Morphological MRI of knee cartilage: repeatability and reproducibility of damage evaluation and correlation with gross pathology examination.
Articular cartilage
Knee
Magnetic resonance imaging
Journal
European radiology
ISSN: 1432-1084
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9114774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
23
10
2019
accepted:
13
12
2019
revised:
26
11
2019
pubmed:
15
2
2020
medline:
24
11
2020
entrez:
15
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the performance of a morphological evaluation, based on a clinically relevant magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) protocol, in scoring the severity of knee cartilage damage. Specifically, to evaluate the reproducibility, repeatability, and agreement of MRI evaluation with the gross pathology examination (GPE) of the tissue. MRI of the knee was performed the day before surgery in 23 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. Osteochondral tissue resections were collected and chondral defects were scored by GPE according to a semi-quantitative scale. MR images were independently scored by four radiologists, who assessed the severity of chondral damage according to equivalent criteria. Inter- and intra-rater agreements of MRI evaluations were assessed. Correlation, precision, and accuracy metrics between MRI and GPE scores were calculated. Moderate to substantial inter-rater agreement in scoring cartilage damage by MRI was found among radiologists. Intra-rater agreement was higher than 96%. A significant positive monotonic correlation between GPE and MRI scores was observed for all radiologists, although higher correlation values were obtained by radiologists with expertise in musculoskeletal radiology and/or longer experience. The accuracy of MRI scores displayed a spatial pattern, characterized by lesion overestimation in the lateral condyle and underestimation in the medial condyle with respect to GPE. Evaluation of knee cartilage morphology by MRI is a reproducible and repeatable technique, which positively correlates with GPE. Clinical expertise in musculoskeletal radiology positively impacts the evaluation reliability. These findings may help to address limitations in MRI evaluation of knee chondral lesions, thus improving MRI assessment of knee cartilage. • MRI evaluation of knee cartilage shows moderate to strong correlation with gross pathology examination. • MRI evaluation overestimates cartilage damage in the lateral condyle and underestimates it in the medial condyle. • Education and experience of the radiologist play a role in MRI evaluation of knee chondral lesions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32055948
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06627-5
pii: 10.1007/s00330-019-06627-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3226-3235Subventions
Organisme : Provincia Autonoma di Trento
ID : Healthcare Research and Innovation Program (IRCS-HTA) 2016
Organisme : Fondazione Cassa Di Risparmio Di Trento E Rovereto
ID : EviVa, Efficacia in Vivo di Impianti di Cartilagine Artificiale, Grant n°2011 0193
Références
Recht M, Bobic V, Burstein D et al (2001) Magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage. Clin Orthop 391:S379–S396. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200110001-00035
doi: 10.1097/00003086-200110001-00035
Recht MP, Goodwin DW, Winalski CS, White LM (2005) MRI of articular cartilage: revisiting current status and future directions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 185:899–914. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.05.0099
doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.0099
pubmed: 16177408
Link TM, Stahl R, Woertler K (2007) Cartilage imaging: motivation, techniques, current and future significance. Eur Radiol 17:1135–1146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0453-5
doi: 10.1007/s00330-006-0453-5
pubmed: 17093967
Gold GE, Chen CA, Koo S, Hargreaves BA, Bangerter NK (2009) Recent advances in MRI of articular cartilage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:628–638. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3042
doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.3042
pubmed: 19696274
pmcid: 2879429
Burstein D, Gray M, Mosher T, Dardzinski B (2009) Measures of molecular composition and structure in osteoarthritis. Radiol Clin North Am 47:675–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2009.04.003
doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2009.04.003
pubmed: 19631075
Wei H, Lin H, Qin L et al (2019) Quantitative susceptibility mapping of articular cartilage in patients with osteoarthritis at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 49:1665–1675. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26535
doi: 10.1002/jmri.26535
pubmed: 30584684
Stahl R, Luke A, Li X et al (2009) T1rho, T2 and focal knee cartilage abnormalities in physically active and sedentary healthy subjects versus early OA patients–a 3.0-tesla MRI study. Eur Radiol 19:132–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1107-6
doi: 10.1007/s00330-008-1107-6
pubmed: 18709373
Hangaard S, Gudbergsen H, Daugaard CL et al (2018) Delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of menisci and cartilage (dGEMRIM/dGEMRIC) in obese patients with knee osteoarthritis: crosssectional study of 85 obese patients with intra-articular administered gadolinium contrast. J Magn Reson Imaging 48:1700–1706. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.26190
doi: 10.1002/jmri.26190
pubmed: 30102447
Li X, Pedoia V, Kumar D et al (2015) Cartilage T1ρ and T2 relaxation times: longitudinal reproducibility and variations using different coils, MR systems and sites. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 23:2214–2223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2015.07.006
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.07.006
pubmed: 26187574
pmcid: 4663102
Brinkhof S, Nizak R, Khlebnikov V, Prompers JJ, Klomp DWJ, Saris DBF (2018) Detection of early cartilage damage: feasibility and potential of gagCEST imaging at 7T. Eur Radiol 28:2874–2881. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5277-y
doi: 10.1007/s00330-017-5277-y
pubmed: 29383528
pmcid: 5986839
Duarte A, Ruiz A, Ferizi U et al (2019) Diffusion tensor imaging of articular cartilage using a navigated radial imaging spin-echo diffusion (RAISED) sequence. Eur Radiol 29:2598–2607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5780-9
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5780-9
pubmed: 30382348
Tsai P-H, Wong C-C, Chan WP, Lu T-W (2019) The value of MR T2* measurements in normal and osteoarthritic knee cartilage: effects of age, sex, and location. Eur Radiol 29:4514–4522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5826-z
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5826-z
pubmed: 30617477
Link TM (2018) Editorial comment: the future of compositional MRI for cartilage. Eur Radiol 28:2872–2873. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5457-4
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5457-4
pubmed: 29713777
pmcid: 5988989
Truhn D, Sondern B, Oehrl S et al (2019) Differentiation of human cartilage degeneration by functional MRI mapping-an ex vivo study. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06283-9
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06283-9
Roemer FW, Kijowski R, Guermazi A (2017) Editorial: from theory to practice - the challenges of compositional MRI in osteoarthritis research. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 25:1923–1925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2017.08.007
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2017.08.007
pubmed: 28844567
Hayashi D, Li X, Murakami AM et al (2018) Understanding magnetic resonance imaging of knee cartilage repair: a focus on clinical relevance. Cartilage 9:223–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1947603517710309
doi: 10.1177/1947603517710309
pubmed: 28580842
Haj-Mirzaian A, Guermazi A, Pishgar F et al (2019) Patellofemoral morphology measurements and their associations with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis-related structural damage: exploratory analysis on the osteoarthritis initiative. Eur Radiol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06324-3
doi: 10.1007/s00330-019-06324-3
Sun D, Neumann J, Joseph GB et al (2019) Introduction of an MR based semi-quantitative score for assessing partial meniscectomy and relation to knee joint degenerative disease: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Eur Radiol 29:3262–3272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5924-y
doi: 10.1007/s00330-018-5924-y
pubmed: 30617481
Kornaat PR, Ceulemans RYT, Kroon HM et al (2005) MRI assessment of knee osteoarthritis: Knee Osteoarthritis Scoring System (KOSS)–inter-observer and intra-observer reproducibility of a compartment-based scoring system. Skeletal Radiol 34:95–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-004-0828-0
doi: 10.1007/s00256-004-0828-0
pubmed: 15480649
Peterfy CG, Guermazi A, Zaim S et al (2004) Whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score (WORMS) of the knee in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 12:177–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2003.11.003
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2003.11.003
pubmed: 14972335
Hunter DJ, Lo GH, Gale D et al (2008) The reliability of a new scoring system for knee osteoarthritis MRI and the validity of bone marrow lesion assessment: BLOKS (Boston Leeds osteoarthritis knee score). Ann Rheum Dis 67:206–211. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2006.066183
doi: 10.1136/ard.2006.066183
pubmed: 17472995
Hunter DJ, Guermazi A, Lo GH et al (2011) Evolution of semi quantitative whole joint assessment of knee OA: MOAKS (MRI osteoarthritis knee score). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 19:990–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2011.05.004
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.05.004
pubmed: 21645627
pmcid: 4058435
Marlovits S, Striessnig G, Resinger CT et al (2004) Definition of pertinent parameters for the evaluation of articular cartilage repair tissue with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 52:310–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.03.014
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2004.03.014
pubmed: 15544911
Marlovits S, Singer P, Zeller P et al (2006) Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol 57:16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.08.007
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.08.007
pubmed: 16203119
Roemer FW, Guermazi A, Trattnig S et al (2014) Whole joint MRI assessment of surgical cartilage repair of the knee: cartilage repair osteoarthritis knee score (CROAKS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 22:779–799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2014.03.014
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2014.03.014
pubmed: 24685525
Link TM, Steinbach LS, Ghosh S et al (2003) Osteoarthritis: MR imaging findings in different stages of disease and correlation with clinical findings. Radiology 226:373–381. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2262012190
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2262012190
pubmed: 12563128
Yoshioka H, Stevens K, Hargreaves BA et al (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage of the knee: comparison between fat-suppressed three-dimensional SPGR imaging, fat suppressed FSE imaging, and fat-suppressed three-dimensional DEFT imaging, and correlation with arthroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:857–864. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20193
doi: 10.1002/jmri.20193
pubmed: 15503323
Bredella MA, Tirman PF, Peterfy CG et al (1999) Accuracy of T2-weighted fast spin-echoMR imaging with fat saturation in detecting cartilage defects in the knee: comparison with arthroscopy in 130 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 172:1073–1080. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.172.4.10587150
doi: 10.2214/ajr.172.4.10587150
pubmed: 10587150
Bittersohl B, Mamisch TC, Welsch GH et al (2009) Experimental model to evaluate in vivo and in vitro cartilage MR imaging by means of histological analyses. Eur J Radiol 70:561–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.031
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.02.031
pubmed: 18434064
Calvo E, Palacios I, Delgado E et al (2004) Histopathological correlation of cartilage swelling detected by magnetic resonance imaging in early experimental osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 12:878–886. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2004.07.007
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2004.07.007
pubmed: 15501403
Trattnig S, Huber M, Breitenseher MJ et al (1998) Imaging articular cartilage defects with 3D fat-suppressed echo planar imaging: comparison with conventional 3D fat-suppressed gradient echo sequence and correlation with histology. J Comput Assist Tomogr 22:8–14
doi: 10.1097/00004728-199801000-00002
McGibbon CA, Trahan CA (2003) Measurement accuracy of focal cartilage defects from MRI and correlation of MRI graded lesions with histology: a preliminary study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 11:483–493
doi: 10.1016/S1063-4584(03)00078-5
Li X, Cheng J, Lin K et al (2011) Quantitative MRI using T1ρ and T2 in human osteoarthritic cartilage specimens: correlation with biochemical measurements and histology. Magn Reson Imaging 29:324–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2010.09.004
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2010.09.004
pubmed: 21130590
Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement:the kappa statistic. Fam Med 37:360–363
pubmed: 15883903
Rubenstein JD, Li JG, Majumdar S, Henkelman RM (1997) Image resolution and signal-to-noise ratio requirements forMR imaging of degenerative cartilage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1089–1096. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.169.4.9308470
doi: 10.2214/ajr.169.4.9308470
pubmed: 9308470
Kornaat PR, Doornbos J, van der Molen AJ et al (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging of knee cartilage using a water selective balanced steady-state free precession sequence. J Magn Reson Imaging 20:850–856. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20194
doi: 10.1002/jmri.20194
pubmed: 15503345
Buckwalter JA, Mankin HJ (1998) Articular cartilage: degeneration and osteoarthritis, repair, regeneration, and transplantation. Instr Course Lect 47:487–504
pubmed: 9571450
Duc SR, Pfirrmann CWA, Schmid MR et al (2007) Articular cartilage defects detected with 3D water-excitation true FISP:prospective comparison with sequences commonly used for knee imaging. Radiology 245:216–223. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2451060990
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2451060990
pubmed: 17717327
Chen CA, Kijowski R, Shapiro LM et al (2010) Cartilage morphology at 3.0T: assessment of three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging 32:173–183. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22213
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22213
pubmed: 20578024
pmcid: 3065186