M P F Janssen1, M J M Peters1, E G M Steijvers-Peeters2, P Szomolanyi3, E M C Jutten1, L W van Rhijn1, L Peterson4, A Lindahl5, S Trattnig3, P J Emans1. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 2. Scannexus Ultra High-Field MRI Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands. 3. High-Field MR Center, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 4. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 5. Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the morphological and biochemical quality of cartilage transplants and surrounding articular cartilage of patients 25 years after perichondrium transplantation (PT) and autologous chondrocyte transplantation (ACT) as measured by ultra-high-field 7-Tesla (7T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to present these findings next to clinical outcome. DESIGN: Seven PT patients and 5 ACT patients who underwent surgery on the femoral condyle between 1986 and 1996 were included. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed by the clinical questionnaires: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for knee pain. The morphological (MOCART score) and biochemical quality (glycosaminoglycans [GAGs] content and collagen integrity) of cartilage transplants and surrounding articular cartilage were analyzed by 7T MRI. The results of the PT and ACT patients were compared. Finally, a detailed morphological analysis of the grafts alone was performed. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found for the PROMs and MOCART scores of PT and ACT patients. Evaluation of the graft alone showed poor repair tissue quality and high prevalence of intralesional osteophyte formation in both the PT and ACT patients. Penetration of the graft surface by the intralesional osteophyte was related to biochemically damaged opposing tibial cartilage; GAG content was significantly lower in patients with an osteophyte penetrating the graft surface. CONCLUSIONS: Both PT and ACT patients have a high incidence of intralesional osteophyte formation 25 years after surgery. The resulting biochemical damage to the opposing tibial cartilage might be dependent on osteophyte morphology.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the morphological and biochemical quality of cartilage transplants and surrounding articular cartilage of patients 25 years after perichondrium transplantation (PT) and autologous chondrocyte transplantation (ACT) as measured by ultra-high-field 7-Tesla (7T) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and to present these findings next to clinical outcome. DESIGN: Seven PT patients and 5 ACT patients who underwent surgery on the femoral condyle between 1986 and 1996 were included. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed by the clinical questionnaires: Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for knee pain. The morphological (MOCART score) and biochemical quality (glycosaminoglycans [GAGs] content and collagen integrity) of cartilage transplants and surrounding articular cartilage were analyzed by 7T MRI. The results of the PT and ACT patients were compared. Finally, a detailed morphological analysis of the grafts alone was performed. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found for the PROMs and MOCART scores of PT and ACT patients. Evaluation of the graft alone showed poor repair tissue quality and high prevalence of intralesional osteophyte formation in both the PT and ACT patients. Penetration of the graft surface by the intralesional osteophyte was related to biochemically damaged opposing tibial cartilage; GAG content was significantly lower in patients with an osteophyte penetrating the graft surface. CONCLUSIONS: Both PT and ACT patients have a high incidence of intralesional osteophyte formation 25 years after surgery. The resulting biochemical damage to the opposing tibial cartilage might be dependent on osteophyte morphology.
Knee injuries are very common and often seen in otherwise healthy, active patients.
Several surgical treatments for focal cartilage defects have been developed
aiming to prevent further deterioration of the knee joint, provide pain relief, and
increase functional outcomes.
Two of these techniques are perichondrium transplantation (PT) and autologous
chondrocyte transplantation (ACT), which aimed at restoring the hyaline cartilage
tissue using a perichondrium flap or cultured chondrocytes combined with a
periosteum flap respectively.[3-7]Short-term follow-up results of PT were reported by Homminga et al.
and Bouwmeester et al. who concluded that the outcome of the
surgery was poor.[5,7]
Long-term results of PT were described by Janssen et al., who found
that patient characteristics (i.e., time of symptoms prior to surgery, previous
surgery in the index knee, and patient age) influence the outcome of PT at a
follow-up of 22 years.
The previous results of ACT were described by Peterson et
al., who found that after 10 to 20 years of follow-up, 92% of the
patients were satisfied and would have the surgery again.
Intralesional osteophytes occurred frequently after both PT and
ACT.[10,11] The cause of the frequent occurrence of intralesional
osteophytes was not specifically investigated, but previous marrow stimulation
techniques and the osteogenic potential of perichondrial and periosteal tissue are
described to increase their occurrence.[12,13] Increased calcification of
cartilage repair tissue is known to impair the outcome of the surgery on a
short-term follow-up.
This impaired outcome is expected to persist at the long-term follow-up, but
long-term results of cartilage repair surgery are scarce in literature. However,
they are of great value to assess whether the initial goals of surgery were
achieved.Postoperative evaluation of cartilage repair tissue is important to assess the
performance of cartilage repair procedures and to evaluate the different phases of
repair, function, and degradation over time. Close insights in these phases will
lead to better understanding of the process and improve cartilage repair strategies.
Conventional modalities to follow patients after cartilage repair surgery include
plain radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Conventional radiography can
sometimes visualize intralesional osteophytes and is helpful in grading the degree
of late osteoarthritis (OA) as it visualizes joint space narrowing, osteophytes,
sclerosis, and bony remodeling as a result of cartilage loss. MRI provides direct
visualization of articular cartilage and surrounding soft-tissue structures, as well
as bone marrow edema that can be involved in the OA disease process,
and allows for a comprehensive evaluation of repair tissue from the articular
joint surface to the bone-cartilage interface and the subchondral bone.In 2017, the first 7 Tesla (7T) MR scanner (TERRA, Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen,
Germany) was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Conformité
Européenne (CE) certified in Europe, thus translating the so far experimental
ultra-high-field MR (7 Tesla) into clinical routine examinations of the knee joint.
With 7T MR, significantly higher, signal-to-noise ratios can be achieved compared to
3 Tesla, which provides higher spatial resolution in morphological imaging by a mean
factor of 2.
The higher signal-to-noise ratio allows depiction of small fissures and
incomplete cartilage repair tissue integration
and the detection of smaller physiological effects. On the downside,
challenges of scanning at higher field strength include faster heating of tissue
(specific absorption rate [SAR] limits), more intense metallic artifacts and more
susceptibility artifacts at the transition between tissues with different densities
caused by more field heterogeneities.
The added value of 7T MRI lies within dedicated quantitative MR techniques
that allow measurement of the biochemical properties of cartilage. Healthy cartilage
is characterized by a high concentration of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) and a
well-organized collagen network. Both the GAG content and the organization of the
collagen network are important indicators for repair tissue quality after treatment.
GAGs carry protons that are in constant chemical exchange with surrounding
bulk water protons. Using high-field MRI and a dedicated GAG Chemical Exchange
Saturation Transfer (gagCEST) imaging sequence, these protons bound to GAG can be
selectively labeled by saturation with a radiofrequency pulse. The label will then
be transferred to the bulk water by chemical exchange which results in a reduction
of the bulk water signal. This reduction in signal is a measure for the ratio of
protons bound to GAG and the bulk water protons and is thereby an indirect measure
for the GAG content.
An advantage of gagCEST is that it can be performed without a contrast agent
and using a regular proton coil, as opposed to dGEMRIC which requires a contrast
agent and sodium imaging which requires a sodium coil to assess the GAG content. On
the downside, the acquisition and postprocessing steps of gagCEST are complex and
scanning on high-field MRI is required to be able to detect the small difference
between the signal of bulk water protons and GAG bound protons.Collagen network integrity is measured by T2 mapping. Disruption of the collagen
structure increases the mobility of protons and therefore produces higher T2
relaxation times. Furthermore, the well-organized structure of collagen matrix in
healthy cartilage gives rise to a zonal difference in T2 relaxation times between
the deep layer and the superficial layer which is absent in degenerated cartilage.The first aim of this study was to evaluate the morphological and biochemical quality
of cartilage transplants and the status of the articular cartilage of patients 25
years after PT and ACT as measured by ultra-high-field 7T MRI and to present these
findings next to clinical outcome. The second aim was to assess intralesional
osteophyte formation of the transplants and evaluate its effect on the quality of
opposing tibial cartilage, as measured by 7T MRI.
Materials and Methods
Patient Population
Perichondrium transplantation patients and ACT patients who underwent surgery
between 1986 and 1996 were included from 2 different databases. The PT database
consisted of 88 Dutch patients and the ACT database consisted of 400 Swedish
patients. To optimize the comparison of the cartilage tissue, only patients with
a repaired cartilage defect on the femoral condyle were included. Furthermore,
for Dutch PT patients specifically: they needed to be willing to visit the
outpatient clinic and undergo a 7T MRI scan in Maastricht; for Swedish ACT
patients specifically: they needed to be willing to travel to the Netherlands
and undergo a 7T MRI scan in Maastricht. All participants had to approve that
coincidental findings would be reported to their general practitioner and
approve storing and use of their data for research purposes. Exclusion criteria
were knee arthroplasty in the area of the transplant (i.e., total-, hemi-knee
arthroplasty); major surgery of transplant in the knee (e.g., patellectomy and
microfracture); severe OA (e.g., grade-4 Kellgren and Lawrence classification);
contra-indications for 7T MRI scanning. The in- and exclusion criteria, combined
with our very long-term follow-up in which a considerable number of patients
developed severe OA caused eligibility for only 12 patients to be enrolled in
our study.Perichondrium transplantation patients were notified of plans to perform 7T MRI
scanning of the transplants for research purposes at the time of participation
in the long-term follow-up study of PT.
An information letter to explain the study was sent to eligible patients.
A week thereafter, the patients were contacted by phone by the research
physician (M.J.) to answer questions if any and to ask whether they were willing
to participate in the study. Eligible ACT patients were contacted by phone by
their surgeon (L.P.) to explain the study and to ask whether they were willing
to participate.This study was performed in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as
revised in 2013, and the protocol was accepted by the medical ethical committee
of the Maastricht University Medical Center (NL48277.068.14/METC 142039) in
which patients gave their written informed consent. Participants from Sweden
signed a certified, translated version of the written informed consent,
translated by Metamorfose Vertalingen, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Surgical Procedures
A comprehensive description of the surgical procedures has been reported before
by Homminga et al., Bouwmeester et al. for PT,
and by Peterson et al. for ACT.[5,7,9,10,22] In short, PT is a
one-stage procedure. A piece of perichondrium was dissected from the
cartilaginous part of one of the lower ribs and removed together with its
cambium layer. The graft was cut to match the size of the defect. Subsequently,
the perichondral graft was placed in the defect with the chondral side facing up
and attached with fibrin glue.[5,10]Autologous chondrocyte transplantation includes 2 surgical procedures. During the
first surgical procedure, cartilage tissue was harvested from a healthy,
nonweight-bearing part of the cartilage. From this tissue, chondrocytes were
retrieved and cultured in a laboratory for several weeks. During the second
surgical procedure, the chondrocytes from the cell culture were injected into
the defect under a periosteal flap.
Patients were asked to complete 3 clinical questionnaires at the time of MRI
acquisition: the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC),
the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)
(Validated Swedish version),
and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for knee pain.
MRI Acquisition
Morphological and biochemical MRI measurements were performed on a 7T MR whole
body system (Magnetom, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) using a 28-channel
proton knee coil (QED, Electrodynamics LLC, Cleveland, OH). Before acquiring MRI
data, the homogeneity of the main magnetic field (B0) was optimized
by a B0 shim. The radiofrequency pulse (B1) was optimized
by acquiring a B1 map. To avoid motion artifacts, the leg was
stabilized using a vacuum cushion underneath the lower leg.The morphological protocol included a 3-dimensional (3D) T2 dual-echo
steady-state (DESS) sequence. The T2 DESS sequence was obtained for the complete
knee in sagittal plane. Furthermore, a 2-dimensional (2D) sagittal
proton-density (PD) weighted fast spin-echo (FSE) sequence with fat suppression
(fatsat) was obtained. The biochemical protocol included T2 mapping and gagCEST
sequences.The T2 relaxation times were obtained from T2 maps that were reconstructed using
a multi-echo, spin-echo technique, using a custom written Matlab script.
The T2 mapping protocol was obtained in sagittal direction. Due to SAR
restrictions, only the femoral condyle containing the cartilage repair tissue
region was acquired. The obtained T2 relaxation times are a measure for collagen
integrity: the higher the T2 relaxation time, the lower the integrity of the
collagen network.For gagCEST imaging, a 3D radiofrequency (RF) spoiled gradient echo (GRE)
sequence including 19 saturation RF pulses was acquired. One additional
measurement without the presaturation pulses was acquired. Residual transversal
magnetization signal was spoiled by gradient spoiling. The applied B1
amplitude of the saturation pulses was set to a minimum of 0.8 µT and adapted
for each individual to the maximum value possible in relation to SAR, to achieve
optimal saturation. The separate saturation measurements were postprocessed into
colored GAG maps using a custom made Matlab script which determined the
magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry (MTRasym) in the calculated
z-spectra.
The MTRasym value is a measure for GAG content: the higher the MTRasym
value, the higher the GAG content.
Imaging parameters for the morphological and biochemical sequences are
presented in
.
Table 1.
Imaging Parameters for Morphological Sequences T2 DESS and PD Fatsat FSE
and for Biochemical Sequences T2 mapping and gagCEST.
T2 DESS
PD Fatsat FSE
T2mapping
gagCEST
Repetition time (ms)
8.90
7,440
2,200
6.90
Echo time (ms)
2.63
36
13.8, 27.6, 41.4, 55.2, 69.0, 82.8
2.84
Flip angle (°)
18
180
180
9
Field of view (mm2)
160 × 160
160 × 160
136 × 160
157 × 180
Matrix size
320 × 320
864 × 864
320 × 272
192 × 168
Voxel size (mm3)
0.5 × 0.5 × 0.5
0.4 × 0.4 × 2.5
0.5 × 0.5 × 3.0
0.9 × 0.9 × 2.2
Acceleration factor (GRAPPA)
3
3
2
2
Acquisition time (min)
05:00
08:42
10:57
20:04
DESS = dual echo steady state; PD = proton-density; FSE = fast
spin-echo; gagCEST = glycosaminoglycan Chemical Exchange Saturation
Transfer.
Imaging Parameters for Morphological Sequences T2 DESS and PD Fatsat FSE
and for Biochemical Sequences T2 mapping and gagCEST.DESS = dual echo steady state; PD = proton-density; FSE = fast
spin-echo; gagCEST = glycosaminoglycan Chemical Exchange Saturation
Transfer.
MRI Analysis
The morphological MR data sets were transferred to a freeware JiveX imaging
viewer (VISUS Technology Transfer GmbH, Bochum, Germany). The Magnetic Resonance
Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue (MOCART)
was used to assess the cartilage transplant tissue and was scored
together with the cartilage quality in the rest of the joint by the senior
author (S.T.; radiologist with over 25 years of experience in musculoskeletal
imaging), in consensus with a resident orthopedic surgeon (M.J.). In case of any
uncertainties, an experienced orthopedic surgeon with over 10 years of
experience in cartilage repair of the knee (P.E.) was consulted.The morphological MR data sets as well as the postprocessed biochemical T2 maps
and GAG maps were transferred to OsiriX imaging software (v.9.0.2, Pixmeo,
Switzerland) and analyzed based on a region of interest (ROI) approach. The
resolution of the biochemical T2 maps and GAG maps were adapted to the
resolution of the morphological DESS images by linear interpolation. As the
images were acquired in the same plane, only translation according to their
DICOM tags was necessary to register the images. No motion correction was
applied; however, the overlay was manually checked by comparing anatomical
landmarks in both sequences and adjusted when deemed necessary. Regions of
interest were manually drawn in the DESS morphological image of each patient by
2 independent readers (M.J. and M.P.), the ROIs were finalized after consensus.
The inclusion of cartilage pixels only was ensured; no bone pixels or joint
fluid pixels were included in the ROIs. Per patient, regions were selected in a
slice showing the defect clearly (
) and regions were selected in a control slice (
). Six ROIs were drawn per patient; a defect ROI (referred to as
defect) with anterior and posterior adjacent ROIs in the
femur (referred to as adj_A and adj_P,
respectively); an ROI in the tibia cartilage opposite to the defect between the
area covered by the meniscus (referred to as tibia); a control
ROI in the posterior part of the femur (referred to as
c_femur); and a control tibia ROI (referred to as
c_tibia). The ROIs were subsequently transferred to the
coregistered GAG maps and T2 maps. In case of the GAG maps, the mean MTRasym
value within each ROI was extracted (see
and
) as a measure of GAG content. In case of the T2 maps, the mean T2
relaxation time within each ROI as a whole (global T2 relaxation time) as well
as within the deep zone and the superficial zone specifically (deep zone T2
relaxation time and superficial zone T2 relaxation time, respectively) were
extracted (see
and
), as a measure for the collagen integrity.
Figure 1.
Example of ROIs in a slice with defect: (A) original image,
T2 DESS, (B) image with ROIs to obtain MTRasym and global
T2 relaxation times: defect ROI in red (defect); anterior adjacent ROI
in yellow (adj_A); posterior adjacent ROI in orange (adj_P); tibia ROI
in blue (tibia), and (C) image with ROIs divided in a deep
zone (dark colors) and a superficial zone (light colors) to obtain zonal
T2 relaxation times. ROI = region of interest; DESS = dual echo steady
state; MTRasym = magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.
Figure 2.
Example of ROIs in a control slice: (A) original T2 DESS
image and (B) image with control ROIs to obtain MTRasym and
global T2 relaxation times. Control region in the femur is presented in
green (c_femur), control region for the tibia from meniscus to meniscus
is presented in blue (c_tibia). (C) Image with control ROIs
divided in a deep zone (dark colors) and a superficial zone (light
colors) to obtain zonal T2 relaxation times. ROI = region of interest;
DESS = dual echo steady state; MTRasym = magnetization transfer ratio
asymmetry.
Example of ROIs in a slice with defect: (A) original image,
T2 DESS, (B) image with ROIs to obtain MTRasym and global
T2 relaxation times: defect ROI in red (defect); anterior adjacent ROI
in yellow (adj_A); posterior adjacent ROI in orange (adj_P); tibia ROI
in blue (tibia), and (C) image with ROIs divided in a deep
zone (dark colors) and a superficial zone (light colors) to obtain zonal
T2 relaxation times. ROI = region of interest; DESS = dual echo steady
state; MTRasym = magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.Example of ROIs in a control slice: (A) original T2 DESS
image and (B) image with control ROIs to obtain MTRasym and
global T2 relaxation times. Control region in the femur is presented in
green (c_femur), control region for the tibia from meniscus to meniscus
is presented in blue (c_tibia). (C) Image with control ROIs
divided in a deep zone (dark colors) and a superficial zone (light
colors) to obtain zonal T2 relaxation times. ROI = region of interest;
DESS = dual echo steady state; MTRasym = magnetization transfer ratio
asymmetry.
Calcification Thickness
Calcification was scored in the T2 DESS morphological image of each patient by 2
independent readers (M.J. and M.P.), the ROIs were finalized after consensus.
The used technique is an adaptation from the technique used by Demange and colleagues.
An ROI was drawn that included the calcified area of the graft. The
percentage of calcification was calculated by dividing the
number of calcified pixels within the graft by the number of pixels in the total
graft. Subsequently, patients with a calcification percentage of less than 50%
were given calcification percentage score 0, patients with a calcification
percentage of more than 50% were given calcification percentage score 1.
Furthermore, the thickness of the calcification was scored.
Patients with a calcification penetrating the surface of the cartilage layer,
thus with the calcification being in direct contact with the opposing tibial
cartilage, were given a calcification thickness score of 1. Patients with a
calcification that was still covered by a layer of cartilage (regardless of the
thickness of that layer of cartilage) preventing direct contact between the
calcification and the opposing tibial cartilage were given a calcification
thickness score of 0. Examples of the calcification scores are provided in
. Subsequently, the influence of the calcification of the cartilage
grafts was compared to the quality of the opposing cartilage tissue.
Figure 3.
Examples of the calcification scoring with the calcification presented in
white: (A) a calcification covering 18% of the defect with
a substantial layer of cartilage between the calcification and the
opposing tibial cartilage, (B) a calcification covering
less than half of the defect with contact of the calcification with the
opposing tibial cartilage, and (C) a calcification covering
more than half of the defect with no layer of cartilage between the
calcification and the opposing tibial cartilage. ACT = autologous
chondrocyte transplantation; PT = perichondrium transplantation.
Examples of the calcification scoring with the calcification presented in
white: (A) a calcification covering 18% of the defect with
a substantial layer of cartilage between the calcification and the
opposing tibial cartilage, (B) a calcification covering
less than half of the defect with contact of the calcification with the
opposing tibial cartilage, and (C) a calcification covering
more than half of the defect with no layer of cartilage between the
calcification and the opposing tibial cartilage. ACT = autologous
chondrocyte transplantation; PT = perichondrium transplantation.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS statistics, version 25 (IBM,
Armonk, New York). Normality was tested by a Shapiro-Wilk test. Differences
between PT and ACT patients were assessed by an independent
t-test in case of normality and a Mann-Whitney
U-test otherwise. Differences between regions were
evaluated by a paired samples t-test in case of normality and a
Wilcoxon Signed-Rank test otherwise. Differences were considered statistically
significant when the P value was below .05.
Results
Description of Patient Population
Seven PT patients and 5 ACT patients were willing to be included in the study.
Baseline demographics are provided in
. Time between surgery and MRI follow-up was similar for the PT patients
and the ACT patients, on average 28.1 years for PT and 24.0 years for ACT
(P value .213). Defect size was larger in the ACT patients
compared to the PT patients (3.9 cm2 and 2.1 cm2,
respectively, P value .048). No adverse events or serious
adverse events occurred during this study.
Table 2.
Patient Characteristics for the Dutch PT Patients (PT1-PT7) and the Five
Swedish ACT Patients (ACT1-ACT5) Including Mean Values, Standard
Deviation (SD) and P Values for the Numeric
Characteristics.
Patient Characteristics for the Dutch PT Patients (PT1-PT7) and the Five
Swedish ACT Patients (ACT1-ACT5) Including Mean Values, Standard
Deviation (SD) and P Values for the Numeric
Characteristics.PT = perichondrium transplantation; ACT = autologous chondrocyte
transplantation; kg/m2 = kilograms per square meter;
cm2 = square centimeter; SD = standard deviation; MFC
= medial femoral condyle; LFC = lateral femoral condyle.
Clinical Outcome at Time of MRI
The IKDC, KOOS, and VAS questionnaire scores of each individual patient at the
time of MRI acquisition are presented in
. No statistically significant difference was found between the
questionnaire scores of the PT patients and the ACT patients.
Table 3.
Individual Scoring Parameters Including the IKDC, KOOS and VAS
Questionnaire Scores Were Used to Assess Clinical Outcome.
Patient Number
IKDC
KOOS
VAS
MOCART Score
Cartilage Quality in the Rest of
the Joint
Pain
Other Symptoms
Function in Daily Living
Function in Sport and Recreation
Knee-Related Quality of Life
PT1
86.2
94.4
75.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
5
65
Moderate degeneration
PT2
60.9
84.4
92.9
95.6
75.0
68.8
20
85
Early degeneration
PT3
26.4
16.7
50.0
16.2
0.0
0.0
85
75
Early-moderate degeneration
PT4
88.5
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
5
80
Early degeneration
PT5
73.6
100.0
96.4
100.0
90.0
83.3
0
65
Early degeneration
PT6
75.9
100.0
82.1
100.0
80.0
75.0
0
85
Early-moderate degeneration
PT7
34.5
25.0
28.6
22.1
0.0
12.5
80
60
Early-severe degeneration
Mean
63.7
74.4
75.0
76.3
63.6
63.8
27.9
73.6
N.A.
SD
24.6
37.1
26.6
39.1
44.4
40.5
38.0
10.3
N.A.
ACT1
79.3
88.9
53.6
97.1
80.0
56.3
10
80
Early-severe degeneration
ACT2
43.7
77.8
39.3
70.6
35.0
50.0
30
55
Early-severe degeneration
ACT3
74.7
75.0
60.7
92.6
35.0
87.5
0
80
Early-moderate degeneration
ACT4
72.4
91.7
78.6
83.8
45.0
62.5
20
65
Early degeneration
ACT5
80.5
97.2
89.3
100.0
90.0
93.8
30
75
Early-severe degeneration
Mean
70.1
86.1
64.1
88.8
57.0
70.0
18.0
71.0
N.A.
SD
15.1
9.4
19.9
11.9
26.1
19.5
13.8
10.8
N.A.
P value
.867
.639
.432
.639
.639
.876
.755
.639
N.A.
The MRI-based MOCART score was used to assess the cartilage
transplant quality and was scored together with the cartilage
quality in the rest of the joint by the senior author (S.T.).
Overall cartilage quality was divided in the categories: no
degeneration, early degeneration, moderate degeneration and severe
degeneration. Mean values with standard deviation (SD) for the PT
patients and the ACT patients were included.
IKDC = International Knee Documentation Committee; KOOS = Knee injury
and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; VAS = Visual Analogue Scale;
MOCART = Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue;
PT = perichondrium transplantation; N.A. = Not applicable; SD =
standard deviation; ACT = autologous chondrocyte
transplantation.
Individual Scoring Parameters Including the IKDC, KOOS and VAS
Questionnaire Scores Were Used to Assess Clinical Outcome.The MRI-based MOCART score was used to assess the cartilage
transplant quality and was scored together with the cartilage
quality in the rest of the joint by the senior author (S.T.).
Overall cartilage quality was divided in the categories: no
degeneration, early degeneration, moderate degeneration and severe
degeneration. Mean values with standard deviation (SD) for the PT
patients and the ACT patients were included.IKDC = International Knee Documentation Committee; KOOS = Knee injury
and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; VAS = Visual Analogue Scale;
MOCART = Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue;
PT = perichondrium transplantation; N.A. = Not applicable; SD =
standard deviation; ACT = autologous chondrocyte
transplantation.
Morphological Assessment and MOCART Score
The morphological MR images of the 7 PT patients and the 5 ACT patients were
available for assessment of the transplant by means of the MOCART score. The
outcome of the 10 MOCART criteria per patient are presented in the
. The overall MOCART score and the cartilage quality in the rest of the
joint are presented in
for each individual patient. The cartilage quality in the rest of the
joint was varying from no degeneration to severe degeneration. The overall
MOCART score was similar for the PT patients and the ACT patients (mean score
73.6 and 71.0 respectively, P value = .639).Evaluation of the graft alone showed similar intralesional osteophyte formation
in the perichondrium transplants compared to the autologous chondrocyte
transplants (
). In 5 of the 12 patients, the grafts were calcified more than 50%, and
also in 5 of the 12 patients the calcification penetrated the surface of the
graft.
shows an overview of the biochemical values of cartilage in the
specified ROIs. The biochemical values for each of the 6 regions are presented
next to the overall MOCART score per patient in
. Paired samples t-test showed that GAG content in the
defect region as well as in the adjacent regions was significantly lower than
the GAG content in the control ROI. The MTRasym value in the tibia cartilage
opposing the defect was similar to the MTRasym value of control tibia cartilage,
suggesting similar GAG content in both regions. Paired samples
t-test showed significantly higher global T2 relaxation
times for the defect region and for anterior adjacent region, compared to the
femur control region. The global T2 relaxation times in the tibia region
opposing the defect were similar to global T2 relaxation times in the control
tibia cartilage, suggesting similar collagen integrity for both regions.
Figure 4.
MTRasym values (A) and global T2 relaxation times
(B) for the 6 different ROIs. The regions in the femur
are displayed on the left side of the dotted line, and regions in the
tibia are presented on the right side of the dotted line. Red asterisks
represent statistically significant differences between regions. MTRasym
= magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.
MTRasym values (A) and global T2 relaxation times
(B) for the 6 different ROIs. The regions in the femur
are displayed on the left side of the dotted line, and regions in the
tibia are presented on the right side of the dotted line. Red asterisks
represent statistically significant differences between regions. MTRasym
= magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.presents the calcification scores for the included patients. The
influence of calcification thickness of the transplant on the opposing cartilage
is presented in
for the gagCEST sequence and in
for T2 mapping. Statistical analysis showed that the tibial cartilage
opposing the defect in patients with a calcification that is in contact with the
opposing cartilage (calcification thickness score of 1) has significantly lower
GAG content (MTRasym value) compared to control tibial cartilage, while the
collagen integrity (global T2 relaxation times) was similar for tibial cartilage
opposing the defect and control tibial cartilage.
shows that the zonal variation between the deep layer and the
superficial layer of the tibial cartilage opposing the defect is similar to that
of the control tibia cartilage. In other words, the collagen integrity of the
opposing cartilage was not affected by the calcification thickness of the
transplant.
Figure 5.
MTRasym values for the tibial cartilage opposing the defect (tibia)
compared to control tibial cartilage (c_tibia) for patients with
calcification thickness score 0 (A) and for calcification
thickness score 1 (B). The red asterisk represents a
statistically significant difference between regions. MTRasym =
magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.
Figure 6.
T2 relaxation times for the tibial cartilage opposing the defect (tibia)
compared to control tibial cartilage (c_tibia) for the calcification
thickness score 0 (A) and for the calcification thickness
score 1 (B) in the deep zone and in the superficial zone of
the cartilage.
MTRasym values for the tibial cartilage opposing the defect (tibia)
compared to control tibial cartilage (c_tibia) for patients with
calcification thickness score 0 (A) and for calcification
thickness score 1 (B). The red asterisk represents a
statistically significant difference between regions. MTRasym =
magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.T2 relaxation times for the tibial cartilage opposing the defect (tibia)
compared to control tibial cartilage (c_tibia) for the calcification
thickness score 0 (A) and for the calcification thickness
score 1 (B) in the deep zone and in the superficial zone of
the cartilage.illustrates the findings of
to
in the form of MTR asymmetry and T2 relaxation time overlays for a
patient with calcification thickness score of 0 and for a patient with
calcification thickness score 1. For both patients, the transplant area shows
low MTRasym values and high T2 relaxation times compared to control regions,
indicating a lower GAG content and a disturbed collagen network. For the patient
with cartilage thickness score 0 (
and
), the opposing cartilage is of relatively good quality. The patient with
a calcification thickness score of 1 (
and
) showed lower GAG content in the opposing cartilage while the collagen
integrity does not seem to be influenced.
Figure 7.
Example of a patient with calcification thickness score 0 (A
and B) and a patient with calcification thickness score 1
(C and D). DESS images are presented with
an overlay of MTRasym values and T2 relaxation times. DESS = dual-echo
steady state; MTRasym = magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.
Example of a patient with calcification thickness score 0 (A
and B) and a patient with calcification thickness score 1
(C and D). DESS images are presented with
an overlay of MTRasym values and T2 relaxation times. DESS = dual-echo
steady state; MTRasym = magnetization transfer ratio asymmetry.
Discussion
In this study, 12 patients were evaluated about 25 years after cartilage repair
surgery of the knee by means of clinical questionnaires and 7T MRI. The cartilage
tissue in general, the cartilage repair tissue and the opposing tibial cartilage
were assessed both morphologically and biochemically by 7T MRI. The quality of the
cartilage tissue throughout the joint was variable. For each of the included
cartilage repair patient, the cartilage repair tissue was of poor quality (low GAG
content [low MTRasym values] and low collagen integrity (high T2 relaxation times)),
regardless of the performed procedure. In line with previous research, we found a
high incidence of intralesional osteophytes. The thickness of the calcification in
these intralesional osteophytes can influence the opposing tibial cartilage. It was
shown that when the intralesional osteophyte penetrates the surface of the graft,
the opposing tibial cartilage was biochemically damaged. The damage was more
pronounced in the GAG content reflected by the MTRasym values and less in the
collagen integrity represented by the intact zonal variation in T2 relaxation times,
suggesting that tibial cartilage opposing osteophytes that penetrate the surface
showed signs of early OA. A difference in percentage of calcification of the grafts
caused no statistically significant difference of opposing cartilage tissue quality.
Calcified tissue has an increased stiffness compared to cartilage, which causes
higher contact stresses and increased friction.
This increased stiffness and friction of a calcification that penetrates the
surface of a graft is expected to exert a larger mechanical strain on the opposing
tibial cartilage compared to an intact surface and thereby causing its deterioration
over time. The 10- to 20-year clinical outcome of cartilage repair surgery has been
documented previously by multiple authors, for example by Minas and co-workers with
satisfactory results.[29-31] However, to
our knowledge, there are no studies that describe the biochemical status of the
articular cartilage of patients after a follow-up of a mean of 25 years as described
in this paper. Evaluation of articular cartilage by 7T MRI provides the opportunity
for its biochemical assessment and a high spatial resolution for detailed
morphological assessment. So far, the evaluation of the GAG content in repair
tissue, an important marker for the biomechanical properties was restricted to
dGEMRIC at lower field MR,
which however requires a double dose of intravenous administration of
Gadolinium-based contrast agents, which considering the ongoing discussions of
Gadolinium depositions in the brain are problematic. In addition, the standard ionic
contrast agent so far used for dGEMRIC, Magnevist, was removed from the European
market by the European Medicine Ageny due to the Gadolinium depositions in the human
body seen with linear Gadolinium-based contrast agents.
High spatial resolution can be achieved using new 3T MRI techniques and T2
mapping is available at 3T MRI as well as on 7T MRI, but gagCEST is limited to use
at ultra-high-field such as 7T MRI.
Using gagCEST, the GAG content can be quantified using a regular proton coil
(no sodium coil needed) and without the use of a contrast agent (as is the case for
dGEMRIC). On the downside, gagCEST is limited to high-field MRI such as 7T MRI,
because the spectral resolution on 7T is by a factor of 2 higher compared to 3T,
which is needed to separate the small frequency shift between protons bound to GAG
and protons in the water pool.
Therefore, gagCEST scanning is only feasible at 7T MRI and provides essential
biochemical information not available in studies performed with lower field MRI
(1.5T or 3.0T).The occurrence of intralesional osteophytes after cartilage repair surgery has been
described before, the incidence of osteophytes rises when the subchondral bone is
involved in either the defect or the surgery.[13,14,34] Intralesional osteophytes
occur more often after ACT procedures with previous marrow stimulation and in
periosteal-covered defects compared to collagen membrane-covered defects,
but it is still unclear whether the osteophytes result from a thickening of
the subchondral bone or from the progenitor cells in the cambium layer of the
periosteal tissue.
Kreuz et al. propose an impaired clinical outcome after
microfracture caused by a thinner layer of cartilage overlying damaged subchondral
bone and subsequent increased shear stresses.
However, calcification of the repair tissue was not a part of the MRI scoring
systems at the time of publication, nor was calcification described separately in
their paper.
In addition, Pestka et al. describe an increased failure
rate after previous marrow stimulation but did not directly correlate this to
increased intralesional osteophytes.In a review focusing on the subchondral bone in osteochondral repair, Orth et
al. elucidate on the lack of detailed visualization of subchondral bone
architecture of repaired cartilage due to technical and ethical limitations.
Although there is no absolute lack of studies which assess the repaired cartilage
morphologically (often by MRI), a detailed biochemical assessment of repair tissue
and evaluation of intralesional osteophytes is less common.
Recently, the MOCART score has been updated to provide a more detailed
assessment of morphologic characteristics of the repaired cartilage resulting in the
MOCART 2.0 score;
however, at this moment, it has only been applied in 3 clinical cartilage
repair studies.[39-41] Only Sessa
et al. found a correlation of the MOCART 2.0 score with
clinical outcome parameters. However, group sizes in these studies were relatively
small and therefore might lack the statistical power to detect
correlations.[39-41] Even though
our study also assessed a relatively small group of patients, we did find a
correlation of surface penetrating intralesional osteophytes which led to opposing
cartilage damage. Based on our current data, we are not able to demonstrate an
impaired subjective or clinical outcome caused by intralesional osteophyte formation
after cartilage repair surgery.An important limitation of this study was the small sample size. The small numbers of
patients for the 2 surgical procedures did not allow for a long-term comparison
between the procedures. The heterogeneity among the included patients was another
limitation. Some patients underwent reconstruction of their anterior cruciate
ligament in combination with cartilage repair of their defect. Furthermore, it was
difficult to select control ROIs in the knees of the patients given that 25 years
after surgery, the quality of the knee cartilage was in general relatively low. In
addition, 7T MRI has only been obtained at a long-term follow-up. To demonstrate the
value of clinical evaluation of articular cartilage repair surgery by 7T MRI, larger
group sizes and monitoring over several timepoints should be included in future
work. It is important to note that ACT has been modified since 1996 to stop the
intralesional osteophyte formation by careful removal of the calcified layer down to
the subchondral bone plate, release the tourniquet to detect and stop any bleeding
by fibrin glue. Furthermore, the periosteal flap has been replaced by synthetical
resorbable membranes.To conclude, PT and ACT patients have a high incidence of intralesional osteophyte
formation 25 years after surgery. The resulting biochemical damage to the opposing
tibial cartilage might be dependent on osteophyte morphology.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-car-10.1177_19476035211060506 for 7-Tesla MRI
Evaluation of the Knee, 25 Years after Cartilage Repair Surgery: The Influence
of Intralesional Osteophytes on Biochemical Quality of Cartilage by M.P.F.
Janssen, M.J.M. Peters, E.G.M. Steijvers-Peeters, P. Szomolanyi, E.M.C. Jutten,
L.W. van Rhijn, L. Peterson, A. Lindahl, S. Trattnig and P.J. Emans in
CARTILAGEClick here for additional data file.Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-car-10.1177_19476035211060506 for 7-Tesla MRI
Evaluation of the Knee, 25 Years after Cartilage Repair Surgery: The Influence
of Intralesional Osteophytes on Biochemical Quality of Cartilage by M.P.F.
Janssen, M.J.M. Peters, E.G.M. Steijvers-Peeters, P. Szomolanyi, E.M.C. Jutten,
L.W. van Rhijn, L. Peterson, A. Lindahl, S. Trattnig and P.J. Emans in
CARTILAGE
Authors: Alexander A Theologis; William W Schairer; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Sharmila Majumdar; Xiaojuan Li; C Benjamin Ma Journal: Knee Date: 2011-10-22 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Haris S Vasiliadis; Barbro Danielson; Maria Ljungberg; Brian McKeon; Anders Lindahl; Lars Peterson Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-02-25 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: J J Irrgang; A F Anderson; A L Boland; C D Harner; M Kurosaka; P Neyret; J C Richmond; K D Shelborne Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2001 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Martin Russlies; Peter Behrens; Eva-Maria Ehlers; Christin Bröhl; Christina Vindigni; Myron Spector; Bodo Kurz Journal: Cell Tissue Res Date: 2004-10-27 Impact factor: 5.249
Authors: Markus M Schreiner; Marcus Raudner; Stefan Marlovits; Klaus Bohndorf; Michael Weber; Martin Zalaudek; Sebastian Röhrich; Pavol Szomolanyi; Giuseppe Filardo; Reinhard Windhager; Siegfried Trattnig Journal: Cartilage Date: 2019-08-17 Impact factor: 4.634