Accuracy and precision of quantitative assessment of cartilage morphology by magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0T

Abstract

Objective. Quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of articular cartilage represents a powerful tool in osteoarthritis (OA) research, but has so far been confined to a field strength of 1.5T. The aim of this study was to evaluate the precision of quantitative MRI assessments of human cartilage morphology at 3.0T and to correlate the measurements at 3.0T with validated measurements at 1.5T.Methods. MR images of the knee of 15 participants with OA and 15 healthy control subjects were acquired using Siemens 1.5T and 3.0T scanners. Double oblique coronal scans were obtained at 1.5T with a 1.5-mm partition thickness, at 3.0T with a 1.5-mm partition thickness, and at 3.0T with a 1.0-mm partition thickness. Cartilage volume, thickness, and surface area of the femorotibial cartilage plates were quantified using proprietary software.Results. For 1.5-mm partition thickness at 1.5T, the precision error was 3.0% and 2.6% for cartilage volume and cartilage thickness, respectively. The error was smaller for a 1.5-mm partition thickness at 3.0T (2.6% and 2.5%) and still smaller for a 1.0-mm partition thickness at 3.0T (2.1% and 2.0%). Correlation coefficients between values obtained at 3.0T and 1.5T were high (r > 0.96), with no significant deviation between the two field strengths.Conclusion. Quantitative MRI measurement of cartilage morphology at 3.0T (partition thickness 1 mm) was found to be accurate and tended to be more reproducible than at 1.5T (partition thickness 1.5 mm). Imaging at 3.0T may therefore provide superior ability to detect changes in cartilage status over time and to determine responses to treatment with structuremodifying drugs.

Reproducibility of the quantitative assessment of cartilage morphology and trabecular bone structure with magnetic resonance imaging at 7 T

“…A comparison of 3-T and 7-T scans in our study demonstrated significant SNR and CNR increases, in agreement with previous studies [1][2][3]. This study examined the reproducibility of quantitative measurements of cartilage morphology and trabecular bone structure, and indicated comparable reproducibility with those reported at lower field strengths [13,16] for both measurements. A longitudinal patient study is still required to examine the advantages of quantitative musculoskeletal imaging at ultra-high fields.…”

“…All images were acquired at high resolution (a matrix of 512×512 was used for cartilage measurements, and a matrix of 512×384 was used for trabecular bone structure measurements) to reduce partial-volume effect. The precision errors of repeated measurements of cartilage morphology with similar imaging parameter settings (acquisition matrix=512×512, slice thickness=1 mm) have been evaluated previously at 3 T by Eckstein et al [16]. In their report, the CV ranged between 1.7% and 2.5% for cartilage volume measurements, and between 1.8% and 2.3% for mean cartilage thickness measurements.…”

“…This implies that there might be some relationship between cartilage and trabecular bone in OA patients, thus requiring further investigation. The protocol employed in this study could be used for this purpose in the future, since no differences in reproducibility errors between OA patients and control subjects were observed [16,19].…”

An analysis algorithm for accurate determination of articular cartilage thickness of hip joint from MR images

“…We model the MR imaging process for two adjacent sheet structures and used this model to predict the shape of the MR signal intensity profile along the sheet normal direction given in Eq. [9]. The difference between the predicted and actual profiles observed in MR data is minimized by refining model parameters.…”

“…MRI-based quantitative cartilage thickness measurement techniques have become increasingly important in clinical applications as well as in fundamental research. Although such studies have been performed for approximately a decade, most of them have focus on the knee joint (7)(8)(9)(10)(11). There have been, to date, very few studies on the human hip due to a lack of an appropriate MRI-acquisition protocol that specifically targets the ball and socket hip joint.…”