Quantitative Assessment of Patellar Cartilage Volume and Thickness at 3.0 Tesla Comparing a 3D-Fast Low Angle Shot Versus a 3D-True Fast Imaging With Steady-State Precession Sequence for Reproducibility

Objectives:We sought to compare patellar cartilage volume and thickness measurement between 3D-FLASH and 3D-True fast imaging with steady-state precession (FISP) image data at 3.0 T. Materials and Methods:One knee each of 6 healthy adults was examined by axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed with a 3D-fast flow angle shot (FLASH) water-excitation sequence and a 3D-TrueFISP water-excitation sequence (spatial resolution 0.31 × 0.31 × 1.5 mm3). Patellar cartilage volume and mean/maximum thickness were calculated. Intraindividual/average reproducibility and interindividual variability were determined from 3 consecutive data sets acquired for each volunteer and sequence. Results:Patellar cartilage volume and thickness as well as reproducibility was slightly but not significantly lower for the 3D-TrueFISP data than for the 3D-FLASH data (volume: 3.4–6.3 mL (3D-FLASH)/3.1–6.0 mL (3D-TrueFISP), average reproducibility 1.8% (3D-FLASH)/4.4% (3D-TrueFISP); mean thickness: 2.1–2.8 mm (3D-FLASH)/1.9–2.6 mm (3D-TrueFISP), average reproducibility 2.8% (3D-FLASH)/3.8% (3D-TrueFISP); maximum thickness: 4.7–6.6 mm (3D-FLASH)/4.5–6.2 mm (3D-TrueFISP), average reproducibility 2.6% (3D-FLASH)/4.1% (3D-TrueFISP)). Interindividual variability was comparable for both sequence techniques. Conclusion:At 3.0 T, the 3D-FLASH sequence showed tendency to be slightly superior to the 3D-TrueFISP sequence considering robust and valid assessment of quantitative cartilage parameters in young healthy adults, although there was found no significant statistical difference between both imaging techniques. However, in patients suffering from osteoarthritis (OA), the 3D-TrueFISP sequence might prove advantageous for monitoring of disease progression and evaluation of therapy success, particularly because the substantially higher signal to noise ratio/contrast to noise ratio values might allow for higher spatial resolution and hence for improvement of the accuracy of segmentation process especially at the articular surface.

[1]  F. Cicuttini,et al.  Comparison and reproducibility of fast and conventional spoiled gradient‐echo magnetic resonance sequences in the determination of knee cartilage volume , 2000, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[2]  F Eckstein,et al.  Effect of physical exercise on cartilage volume and thickness in vivo: MR imaging study. , 1998, Radiology.

[3]  C C Glüer,et al.  Quantification of articular cartilage in the knee with pulsed saturation transfer subtraction and fat-suppressed MR imaging: optimization and validation. , 1994, Radiology.

[4]  M Heller,et al.  [MR imaging of the articular cartilage]. , 2001, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[5]  R. Pozzi-mucelli,et al.  Hyaline articular cartilage: relaxation times, pulse-sequence parameters and MR appearance at 1.5 T , 1994, European Radiology.

[6]  T. Vogl,et al.  Quantitative assessment of cartilage status in osteoarthritis by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: technical validation for use in analysis of cartilage volume and further morphologic parameters. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[7]  F. Cicuttini,et al.  The determinants of change in patella cartilage volume in osteoarthritic knees. , 2002, The Journal of rheumatology.

[8]  C. Baker,et al.  Future treatment of osteoarthritis. , 2005, Orthopedics.

[9]  T J Mosher,et al.  Human articular cartilage: influence of aging and early symptomatic degeneration on the spatial variation of T2--preliminary findings at 3 T. , 2000, Radiology.

[10]  F Eckstein,et al.  Interindividual variability and correlation among morphological parameters of knee joint cartilage plates: analysis with three-dimensional MR imaging. , 2001, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[11]  Margreet Kloppenburg,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of knee cartilage using a water selective balanced steady‐state free precession sequence , 2004, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[12]  Jean-Pierre Raynauld,et al.  Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage in knee osteoarthritis , 2003, Current opinion in rheumatology.

[13]  F. Eckstein.  Noninvasive study of human cartilage structure by MRI. , 2004, Methods in molecular medicine.

[14]  Norbert J Pelc,et al.  Rapid MR imaging of articular cartilage with steady-state free precession and multipoint fat-water separation. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  T Stammberger,et al.  Optimization and validation of a rapid high-resolution T1-w 3D FLASH water excitation MRI sequence for the quantitative assessment of articular cartilage volume and thickness. , 2001, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[16]  T. Stammberger,et al.  Determination of 3D cartilage thickness data from MR imaging: Computational method and reproducibility in the living , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[17]  T P Andriacchi,et al.  MR imaging of articular cartilage at 1.5T and 3.0T: comparison of SPGR and SSFP sequences. , 2005, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[18]  D G Disler,et al.  Fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging of hyaline cartilage defects in the knee: comparison with standard MR imaging and arthroscopy. , 1996, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  T. Brown,et al.  Mechanical determinants of osteoarthrosis. , 1991, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[20]  Felix Eckstein,et al.  Measuring cartilage morphology with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. , 2004, Seminars in musculoskeletal radiology.

[21]  F Eckstein,et al.  A non-invasive technique for 3-dimensional assessment of articular cartilage thickness based on MRI. Part 2: Validation using CT arthrography. , 1997, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[22]  I. Sulzbacher.  Arthrose – Histologie und pathogenetische Ansätze , 2000, Der Radiologe.

[23]  T Stammberger,et al.  Validation of high-resolution water-excitation magnetic resonance imaging for quantitative assessment of thin cartilage layers. , 2000, Osteoarthritis and cartilage.

[24]  G. Bodenhausen,et al.  Principles of nuclear magnetic resonance in one and two dimensions , 1987 .

[25]  Johanne Martel-Pelletier,et al.  Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of knee osteoarthritis progression over two years and correlation with clinical symptoms and radiologic changes. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[26]  F Eckstein,et al.  A non-invasive technique for 3-dimensional assessment of articular cartilage thickness based on MRI. Part 1: Development of a computational method. , 1997, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[27]  M. Tingart,et al.  [Current treatment modalities for cartilage defects at the knee--results of a nation-wide survey of surgical trauma and orthopaedic clinics in Germany]. , 2004, Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und ihre Grenzgebiete.

[28]  F Eckstein,et al.  In vivo cartilage deformation after different types of activity and its dependence on physical training status , 2005, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[29]  F Eckstein,et al.  Accuracy of cartilage volume and thickness measurements with magnetic resonance imaging. , 1998, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.