Cartilage thickness measurement in magnetic resonance imaging

Objective.To evaluate whether features of radiographic hand osteoarthritis (OA) are associated with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-defined knee cartilage thickness, radiographic knee OA, and 1-year structural progression.Methods.A total of 765 participants in Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI; 455 women, mean age 62.5 yrs, SD 9.4) obtained hand radiographs (at baseline), knee radiographs (baseline and Year 1), and knee MRI (baseline and Year 1). Hand radiographs were scored for presence of osteophytes and joint space narrowing (JSN). Knee radiographs were scored according to the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) scale. Cartilage thickness in the medial and lateral femorotibial compartments was measured quantitatively from coronal FLASHwe images. We examined the cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between features of hand OA (total osteophyte and JSN scores) and knee cartilage thickness, 1-year knee cartilage thinning (above smallest detectable change), presence of knee OA (KL grade ≥ 3), and progression of knee OA (KL change ≥ 1) by linear and logistic regression. Both hand OA features were included in a multivariate model (if p ≤ 0.25) adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI).Results.Hand JSN was associated with reduced knee cartilage thickness (ß = −0.02, 95% CI −0.03, −0.01) in the medial femorotibial compartment, while hand osteophytes were associated with the presence of radiographic knee OA (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.03–1.18; multivariate models) with both hand OA features as independent variables adjusted for age, sex, and BMI). Radiographic features of hand OA were not associated with 1-year cartilage thinning or radiographic knee OA progression.Conclusion.Our results support a systemic OA susceptibility and possibly different mechanisms for osteophyte formation and cartilage thinning.

Download Full-text

Non-invasive determination of cartilage thickness throughout joint surfaces using magnetic resonance imaging

Journal of Biomechanics ◽

10.1016/s0021-9290(97)81146-3 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 30 (3) ◽

pp. 285-289 ◽

Cited By ~ 91

Author(s):

F. Eckstein ◽

C. Adam ◽

H. Sittek ◽

C. Becker ◽

S. Milz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Cartilage Thickness ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Non Invasive ◽

Joint Surfaces

Download Full-text

Validity of Ultrasound Imaging Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Measuring Anterior Thigh Muscle, Subcutaneous Fat, and Fascia Thickness

Methods and Protocols ◽

10.3390/mps2030058 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 2 (3) ◽

pp. 58 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Mechelli ◽

Arendt-Nielsen ◽

Stokes ◽

Agyapong-Badu

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Subcutaneous Fat ◽

Thickness Measurement ◽

Thigh Muscle ◽

Poor Correlation ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Anterior Thigh ◽

Mri Measurements ◽

Contractile Tissue

The aim of the present study was to determine the validity of ultrasound (US) imaging versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for measuring anterior thigh muscle, subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), and fascia thickness. Twenty healthy, moderately active participants (aged 49.1 ± 9.74 [36–64] years), underwent imaging of the anterior thigh, using ultrasound and MRI modalities on the same day. Images were analyzed offline to assess the level of agreement between US and MRI measurements. Pearson’s correlation coefficient showed an excellent relationship between US imaging and MRI for measuring muscle (r = 0.99, p < 0.01), SAT (r = 0.99, p < 0.01), and non-contractile tissue (SAT combined with perimuscular fascia) thickness (r = 0.99, p < 0.01). Perimuscular fascia thickness measurement showed a poor correlation between modalities (r = 0.39, p < 0.01). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC3,1) also showed excellent correlation of the measurements with ICC = 0.99 for muscle thickness, SAT, and non-contractile tissue, but not for perimuscular fascia, which showed poor agreement ICC = 0.36. Bland and Altman plots demonstrated excellent agreement between US imaging and MRI measurements. Criterion validity was demonstrated for US imaging against MRI, for measuring thickness of muscle and SAT, but not perimuscular fascia alone on the anterior thigh. The US imaging technique is therefore applicable for research and clinical purposes for muscle and SAT.

Download Full-text

Measurement of cartilage thickness in the human knee-joint by magnetic resonance imaging using a three-dimensional gradient-echo sequence

International Orthopaedics ◽

10.1007/s002640050367 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 23 (5) ◽

pp. 264-267 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

B. Kladny ◽

P. Martus ◽

K. -H. Schiwy-Bochat ◽

G. Weseloh ◽

B. Swoboda

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Knee Joint ◽

Three Dimensional ◽

Cartilage Thickness ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Gradient Echo ◽

Human Knee ◽

Human Knee Joint

Download Full-text

Does cartilage volume or thickness distinguish knees with and without mild radiographic osteoarthritis? The Framingham Study

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases ◽

10.1136/ard.2008.099200 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 69 (01) ◽

pp. 143-149 ◽

Cited By ~ 31

Author(s):

S Reichenbach ◽

M Yang ◽

F Eckstein ◽

J Niu ◽

D J Hunter ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

Weight Bearing ◽

Cartilage Damage ◽

Three Dimensional ◽

Cartilage Volume ◽

Cartilage Thickness ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

Radiographic Osteoarthritis ◽

Study Participants

Objectives:To examine whether the quantity of cartilage or semiquantitative scores actually differ in knees with mild radiographic osteoarthritis compared with knees without osteoarthritis.Methods:Framingham Osteoarthritis Study participants had knee tibiofemoral magnetic resonance imaging-based measurements of cartilage. Using three-dimensional FLASH-water excitation sequences, cartilage volume, thickness and subregional cartilage thickness were measured and cartilage scored semiquantitatively (using the whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score; WORMS). Using weight-bearing radiographs, mild osteoarthritis was defined as Kellgren/Lawrence (K/L) grade 2 and non-osteoarthritis as K/L grade 0. Differences between osteoarthritis and non-osteoarthritis knees in median cartilage measurements were tested using the Wilcoxon rank sum test.Results:Among 948 participants (one knee each), neither cartilage volume nor regional thickness were different in mild versus non-osteoarthritis knees. In mild osteoarthritis, cartilage erosions in focal areas were missed when cartilage was quantified over large regions such as the medial tibia. For some but not all subregions of cartilage, especially among men, cartilage thickness was lower (p<0.05) in mild osteoarthritis than non-osteoarthritis knees. Because semiquantitative scores captured focal erosions, median WORMS scores were higher in mild osteoarthritis than non-osteoarthritis (all p<0.05). In moderate/severe osteoarthritis (K/L grades 3 or 4), osteoarthritis knees had much lower cartilage thickness and higher WORMS scores than knees without osteoarthritis.Conclusions:In mild osteoarthritis, the focal loss of cartilage is missed by quantitative measures of cartilage volume or thickness over broad areas. Regional cartilage volume and thickness (eg, medial tibia) are not different in mild osteoarthritis versus non-osteoarthritis. Subregional thickness may be decreased in mild osteoarthritis. Semiquantitative scoring that assesses focal cartilage damage differentiates mild osteoarthritis from non-osteoarthritis.

Download Full-text

Assessment of T2 Relaxation Times for Normal Canine Knee Articular Cartilage by T2 Mapping Using 1.5-T Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology ◽

10.3415/vcot-17-01-0014 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 30 (06) ◽

pp. 391-397 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Asami Matsui ◽

Miki Shimizu ◽

Brian Beale ◽

Fumitaka Takahashi ◽

Sinya Yamaguchi

Keyword(s):

Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽

Articular Cartilage ◽

Magnetic Resonance ◽

T2 Mapping ◽

Relaxation Times ◽

Cartilage Thickness ◽

Resonance Imaging ◽

T2 Relaxation ◽

Stifle Joint

Abstract Objectives This study aims to assess and compare the T2 relaxation times for articular cartilage of normal canine stifle joints in four regions by T2 mapping using a 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Methods In vivo prospective study: 20 hindlimbs (left and right) from 10 normal healthy beagle dogs (n = 20). The region of interest (ROI) was subdivided into medial and lateral condyles of femoral cartilage (MF and LF, respectively) and medial and lateral condyles of tibial cartilage (MT and LT, respectively). The T2 relaxation times were assessed in regions where the cartilage thickness was greater than 0.5 mm. Results The median maximum cartilage thickness (mm) of the four ROI were 0.7 (range: 0.9–0.6), 0.6 (range: 0.7–0.5), 0.7 (range: 0.9–0.5) and 0.6 (range: 0.8–0.5) at MF, LF, MT and LT, respectively. The errors in the measurement (%) of the four ROI were 64.3 (range: 50.0–75.0), 75.0 (range: 64.3–90.0), 64.3 (range: 20.0–90.0) and 75.0 (range: 56.3–90.0) at MF, LF, MT and LT, respectively. The median T2 relaxation times (ms) for the articular cartilage of the four ROI were 70.2 (range: 57.9–87.9), 57.5 (range: 46.8–66.9), 65.0 (range: 52.0–92.0) and 57.0 (range: 49.0–66.2) at MF, LF, MT and LT, respectively. The inter-observer correlation coefficient (ICC, 2.1) for the T2 relaxation times of MF was 0.644. Clinical Significance This study offers useful information on T2 relaxation times for articular cartilage of the stifle joint using a 1.5-T MRI in normal dogs.

Download Full-text