Sandberg; Michael J Anderson; Javier S Turek; Theodore L Willke; Michael Lustig; Shreyas S Vasanawala Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-01-13 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Akshay S Chaudhari; Kathryn J Stevens; Jeff P Wood; Amit K Chakraborty; Eric K Gibbons; Zhongnan Fang; Arjun D Desai; Jin Hyung Lee; Garry E Gold; Brian A Hargreaves Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Bragi Sveinsson; Akshay S Chaudhari; Bo Zhu; Neha Koonjoo; Martin Torriani; Garry E Gold; Matthew S Rosen Journal: Radiol Artif Intell Date: 2021-05-26
Authors: Kevin A Thomas; Dominik Krzemiński; Łukasz Kidziński; Rohan Paul; Elka B Rubin; Eni Halilaj; Marianne S Black; Akshay Chaudhari; Garry E Gold; Scott L Delp Journal: Cartilage Date: 2021-09-08 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Edwin J R van Beek; Christiane Kuhl; Yoshimi Anzai; Patricia Desmond; Richard L Ehman; Qiyong Gong; Garry Gold; Vikas Gulani; Margaret Hall-Craggs; Tim Leiner; C C Tschoyoson Lim; James G Pipe; Scott Reeder; Caroline Reinhold; Marion Smits; Daniel K Sodickson; Clare Tempany; H Alberto Vargas; Meiyun Wang Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2018-08-25 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Akshay S Chaudhari; Zhongnan Fang; Feliks Kogan; Jeff Wood; Kathryn J Stevens; Eric K Gibbons; Jin Hyung Lee; Garry E Gold; Brian A Hargreaves Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2018-03-26 Impact factor: 4.668
Authors: Jacob Thoenen; James W MacKay; Halston J C Sandford; Garry E Gold; Feliks Kogan Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 3.959