Variation in cartilage T2 and T2* mapping of the wrist: a comparison between 3- and 7-T MRI.

Cartilage (articular) Image processing (computer-assisted) Magnetic resonance imaging Triangular fibrocartilage Wrist joint

Journal

European radiology experimental
ISSN: 2509-9280
Titre abrégé: Eur Radiol Exp
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101721752

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
14 Dec 2023
Historique:
received: 14 06 2023
accepted: 30 09 2023
medline: 14 12 2023
pubmed: 14 12 2023
entrez: 13 12 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

To analyze regional variations in T2 and T2* relaxation times in wrist joint cartilage and the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) at 3 and 7 T and to compare values between field strengths. Twenty-five healthy controls and 25 patients with chronic wrist pain were examined at 3 and 7 T on the same day using T2- and T2*-weighted sequences. Six different regions of interest (ROIs) were evaluated for cartilage and 3 ROIs were evaluated at the TFCC based on manual segmentation. Paired t-tests were used to compare T2 and T2* values between field strengths and between different ROIs. Spearman's rank correlation was calculated to assess correlations between T2 and T2* time values at 3 and 7 T. T2 and T2* time values of the cartilage differed significantly between 3 and 7 T for all ROIs (p ≤ 0.045), with one exception: at the distal lunate, no significant differences in T2 values were observed between field strengths. T2* values differed significantly between 3 and 7 T for all ROIs of the TFCC (p ≤ 0.001). Spearman's rank correlation between 3 and 7 T ranged from 0.03 to 0.62 for T2 values and from 0.01 to 0.48 for T2* values. T2 and T2* values for cartilage varied across anatomic locations in healthy controls at both 3 and 7 T. Quantitative results of T2 and T2* mapping at the wrist differ between field strengths, with poor correlation between 3 and 7 T. Local variations in cartilage T2 and T2* values are observed in healthy individuals. T2 and T2* mapping are feasible for compositional imaging of the TFCC and the cartilage at the wrist at both 3 and 7 T, but the clinical interpretation remains challenging due to differences between field strengths and variations between anatomic locations. •Field strength and anatomic locations influence T2 and T2* values at the wrist. •T2 and T2* values have a poor correlation between 3 and 7 T. •Local reference values are needed for each anatomic location for reliable interpretation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
To analyze regional variations in T2 and T2* relaxation times in wrist joint cartilage and the triangular fibrocartilage complex (TFCC) at 3 and 7 T and to compare values between field strengths.
METHODS METHODS
Twenty-five healthy controls and 25 patients with chronic wrist pain were examined at 3 and 7 T on the same day using T2- and T2*-weighted sequences. Six different regions of interest (ROIs) were evaluated for cartilage and 3 ROIs were evaluated at the TFCC based on manual segmentation. Paired t-tests were used to compare T2 and T2* values between field strengths and between different ROIs. Spearman's rank correlation was calculated to assess correlations between T2 and T2* time values at 3 and 7 T.
RESULTS RESULTS
T2 and T2* time values of the cartilage differed significantly between 3 and 7 T for all ROIs (p ≤ 0.045), with one exception: at the distal lunate, no significant differences in T2 values were observed between field strengths. T2* values differed significantly between 3 and 7 T for all ROIs of the TFCC (p ≤ 0.001). Spearman's rank correlation between 3 and 7 T ranged from 0.03 to 0.62 for T2 values and from 0.01 to 0.48 for T2* values. T2 and T2* values for cartilage varied across anatomic locations in healthy controls at both 3 and 7 T.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Quantitative results of T2 and T2* mapping at the wrist differ between field strengths, with poor correlation between 3 and 7 T. Local variations in cartilage T2 and T2* values are observed in healthy individuals.
RELEVANCE STATEMENT CONCLUSIONS
T2 and T2* mapping are feasible for compositional imaging of the TFCC and the cartilage at the wrist at both 3 and 7 T, but the clinical interpretation remains challenging due to differences between field strengths and variations between anatomic locations.
KEY POINTS CONCLUSIONS
•Field strength and anatomic locations influence T2 and T2* values at the wrist. •T2 and T2* values have a poor correlation between 3 and 7 T. •Local reference values are needed for each anatomic location for reliable interpretation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38093075
doi: 10.1186/s41747-023-00394-1
pii: 10.1186/s41747-023-00394-1
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

80

Subventions

Organisme : German Roentgen Society
ID : 2018_01: 7T MRI of the wrist

Informations de copyright

© 2023. The Author(s).

Références

Rehnitz C, Klaan B, Burkholder I, von Stillfried F, Kauczor HU, Weber MA (2017) Delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) and T(2) mapping at 3T MRI of the wrist: Feasibility and clinical application. J Magn Reson Imaging 45:381–389. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25371
doi: 10.1002/jmri.25371 pubmed: 27381489
Hayter CL, Gold SL, Potter HG (2013) Magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist: bone and cartilage injury. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:1005–1019. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23845
doi: 10.1002/jmri.23845 pubmed: 23606139
Nagy L (2005) Salvage of post-traumatic arthritis following distal radius fracture. Hand Clin 21:489–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hcl.2005.03.005
doi: 10.1016/j.hcl.2005.03.005 pubmed: 16039459
Rettig AC (2003) Athletic injuries of the wrist and hand. Part I: traumatic injuries of the wrist. Am J Sports Med 31:1038–1048. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465030310060801
doi: 10.1177/03635465030310060801 pubmed: 14623677
Hesper T, Hosalkar HS, Bittersohl D et al (2014) T2*mapping for articular cartilage assessment: principles, current applications, and future prospects. Skeletal Radiol 43:1429–1445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-014-1852-3
doi: 10.1007/s00256-014-1852-3 pubmed: 24643762
Heiss R, Janka R, Uder M, Nagel AM, Trattnig S, Roemer FW (2019) Update cartilage imaging of the small joints Focus on high-field MRI. Radiologe 59:732–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-019-0521-x
doi: 10.1007/s00117-019-0521-x pubmed: 30953080
Crema MD, Roemer FW, Marra MD et al (2011) Articular cartilage in the knee: current MR imaging techniques and applications in clinical practice and research. Radiographics 31:37–61. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.311105084
doi: 10.1148/rg.311105084 pubmed: 21257932
Newbould RD, Miller SR, Toms LD et al (2012) T2* measurement of the knee articular cartilage in osteoarthritis at 3T. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:1422–1429. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23598
doi: 10.1002/jmri.23598 pubmed: 22314961 pmcid: 4351813
Krug R, Stehling C, Kelley DA, Majumdar S, Link TM (2009) Imaging of the musculoskeletal system in vivo using ultra-high field magnetic resonance at 7 T. Invest Radiol 44:613–618. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181b4c055
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181b4c055 pubmed: 19652609
Rauscher I, Bender B, Grozinger G et al (2014) Assessment of T1, T1rho, and T2 values of the ulnocarpal disc in healthy subjects at 3 tesla. Magn Reson Imaging 32:1085–1090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2014.05.010
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2014.05.010 pubmed: 24960365
Yan M, Wen S, Wang X (2022) Quantitative analysis of triangular fibrocartilage complex injury by 3.0T MR 3D VIBE and T2 mapping techniques. Medicine (Baltimore) 101:e31589. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000031589
Heiss R, Weber MA, Balbach E et al (2023) Clinical application of ultrahigh-field-strength wrist MRI: a multireader 3-T and 7-T comparison study. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.220753
Donati OF, Nordmeyer-Massner J, Nanz D et al (2011) Direct MR arthrography of cadaveric wrists: comparison between MR imaging at 3.0T and 7.0T and gross pathologic inspection. J Magn Reson Imaging 34:1333–1340. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22781
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22781 pubmed: 21953599
Friedrich KM, Komorowski A, Trattnig S (2012) 7T imaging of the wrist. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 16:88–92. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1311760
doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1311760 pubmed: 22648424
Nordmeyer-Massner JA, Wyss M, Andreisek G, Pruessmann KP, Hodler J (2011) In vitro and in vivo comparison of wrist MR imaging at 3.0 and 7.0 tesla using a gradient echo sequence and identical eight-channel coil array designs. J Magn Reson Imaging 33:661–667. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.22419
doi: 10.1002/jmri.22419 pubmed: 21563250
Raval SB, Zhao T, Krishnamurthy N et al (2016) Ultra-high-field RF coil development for evaluating upper extremity imaging applications. NMR Biomed 29:1768–1779. https://doi.org/10.1002/nbm.3582
doi: 10.1002/nbm.3582 pubmed: 27809383 pmcid: 5929486
Subburaj K, Valentinitsch A, Dillon AB et al (2013) Regional variations in MR relaxation of hip joint cartilage in subjects with and without femoralacetabular impingement. Magn Reson Imaging 31:1129–1136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2013.01.009
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2013.01.009 pubmed: 23684960 pmcid: 3729918
Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Hughes T et al (2008) In vivo biochemical 7.0 Tesla magnetic resonance: preliminary results of dGEMRIC, zonal T2, and T2* mapping of articular cartilage. Invest Radiol 43:619–626. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0b013e31817e9122
doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31817e9122 pubmed: 18708855
Bae WC, Ruangchaijatuporn T, Chang EY et al (2016) MR morphology of triangular fibrocartilage complex: correlation with quantitative MR and biomechanical properties. Skeletal Radiol 45:447–454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2309-z
doi: 10.1007/s00256-015-2309-z pubmed: 26691643
Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15:155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012 pubmed: 27330520 pmcid: 4913118
Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ (2004) Cartilage MRI T2 relaxation time mapping: overview and applications. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 8:355–368. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2004-861764
doi: 10.1055/s-2004-861764 pubmed: 15643574
Emanuel KS, Kellner LJ, Peters MJM, Haartmans MJJ, Hooijmans MT, Emans PJ (2022) The relation between the biochemical composition of knee articular cartilage and quantitative MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 30:650–662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2021.10.016
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2021.10.016 pubmed: 34826570
Gotestrand S, Bjorkman A, Bjorkman-Burtscher IM et al (2022) Visualization of wrist anatomy-a comparison between 7T and 3T MRI. Eur Radiol 32:1362–1370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-021-08165-5
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-08165-5 pubmed: 34378077
Grunz JP, Gietzen CH, Christopoulos G et al (2021) Osteoarthritis of the wrist: pathology, radiology, and treatment. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 25:294–303. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1730948
doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1730948 pubmed: 34374064
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation P (2009) Guidelines on limits of exposure to static magnetic fields. Health Phys 96:504–514. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.HP.0000343164.27920.4a
doi: 10.1097/01.HP.0000343164.27920.4a
Theysohn JM, Maderwald S, Kraff O, Moenninghoff C, Ladd ME, Ladd SC (2008) Subjective acceptance of 7 Tesla MRI for human imaging. MAGMA 21:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10334-007-0095-x
doi: 10.1007/s10334-007-0095-x pubmed: 18064501
Hansson B, Hoglund P, Markenroth Bloch K et al (2019) Short-term effects experienced during examinations in an actively shielded 7 T MR. Bioelectromagnetics 40:234–249. https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.22189
doi: 10.1002/bem.22189 pubmed: 30920671 pmcid: 6593459
Hansson B, Markenroth Bloch K, Owman T et al (2020) Subjectively reported effects experienced in an actively shielded 7T MRI: a large-scale study. J Magn Reson Imaging 52:1265–1276. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.27139
doi: 10.1002/jmri.27139 pubmed: 32196818
Friebe B, Wollrab A, Thormann M et al (2015) Sensory perceptions of individuals exposed to the static field of a 7T MRI: a controlled blinded study. J Magn Reson Imaging 41:1675–1681. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24748
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24748 pubmed: 25236353
Ladd ME, Bachert P, Meyerspeer M et al (2018) Pros and cons of ultra-high-field MRI/MRS for human application. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc 109:1–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnmrs.2018.06.001
doi: 10.1016/j.pnmrs.2018.06.001 pubmed: 30527132
Welsch GH, Apprich S, Zbyn S et al (2011) Biochemical (T2, T2* and magnetisation transfer ratio) MRI of knee cartilage: feasibility at ultra-high field (7T) compared with high field (3T) strength. Eur Radiol 21:1136–1143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-010-2029-7
doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-2029-7 pubmed: 21153551
Agt RP, Neji R, Wood TC, Baburamani AA, Malik SJ, Hajnal JV (2020) Controlled saturation magnetization transfer for reproducible multivendor variable flip angle T(1) and T(2) mapping. Magn Reson Med 84:221–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.28109
doi: 10.1002/mrm.28109
Pachowsky ML, Trattnig S, Apprich S, Mauerer A, Zbyn S, Welsch GH (2013) Impact of different coils on biochemical T2 and T2* relaxation time mapping of articular patella cartilage. Skeletal Radiol 42:1565–1572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-013-1699-z
doi: 10.1007/s00256-013-1699-z pubmed: 23974465
Chang G, Wiggins GC, Xia D et al (2012) Comparison of a 28-channel receive array coil and quadrature volume coil for morphologic imaging and T2 mapping of knee cartilage at 7T. J Magn Reson Imaging 35:441–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.23506
doi: 10.1002/jmri.23506 pubmed: 22095723
Matzat SJ, McWalter EJ, Kogan F, Chen W, Gold GE (2015) T2 Relaxation time quantitation differs between pulse sequences in articular cartilage. J Magn Reson Imaging 42:105–113. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.24757
doi: 10.1002/jmri.24757 pubmed: 25244647
McKenzie CA, Williams A, Prasad PV, Burstein D (2006) Three-dimensional delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) at 1.5T and 3.0T. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:928–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.20689
doi: 10.1002/jmri.20689 pubmed: 16941612
Shepherd DE, Seedhom BB (1999) Thickness of human articular cartilage in joints of the lower limb. Ann Rheum Dis 58:27–34. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.58.1.27
doi: 10.1136/ard.58.1.27 pubmed: 10343537 pmcid: 1752762
Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ, Smith MB (2000) Human articular cartilage: influence of aging and early symptomatic degeneration on the spatial variation of T2–preliminary findings at 3 T. Radiology 214:259–266. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.214.1.r00ja15259
doi: 10.1148/radiology.214.1.r00ja15259 pubmed: 10644134
Nishii T, Tanaka H, Sugano N, Sakai T, Hananouchi T, Yoshikawa H (2008) Evaluation of cartilage matrix disorders by T2 relaxation time in patients with hip dysplasia. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 16:227–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2007.06.003
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.06.003 pubmed: 17644363
Shao H, Pauli C, Li S et al (2017) Magic angle effect plays a major role in both T1rho and T2 relaxation in articular cartilage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 25:2022–2030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2017.01.013
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2017.01.013 pubmed: 28161394 pmcid: 5732002
Mosher TJ, Smith H, Dardzinski BJ, Schmithorst VJ, Smith MB (2001) MR imaging and T2 mapping of femoral cartilage: in vivo determination of the magic angle effect. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:665–669. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.177.3.1770665
doi: 10.2214/ajr.177.3.1770665 pubmed: 11517068
Balamoody S, Williams TG, Wolstenholme C et al (2013) Magnetic resonance transverse relaxation time T2 of knee cartilage in osteoarthritis at 3-T: a cross-sectional multicentre, multivendor reproducibility study. Skeletal Radiol 42:511–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-012-1511-5
doi: 10.1007/s00256-012-1511-5 pubmed: 23053200
Dardzinski BJ, Schneider E (2013) Radiofrequency (RF) coil impacts the value and reproducibility of cartilage spin-spin (T2) relaxation time measurements. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 21:710–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2013.01.006
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.01.006 pubmed: 23376528 pmcid: 3624070
Kim J, Mamoto K, Lartey R et al (2020) Multi-vendor multi-site T(1rho) and T(2) quantification of knee cartilage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 28:1539–1550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca.2020.07.005
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2020.07.005 pubmed: 32739341 pmcid: 8094841
Pai A, Li X, Majumdar S (2008) A comparative study at 3 T of sequence dependence of T2 quantitation in the knee. Magn Reson Imaging 26:1215–1220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2008.02.017
doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2008.02.017 pubmed: 18502073 pmcid: 2849643
Chalian M, Li X, Guermazi A et al (2021) The QIBA Profile for MRI-based Compositional Imaging of Knee Cartilage. Radiology 301:423–432. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2021204587
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021204587 pubmed: 34491127
Hayashi D, Roemer FW, Tol JL et al (2023) Emerging quantitative imaging techniques in sports medicine. Radiology 308:e221531. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.221531
doi: 10.1148/radiol.221531 pubmed: 37552087

Auteurs

Rafael Heiss (R)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. Rafael.Heiss@uk-erlangen.de.

Marc-André Weber (MA)

Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Pediatric Radiology and Neuroradiology, University Medical Center Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Germany.

Eva L Balbach (EL)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Maximilian Hinsen (M)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Frederik Geissler (F)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Armin M Nagel (AM)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Medical Physics in Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Mark E Ladd (ME)

Medical Physics in Radiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of Physics and Astronomy, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 226, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Andreas Arkudas (A)

Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery and Laboratory for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Krankenhausstraße 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Raymund E Horch (RE)

Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery and Laboratory for Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Krankenhausstraße 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Christine Gall (C)

Institute for Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Waldstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Michael Uder (M)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Frank W Roemer (FW)

Department of Radiology, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Maximiliansplatz 3, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Boston University School of Medicine, 72 E Concord St, Boston, MA, 02118, USA.

Classifications MeSH