Literature DB >> 31240354

[Update: clinical imaging of cartilage-part 1 : Technical aspects].

C Glaser1, A Heuck2, A Horng2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In order to answer clinical therapy-oriented questions, reliable and consistent depiction of articular cartilage across technical platforms is necessary.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Technical standards and developments in cartilage imaging are summarized based on current literature and experience from clinical daily routine.
RESULTS: Clinical questions that need to be answered relate to cross-sectional extent, depth, differentiating cartilaginous from bony components of a lesion and to the lesion's location within the compartment. If present, displaced fragments, concomitant meniscal, ligamentous and/or degenerative lesions should be identified. To date, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the workhorse of cartilage imaging and is largely based on moderately T2-weighted and also proton-density (PD)-weighted fat-suppressed turbo-spin-echo sequences. Direct MR- and CT-arthrography are the gold standard to evaluate thin cartilage layers. Recent advances in coil and MR sequence design, increased availability of 3T-MR scanners and more and more sophisticated acceleration techniques allow for better spatial resolution and more robust image contrast at acceptable scan times. DISCUSSION: As abundant as current developments in clinical routine cartilage imaging may be, the radiologist must carefully select the approach best suited to answering the clinical questions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coils; Computed tomography arthrography; Joint cartilage; Magnetic resonance imaging; Sequences

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31240354     DOI: 10.1007/s00117-019-0561-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiologe        ISSN: 0033-832X            Impact factor:   0.635


  33 in total

1.  About the variability of the shape of the glenoid cavity.

Authors:  L F De Wilde; B M Berghs; E Audenaert; G Sys; G O Van Maele; E Barbaix
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2003-09-19       Impact factor: 1.246

Review 2.  Femoroacetabular impingement magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Suzanne E Anderson; Klaus A Siebenrock; Tallal Charles Mamisch; Moritz Tannast
Journal:  Top Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2009-06

Review 3.  [Imaging of cartilage].

Authors:  C Glaser
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 0.635

4.  Validation of V-SS-PARSE for single-shot flow measurement.

Authors:  Jin Zuo; Mark Bolding; Donald B Twieg
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2006-11-13       Impact factor: 2.546

5.  Vacuum phenomenon: prevalence and appearance in the knee with 3 T magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Flavia A Sakamoto; Carl S Winalski; Jean P Schils; Richard D Parker; Joshua M Polster
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Subchondral bone marrow edema in patients with degeneration of the articular cartilage of the knee joint.

Authors:  Richard Kijowski; Paul Stanton; Jason Fine; Arthur De Smet
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-01-19       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Hip morphology influences the pattern of damage to the acetabular cartilage: femoroacetabular impingement as a cause of early osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  M Beck; M Kalhor; M Leunig; R Ganz
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2005-07

8.  Calcification in calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate (CPPD) crystalline deposits in the knee: anatomic, radiographic, MR imaging, and histologic study in cadavers.

Authors:  M Abreu; K Johnson; C B Chung; J E De Lima; D Trudell; R Terkeltaub; S Pe; D Resnick
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2004-05-11       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  MR arthrography of acetabular cartilage delamination in femoroacetabular cam impingement.

Authors:  Christian W A Pfirrmann; Sylvain R Duc; Marco Zanetti; Claudio Dora; Juerg Hodler
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Comparison of 1.5- and 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint.

Authors:  Richard Kijowski; Donna G Blankenbaker; Kirkland W Davis; Kazuhiko Shinki; Lee D Kaplan; Arthur A De Smet
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-01-21       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.