| Literature DB >> 33071975 |
Ya-Jun Ma1, Saeed Jerban1, Hyungseok Jang1, Douglas Chang2, Eric Y Chang1,3, Jiang Du1.
Abstract
Bone possesses a highly complex hierarchical structure comprised of mineral (~45% by volume), organic matrix (~35%) and water (~20%). Water exists in bone in two forms: as bound water (BW), which is bound to bone mineral and organic matrix, or as pore water (PW), which resides in Haversian canals as well as in lacunae and canaliculi. Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has been increasingly used for assessment of cortical and trabecular bone. However, bone appears as a signal void on conventional MR sequences because of its short T2*. Ultrashort echo time (UTE) sequences with echo times (TEs) 100-1,000 times shorter than those of conventional sequences allow direct imaging of BW and PW in bone. A series of quantitative UTE MRI techniques has been developed for bone evaluation. UTE and adiabatic inversion recovery prepared UTE (IR-UTE) sequences have been developed to quantify BW and PW. UTE magnetization transfer (UTE-MT) sequences have been developed to quantify collagen backbone protons, and UTE quantitative susceptibility mapping (UTE-QSM) sequences have been developed to assess bone mineral.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; UTE; bone mineral density; cortical bone; macromolecular fraction; trabecular bone; water contents
Year: 2020 PMID: 33071975 PMCID: PMC7531487 DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2020.567417
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ISSN: 1664-2392 Impact factor: 5.555
Comparing quantitative MRI techniques for bone imaging.
| Basic UTE (+ phantom imaging) ( | Total water proton density | High | - Significantly correlated positively with cortical bone porosity and negatively with BMD (μCT) ( | |
| IR-UTE (+ phantom imaging) ( | Bound water proton density | Moderate | - Significantly correlated positively with cortical bone stiffness, strength, and toughness to fracture ( | |
| DAEF-UTE (+ phantom imaging) ( | Pore water proton density | Moderate | - Significantly correlated positively with bone porosity (μCT) and negatively with stiffness, strength, and toughness to fracture ( | |
| IR-UTE and UTE subtraction (+ phantom imaging) ( | Pore water proton density | Moderate | - Significantly correlated positively with cortical bone porosity and negatively with BMD (μCT) ( | |
| Bicomponent UTE fitting ( | T2*s of bound and pore water, as well as bound water to total water ratio | Low | - Pore water fraction was significantly correlated positively with cortical bone porosity (μCT and histomorphometry) and negatively with BMD, stiffness, and strength (negatively) ( | |
| Tricomponent UTE fitting ( | T2*s of bound, pore water and fat, as well as bound and fat to total water ratios | Low | - Pore water fraction was significantly correlated positively with cortical bone porosity (μCT) and negatively with BMD, stiffness, and strength ( | |
| UTE to IR-UTE signal fraction ( | Total and bound water ratio | Moderate | - Significantly correlated positively with cortical bone porosity (μCT) and age ( | |
| Dual TE signal fraction ( | Pore and total water ratio | High | - Significantly correlated positively with cortical bone porosity (μCT) and donor age and negatively with mechanical stiffness and collagen estimation from near infrared spectroscopy ( | |
| Basic UTE signal decomposition model ( | Bound and pore water ratio | High | - Pore water fraction was significantly correlated positively with subject age ( | |
| UTE-MT modeling ( | Macromolecular proton to total proton ratio | Low | - Significantly correlated negatively with cortical bone porosity (μCT and Histomorphometry) and positively with BMD, stiffness, and strength ( | |
| UTE-MT modeling and Basic UTE (+ phantom imaging) ( | Macromolecular proton density | Low | - Significantly correlated negatively with cortical bone porosity (μCT) and subject age ( | |
| UTE QSM ( | Magnetic susceptibility (BMD estimation) | Low | - Significantly correlated negatively with cortical bone porosity (μCT) and positively with BMD ( | |
| Basic UTE at 31P frequency ( | Phosphorous content (BMD estimation) | Moderate | - Feasibility studies were performed ( | |
| SPIR UTE ( | Bound water T2* | Moderate | - Correlated positively with cortical bone porosity (μCT) ( | |
| IR-UTE ( | Bound water content | Moderate | - Feasibility studies were performed ( |
Figure 1Bone water concentration was estimated by comparison of signal intensity of bone (thick arrows) relative to that of a water calibration phantom (thin arrows) using UTE (A) and IR-UTE (B) sequences, providing a bone water concentration estimation of 22.2 ± 2.7% and 16.8 ± 1.9%, respectively. This figure was previously presented by Du et al. (38). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 2Generated TW proton density (TWPD), BW proton density (BWPD) and PW proton density (PWPD) maps for two young healthy volunteers (34- and 35-year-old female) and two old volunteers, (75- and 76-year-old female). In older individuals, PWPDs were higher and BWPDs were lower compared with the younger group. This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (44). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 3PW (top row) and BW (bottom row) proton density maps of tibial midshaft in five different subjects (two men and three women aged 24, 24, 49, 30, and 26 years). Maps are overlaid on UTE MRI images. This figure was previously presented by Manhard et al. (41). Reprinting permission is granted from Radiology journal (RSNA). This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 4MRI-based and histomorphometric analyses for three representative ROIs at three different cortical bone layers. Selected ROIs at three different bone layers on a representative bone specimen (male, 71-year-old) illustrated on (A) UTE MRI (TE = 32 μs, 250 μm pixel size), (B) μCT (9 μm pixel size) and (C) histology (H&E-stained, 0.2 μm pixel size) images. Bicomponent exponential fitting of the T2* decay within (D) ROI-1, (E) ROI-2, and (F) ROI-3. The oscillating actual data points indicate the presence of fat particularly in ROI-1 and ROI-2 near the endosteum. Pore size distribution obtained from histomorphometric analyses are shown for (G) ROI-1, (H) ROI-2, and (I) ROI-3. Histomorphometric porosity and pore size for ROI-1 to−3 are 33.1, 13.9 and 7.1% and 221, 83 and 49 μm, respectively. The μCT-based porosities are 21.2, 8.2, and 1.7% for ROIs-1 to−3, respectively. This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (51). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 5UTE MRI image and μCT images of two representative cortical bone strips harvested from different donors possessing different levels of porosities, in addition to bicomponent and tricomponent T2* fitting results. (A) UTE MRI (TE = 0.032 ms) image of a set of cortical bone strips with ~4 × 2 mm cross-sections soaked in fomblin, which has no signal in MRI. (B,C) μCT images of representative cortical bone strips from a 47-year-old male and 57-year-old female, respectively. (D,E) Bicomponent T2* fittings for the bone strips shown in (B) and (C), respectively. (F,G) Tricomponent T2* fitting for bone strips shown in (A,B), respectively. The oscillating signal decay in cortical bone specimens is better fitted by including the signal contribution of fat using the tri-component model (higher fitting R2 values). This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (53). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 6(A) μCT image of a representative tibial specimen (male, 73-year-old) focused on anterior tibia with two selected ROIs in middle and outer layers. Measured porosity (Po) in middle layer (ROI-1.2) is higher than that of outer layer (ROI-1.3). The two-pool MT modeling analyses in (B) ROI-1.2 and (C) ROI-1.3 using three pulse saturation powers (500° in blue, 1,000° in green and 1,500° in red) and five frequency offsets (2, 5, 10, 20, 50 kHz). MMF and T2MM refer to macromolecular fraction and macromolecular T2, respectively. This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (61). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 7(A) Macromolecular fraction (MMF) from MT modeling, (B) μCT-based porosity and (C) histomorphometry-based pore size maps of a representative anterior tibial bone specimen (male, 71-year-old). This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (51). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 8Generated MMF and macromolecular proton density (MMPD) maps for two young healthy volunteers (34- and 35-year-old females) and two old volunteers (75- and 76-year-old females). In older individuals, MMF and MMPD were lower compared with the younger group. This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (44). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 9(A) Quantitative susceptibility map (QSM) using Cones 3D UTE MRI scans (0.5 × 0.5 × 2 mm voxel size) of a representative tibial midshaft cortical bone (45-year-old female), (B) μCT-based volumetric bone mineral density (BMD) map of the same specimen. Local maxima in the QSM map clearly correspond to the regions of high BMD in μCT-based maps. This figure was previously presented by Jerban et al. (64). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 10Proximal femur bone images in a male subject (58-year-old). (A) 1H proton image at TE≈1 ms, (B) 1H proton UTE image at TE≈0.08 ms, and (C) 31P UTE image at TE≈0.08 ms. This figure was previously presented by Robson et al. (66). The reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 11In vivo imaging of the spine of a 36-year-old male volunteer using the 3D IR-UTE-Cones sequence with TEs of 0.032, 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, and 2.2 ms. Single-component fitting is achieved for a selected vertebra with a short T2* of 0.31 ± 0.01 ms, which demonstrates that long T2 water and marrow fat are sufficiently suppressed in the IR-UTE-Cones images. This figure was previously presented by Ma et al. (68). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.
Figure 12In vivo qualitative and quantitative imaging of the spine of a 31-year-old male volunteer using the 3D IR-UTE-Cones sequence. The long T2 muscle and fat are bright in the clinical T2-FSE image (A). (B) 3D IR-UTE-Cones image after coil sensitivity correction. (C) PD map of the spine trabecular bone. This figure was previously presented by Ma et al. (68). Reprinting permission is granted through Rightslink system. This figure is modified for presentation purposes. Minor modifications were performed for presentation purposes.