Quantitative analysis of repaired rabbit supraspinatus tendons (± channeling) using magnetic resonance imaging at 7 Tesla.
7 Tesla
T2 relaxation times
surgical re-attachment
tendon
Journal
Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery
ISSN: 2223-4292
Titre abrégé: Quant Imaging Med Surg
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101577942
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2021
Aug 2021
Historique:
received:
09
12
2020
accepted:
26
03
2021
entrez:
3
8
2021
pubmed:
4
8
2021
medline:
4
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The quantitative assessment of supraspinatus tendons by conventional magnetic resonance is limited by low contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners operating at 7 Tesla offer high signal-to noise ratio (SNR), low CNR and high spatial resolution that are well-suited for rapidly relaxing tissues like tendons. Few studies have applied T2 and T2* mapping to musculoskeletal imaging and to the rotator cuff tendons. Our objective was to analyze the T2 and T2* relaxation times from surgically repaired supraspinatus tendons and the effect of bone channeling. One supraspinatus tendon of 112 adult female New Zealand white rabbits was surgically detached and repaired one week later. Rabbits were randomly assigned to channeling (n=64) or control (n=48) groups and harvested at 0, 1, 2, and 4 weeks. A 7T magnet was used for signal acquisition. For T2 mapping, a sagittal multi slice 2D multi-echo spin-echo (MESE) CPMG sequence with fat saturation was applied and T2* mapping was performed using a 3D UTE sequence. Magnetic resonance images from supraspinatus tendons were analyzed by two raters. Three regions of interest were manually drawn on the first T2-weighted dataset. For T2 and T2*, different ROI masks were generated to obtain relaxation times. T2-weighted maps but not T2*-weighted maps generated reliable signals for relaxation time measurement. Torn supraspinatus tendons had lower T2 than controls at the time of repair (20.0±3.4 Supraspinatus tendons detached for 1 week had shorter T2 relaxation time compared to contralateral as measured with 7T MRI.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The quantitative assessment of supraspinatus tendons by conventional magnetic resonance is limited by low contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners operating at 7 Tesla offer high signal-to noise ratio (SNR), low CNR and high spatial resolution that are well-suited for rapidly relaxing tissues like tendons. Few studies have applied T2 and T2* mapping to musculoskeletal imaging and to the rotator cuff tendons. Our objective was to analyze the T2 and T2* relaxation times from surgically repaired supraspinatus tendons and the effect of bone channeling.
METHODS
METHODS
One supraspinatus tendon of 112 adult female New Zealand white rabbits was surgically detached and repaired one week later. Rabbits were randomly assigned to channeling (n=64) or control (n=48) groups and harvested at 0, 1, 2, and 4 weeks. A 7T magnet was used for signal acquisition. For T2 mapping, a sagittal multi slice 2D multi-echo spin-echo (MESE) CPMG sequence with fat saturation was applied and T2* mapping was performed using a 3D UTE sequence. Magnetic resonance images from supraspinatus tendons were analyzed by two raters. Three regions of interest were manually drawn on the first T2-weighted dataset. For T2 and T2*, different ROI masks were generated to obtain relaxation times.
RESULTS
RESULTS
T2-weighted maps but not T2*-weighted maps generated reliable signals for relaxation time measurement. Torn supraspinatus tendons had lower T2 than controls at the time of repair (20.0±3.4
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Supraspinatus tendons detached for 1 week had shorter T2 relaxation time compared to contralateral as measured with 7T MRI.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34341723
doi: 10.21037/qims-20-1343
pii: qims-11-08-3460
pmc: PMC8245966
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
3460-3471Informations de copyright
2021 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/qims-20-1343). Dr. Guy Trudel and Dr. Odette Laneuville report that they are the recipients of the research grant from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Dr. Peder E. Z. Larson receives research support from GE Healthcare and royalty payments for patents related to the work. Dr. Samuel Duchesne-Bélanger, Dr. Justin Thomas, Dr. Greg O. Cron, Dr. Mark Schweitzer, Dr. Adnan Sheikh, Dr. Hakim Louati MEng report that this work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research: grant number FRN 110995. Funds were used to purchase material, cost of services including MRI services, animal surgeries and care, and to cover the salaries of staff. The other author has no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Acad Radiol. 2015 Jul;22(7):909-17
pubmed: 24709378
Eur Radiol. 2012 Nov;22(11):2338-46
pubmed: 22688127
Ann Rheum Dis. 1994 Jun;53(6):359-66
pubmed: 8037494
Magn Reson Imaging. 2004 Jan;22(1):67-80
pubmed: 14972396
Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2020 May;28(2):165-179
pubmed: 32241656
Biophys J. 1990 Jan;57(1):71-84
pubmed: 2297563
Am J Sports Med. 2020 Jun;48(7):1559-1567
pubmed: 32406765
Skeletal Radiol. 2017 Feb;46(2):191-199
pubmed: 27896400
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998 May-Jun;7(3):205-9
pubmed: 9658342
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 17;10(12):e0145255
pubmed: 26678918
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Dec 9;12:CD013502
pubmed: 31813166
Magn Reson Med. 2010 Jan;63(1):181-93
pubmed: 19859960
J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 Mar 27;13(1):64
pubmed: 29587870
Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2019 Jun;28(3):125-135
pubmed: 30951006
Joints. 2014 May 08;2(1):26-8
pubmed: 25606538
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Jul;24(7):2216-24
pubmed: 25739912
Radiology. 2015 Sep;276(3):748-55
pubmed: 25816105
Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2018 Jan 10;7(3):478-484
pubmed: 29387641
Br J Radiol. 2011 Dec;84(1008):1067-82
pubmed: 22101579
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018 Aug;26(8):2490-2497
pubmed: 29411080
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2015 Apr;41(4):870-83
pubmed: 25045018
J Orthop Res. 2014 Nov;32(11):1430-5
pubmed: 25070492
Eur J Radiol. 2014 May;83(5):801-5
pubmed: 24613548
J Orthop Sci. 2003;8(3):449-56
pubmed: 12768494
Am J Sports Med. 2007 May;35(5):719-28
pubmed: 17337727
Skeletal Radiol. 2016 Feb;45(2):251-61
pubmed: 26634253
Scand J Med Sci Sports. 1997 Apr;7(2):86-95
pubmed: 9211609
Bioconjug Chem. 2015 Jul 15;26(7):1237-51
pubmed: 25970130
Radiology. 2019 Jun;291(3):722-729
pubmed: 31012813
Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2014 Nov 17;4(3):391-7
pubmed: 25489559
Skeletal Radiol. 2018 Jul;47(7):973-980
pubmed: 29396694
Eur Radiol. 2013 Oct;23(10):2814-22
pubmed: 23760303
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Jun;87(6):1229-40
pubmed: 15930531
Clin Radiol. 2003 Jan;58(1):1-19
pubmed: 12565203
Invest Radiol. 2014 May;49(5):339-45
pubmed: 24500089
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2017 Aug;46(2):461-467
pubmed: 28152242
Magn Reson Med. 2018 Aug;80(2):726-735
pubmed: 29194734
Magn Reson Med. 1987 Mar;4(3):203-20
pubmed: 3574056
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014 Jan 08;15:4
pubmed: 24397703
Invest Radiol. 2019 Apr;54(4):212-220
pubmed: 30444794