Literature DB >> 9448754

Imaging articular cartilage defects with 3D fat-suppressed echo planar imaging: comparison with conventional 3D fat-suppressed gradient echo sequence and correlation with histology.

S Trattnig1, M Huber, M J Breitenseher, H J Trnka, T Rand, A Kaider, T Helbich, H Imhof, D Resnick.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Our goal was to shorten examination time in articular cartilage imaging by use of a recently developed 3D multishot echo planar imaging (EPI) sequence with fat suppression (FS). We performed comparisons with 3D FS GE sequence using histology as the standard of reference.
METHOD: Twenty patients with severe gonarthrosis who were scheduled for total knee replacement underwent MRI prior to surgery. Hyaline cartilage was imaged with a 3D FS EPI and a 3D FS GE sequence. Signal intensities of articular structures were measured, and contrast-to-noise (C/N) ratios were calculated. Each knee was subdivided into 10 cartilage surfaces. From a total of 188 (3D EPI sequence) and 198 (3D GE sequence) cartilage surfaces, 73 and 79 histologic specimens could be obtained and analyzed. MR grading of cartilage lesions on both sequences was based on a five grade classification scheme and compared with histologic grading.
RESULTS: The 3D FS EPI sequence provided a high C/N ratio between cartilage and subchondral bone similar to that of the 3D FS GE sequence. The C/N ratio between cartilage and effusion was significantly lower on the 3D EPI sequence due to higher signal intensity of fluid. MR grading of cartilage abnormalities using 3D FS EPI and 3D GE sequence correlated well with histologic grading. 3D FS EPI sequence agreed within one grade in 69 of 73 (94.5%) histologically proven cartilage lesions and 3D FS GE sequence agreed within one grade in 76 of 79 (96.2%) lesions. The gradings were identical in 38 of 73 (52.1%) and in 46 of 79 (58.3%) cases, respectively. The difference between the sensitivities was statistically not significant.
CONCLUSION: The 3D FS EPI sequence is comparable with the 3D FS GE sequence in the noninvasive evaluation of advanced cartilage abnormalities but reduces scan time by a factor of 4.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9448754     DOI: 10.1097/00004728-199801000-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr        ISSN: 0363-8715            Impact factor:   1.826


  11 in total

Review 1.  [Diagnostic imaging of cartilage replacement therapy].

Authors:  S Trattnig; C Plank; K Pinker; G Striessnig; V Mlynarik; I Nöbauer; S Marlovits
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 2.  The diagnostic performance of MRI in osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  L Menashe; K Hirko; E Losina; M Kloppenburg; W Zhang; L Li; D J Hunter
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 3.  [When is cartilage repair successful?]

Authors:  M Raudner; M M Schreiner; S Röhrich; M Zalaudek; S Trattnig
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 4.  Systematic review of the concurrent and predictive validity of MRI biomarkers in OA.

Authors:  D J Hunter; W Zhang; Philip G Conaghan; K Hirko; L Menashe; L Li; W M Reichmann; E Losina
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 5.  Responsiveness and reliability of MRI in knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of published evidence.

Authors:  D J Hunter; W Zhang; P G Conaghan; K Hirko; L Menashe; W M Reichmann; E Losina
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 6.576

6.  Diagnostic performance of in vivo 3-T MRI for articular cartilage abnormalities in human osteoarthritic knees using histology as standard of reference.

Authors:  Ehsan Saadat; Bjoern Jobke; Bill Chu; Ying Lu; Jonathan Cheng; Xiaojuan Li; Michael D Ries; Sharmila Majumdar; Thomas M Link
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  MR imaging of osteochondral grafts and autologous chondrocyte implantation.

Authors:  S Trattnig; S A Millington; P Szomolanyi; S Marlovits
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2006-06-27       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Autologous chondrocyte implantation for cartilage repair: monitoring its success by magnetic resonance imaging and histology.

Authors:  Sally Roberts; Iain W McCall; Alan J Darby; Janis Menage; Helena Evans; Paul E Harrison; James B Richardson
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2002-11-13       Impact factor: 5.156

Review 9.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Cartilage Repair: A Review.

Authors:  Siegfried Trattnig; Carl S Winalski; Stephan Marlovits; Jukka S Jurvelin; Goetz H Welsch; Hollis G Potter
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 4.634

10.  Microstructural analysis of subchondral bone in knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  L A Holzer; M Kraiger; E Talakic; G A Fritz; A Avian; A Hofmeister; A Leithner; G Holzer
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.