Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of MRI and arthroscopy findings for transitional zone cartilage damage in the acetabulum of the hip joint

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To assess the performance of morphologic and hypointense signal changes on MRI to predict grades and types of acetabular cartilage damage in the chondrolabral transitional zone (TZ) of the hip identified at arthroscopy.

Materials and methods

This retrospective single-center study reviewed conventional 3T MRI hip studies from individuals with symptomatic femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and subsequent hip arthroscopy surgery within 6 months. Independent review was made by three radiologists for the presence of morphologic damage or a hypointense signal lesion in the TZ on MRI. Fleiss’ kappa statistic was used to assess inter-reader agreement. The degree of TZ surfacing damage (modified Outerbridge grades 1–4) and presence of non-surfacing wave sign at arthroscopic surgery were collected. Relationship between sensitivity and lesion grade was examined.

Results

One hundred thirty-six MRI hip studies from 40 males and 74 females were included (mean age 28.5 years, age range 13–54 years). MRI morphologic lesions had a sensitivity of 64.9–71.6% and specificity of 48.4–67.7% for arthroscopic surfacing lesions, with greater sensitivity seen for higher grade lesions. Low sensitivity was seen for wave sign lesions (34.5–51.7%). MRI hypointense signal lesions had a sensitivity of 26.3–62% and specificity of 43.8–78.0% for any lesion. Inter-reader agreement was moderate for morphologic lesions (k = 0.601) and poor for hypointense signal lesions (k = 0.097).

Conclusion

Morphologic cartilage damage in the TZ on MRI had moderate sensitivity for any cartilage lesion, better sensitivity for higher grade lesions, and poor sensitivity for wave sign lesions. The diagnostic value of hypointense signal lesions was uncertain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, BKM, upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Onggo JD, Onggo JR, Nambiar M, et al. The ‘wave sign’ in hip arthroscopy: a systematic review of epidemiological factors, current diagnostic methods and treatment options. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2020;7:410–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Lund B, Nielsen TG, Lind M. Cartilage status in FAI patients - results from the Danish Hip Arthroscopy Registry (DHAR). Sicot J. 2017;3:44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Mayer SW, Fauser TR, Marx RG, et al. Reliability of the classification of cartilage and labral injuries during hip arthroscopy. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2020;7:448–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Anderson LA, Peters CL, Park BB, Stoddard GJ, Erickson JA, Crim JR. Acetabular cartilage delamination in femoroacetabular impingement. Risk factors and magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:305–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jannelli E, Parafioriti A, Acerbi A, Ivone A, Fioruzzi A, Fontana A. Acetabular delamination: epidemiology, histological features, and treatment. Cartilage. 2019;10:314–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pfirrmann CW, Duc SR, Zanetti M, Dora C, Hodler J. MR arthrography of acetabular cartilage delamination in femoroacetabular cam impingement. Radiology. 2008;249:236–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Konstantinidis G, Mitchell M, Boyd G, Coady C, Ghosh S, Wong I. Poor sensitivity of magnetic resonance arthrography to detect hip chondral delamination: a retrospective follow-up of 227 FAI-Operated Patients. Cartilage. 2021;12:162–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gao G, Dong H, Wang J, Ao Y, Xu Y. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of acetabular chondral delamination in femoroacetabular impingement. Orthop J Sports Med. 2022;10:23259671221119225.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Linda DD, Naraghi A, Murnaghan L, Whelan D, White LM. Accuracy of non-arthrographic 3T MR imaging in evaluation of intra-articular pathology of the hip in femoroacetabular impingement. Skeletal Radiol. 2017;46:299–308.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Carulli C, Tonelli F, Melani T, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance arthrography in detecting intra-articular pathology associated with femoroacetabular impingement. Joints. 2018;6:104–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Zimmerer A, Schneider MM, Tramountanis K, et al. Assessment of acetabular chondral damage and labral pathologies via direct MR arthrography: specialization matters. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142:1563–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Markhardt BK, Kijowski R. The clinical significance of dark cartilage lesions identified on MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:1251–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Markhardt BK, Huang BK, Spiker AM, Chang EY. Interpretation of cartilage damage at routine clinical MRI: how to match arthroscopic findings. Radiographics. 2022;42:1457–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Nguyen MS, Kheyfits V, Giordano BD, Dieudonne G, Monu JU. Hip anatomic variants that may mimic abnormalities at MRI: labral variants. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201:W394–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Crewson PE. Reader agreement studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184:1391–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Fitzmaurice GM, Laird NM, Ware JH. Applied longitudinal analysis, vol. xxv. 2nd ed. Hoboken, N.J: Wiley; 2011. p. 701.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Carreira DS, Shaw DB, Ueland TE, et al. Acetabular cartilage lesions predict inferior mid-term outcomes for arthroscopic labral repair and treatment of femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Arthroscopy. 2022;38:3152–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. McCarthy JC, Jarrett BT, Ojeifo O, Lee JA, Bragdon CR. What factors influence long-term survivorship after hip arthroscopy? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:362–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Bagheri K, Sierra F, Jamali AA. Acetabular cartilage repair: state of the art in surgical treatment. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2020;7:205–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Saied AM, Redant C, El-Batouty M, et al. Accuracy of magnetic resonance studies in the detection of chondral and labral lesions in femoroacetabular impingement: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18:83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmaranzer F, Todorski IAS, Lerch TD, Schwab J, Cullmann-Bastian J, Tannast M. Intra-articular lesions: imaging and surgical correlation. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2017;21:487–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Naraghi A, White LM. MRI of labral and chondral lesions of the hip. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:479–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Link TM, Schwaiger BJ, Zhang AL. Regional articular cartilage abnormalities of the hip. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:502–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Potter HG, Schachar J. High resolution noncontrast MRI of the hip. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2010;31:268–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Li X, Pai A, Blumenkrantz G, et al. Spatial distribution and relationship of T1rho and T2 relaxation times in knee cartilage with osteoarthritis. Magn Reson Med. 2009;61:1310–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Zhong H, Miller DJ, Urish KL. T2 map signal variation predicts symptomatic osteoarthritis progression: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Skeletal Radiol. 2016;45:909–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Mosher TJ, Zhang Z, Reddy R, et al. Knee articular cartilage damage in osteoarthritis: analysis of MR image biomarker reproducibility in ACRIN-PA 4001 multicenter trial. Radiology. 2011;258:832–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Cao G, Gao S, Xiong B. Application of quantitative T1, T2 and T2* mapping magnetic resonance imaging in cartilage degeneration of the shoulder joint. Sci Rep. 2023;13:4558.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Nebelung S, Brill N, Tingart M, et al. Quantitative OCT and MRI biomarkers for the differentiation of cartilage degeneration. Skeletal Radiol. 2016;45:505–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shao H, Pauli C, Li S, et al. Magic angle effect plays a major role in both T1rho and T2 relaxation in articular cartilage. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25:2022–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Afsahi AM, Ma Y, Jang H, et al. Ultrashort echo time magnetic resonance imaging techniques: met and unmet needs in musculoskeletal imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2022;55:1597–612.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chang EY, Du J, Bae WC, Chung CB. Qualitative and quantitative ultrashort echo time imaging of musculoskeletal tissues. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2015;19:375–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Cheng KY, Moazamian D, Ma, Jang H, Jerban S, Du J, Chung CB. Clinical application of ultrashort echo time (UTE) and zero echo time (ZTE) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the evaluation of osteoarthritis. Skeletal Radiol 2023:52(11):2149–2157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-022-04269-1

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Musculoskeletal Imaging and Intervention, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    B. Keegan Markhardt, Humberto G. Rosas, John S. Symanski & Donna G. Blankenbaker

  2. Department of Radiology, Musculoskeletal Section, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA

    Samuel Hund

  3. Departments of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Lu Mao

  4. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA

    Andrea M. Spiker

Authors
  1. B. Keegan Markhardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samuel Hund
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Humberto G. Rosas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John S. Symanski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lu Mao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrea M. Spiker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Donna G. Blankenbaker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Keegan Markhardt.

Additional information

All illustrations are made by BKM and not previously published. All cases are not previously or otherwhere published.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Markhardt, B.K., Hund, S., Rosas, H.G. et al. Comparison of MRI and arthroscopy findings for transitional zone cartilage damage in the acetabulum of the hip joint. Skeletal Radiol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-024-04563-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-024-04563-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation