Literature DB >> 34219396

Cartilage Topography Assessment With Local-Area Cartilage Segmentation for Knee Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Alexander Mathiessen1, Erin L Ashbeck2, Emily Huang3, Edward John Bedrick4, C Kent Kwoh2, Jeffrey Duryea3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Local-area cartilage segmentation (LACS) software was developed to segment medial femur (MF) cartilage on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Our objectives were 1) to extend LACS to the lateral femur (LF), medial tibia (MT), and lateral tibia (LT), 2) to compare LACS to an established manual segmentation method, and 3) to visualize cartilage responsiveness over each cartilage plate.
METHODS: Osteoarthritis Initiative participants with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) were selected, including knees selected at random (n = 40) and knees identified with loss of cartilage based on manual segmentation (Chondrometrics GmbH), an enriched sample of 126 knees. LACS was used to segment cartilage in the MF, LF, MT, and LT on sagittal 3D double-echo steady-state MRI scans at baseline and at 2-year follow-up. We compared LACS and Chondrometrics average thickness measures by estimating the correlation in each cartilage plate and estimating the standardized response mean (SRM) for 2-year cartilage change. We illustrated cartilage loss topographically with SRM heatmaps.
RESULTS: The estimated correlation between LACS and Chondrometrics measures was r = 0.91 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.86, 0.94) for LF, r = 0.93 (95% CI 0.89, 0.95) for MF, r = 0.97 (95% CI 0.96, 0.98) for LT, and r = 0.87 (95% CI 0.81, 0.91) for MT. Estimated SRMs for LACS and Chondrometrics measures were similar in the random sample, and SRM heatmaps identified subregions of LACS-measured cartilage loss.
CONCLUSION: LACS cartilage thickness measurement in the MF and LF and tibia correlated well with established manual segmentation-based measurement, with similar responsiveness to change, among knees with symptomatic knee OA. LACS measurement of cartilage plate topography enables spatiotemporal analysis of cartilage loss in future knee OA studies.
© 2021 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34219396      PMCID: PMC8727638          DOI: 10.1002/acr.24745

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)        ISSN: 2151-464X            Impact factor:   5.178


  31 in total

Review 1.  Clinical research in OA--the NIH Osteoarthritis Initiative.

Authors:  G Lester
Journal:  J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact       Date:  2008 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.041

2.  Quantitative measurement of medial femoral knee cartilage volume - analysis of the OA Biomarkers Consortium FNIH Study cohort.

Authors:  L F Schaefer; M Sury; M Yin; S Jamieson; I Donnell; S E Smith; J A Lynch; M C Nevitt; J Duryea
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2017-01-30       Impact factor: 6.576

3.  Evolution of semi-quantitative whole joint assessment of knee OA: MOAKS (MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score).

Authors:  D J Hunter; A Guermazi; G H Lo; A J Grainger; P G Conaghan; R M Boudreau; F W Roemer
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2011-05-23       Impact factor: 6.576

4.  Comparison of radiographic joint space width with magnetic resonance imaging cartilage morphometry: analysis of longitudinal data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.

Authors:  Jeffrey Duryea; Gesa Neumann; Jingbo Niu; Saara Totterman; Jose Tamez; Christine Dabrowski; Marie-Pierre Hellio Le Graverand; Monica Luchi; Chan R Beals; David J Hunter
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 4.794

5.  Quantification of cartilage loss in local regions of knee joints using semi-automated segmentation software: analysis of longitudinal data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Authors:  T Iranpour-Boroujeni; A Watanabe; R Bashtar; H Yoshioka; J Duryea
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2010-12-10       Impact factor: 6.576

6.  Baseline radiographic osteoarthritis and semi-quantitatively assessed meniscal damage and extrusion and cartilage damage on MRI is related to quantitatively defined cartilage thickness loss in knee osteoarthritis: the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study.

Authors:  A Guermazi; F Eckstein; D Hayashi; F W Roemer; W Wirth; T Yang; J Niu; L Sharma; M C Nevitt; C E Lewis; J Torner; D T Felson
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 7.  The osteoarthritis initiative: report on the design rationale for the magnetic resonance imaging protocol for the knee.

Authors:  C G Peterfy; E Schneider; M Nevitt
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 6.576

8.  Use of 2D U-Net Convolutional Neural Networks for Automated Cartilage and Meniscus Segmentation of Knee MR Imaging Data to Determine Relaxometry and Morphometry.

Authors:  Berk Norman; Valentina Pedoia; Sharmila Majumdar
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Differences in subchondral bone size after one year in osteoarthritic and healthy knees.

Authors:  M Hudelmaier; W Wirth
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2015-11-10       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  Local area cartilage segmentation: a semiautomated novel method of measuring cartilage loss in knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Jeffrey Duryea; Tannaz Iranpour-Boroujeni; Jamie E Collins; Case Vanwynngaarden; Ali Guermazi; Jeffrey N Katz; Elena Losina; Ruby Russell; Charles Ratzlaff
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.794

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.