Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

MARS MRI assessment of fatty degeneration of the gluteal muscles in patients with THA: reliability and accuracy of commonly used classification systems

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

Abstract

Introduction

Fatty degeneration of the gluteal muscles on metal artefact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI has been shown to correlate with poor functional outcomes, particularly in patients with total hip arthroplasty (THA). Standardized, reliable classification systems that permit assessment of fatty gluteal infiltration are needed for clinical decision making. This study aimed to compare the reproducibility and accuracy of commonly used MRI classification systems for fatty gluteal atrophy in THA patients.

Methods

MARS magnetic resonance images of 82 patients with unilateral THA were analysed by three independent trained observers. The readers evaluated fatty degeneration of the gluteus minimus, gluteus medius, and gluteus maximus according to 3 widely used classification systems: Goutallier, Quartile, and Bal and Lowe. Interobserver and intraobserver repeatability were determined using the weighted Kappa test. Quantitative evaluation of the proportion of intramuscular fat based on MR signal intensities was obtained and represented the gold standard.

Results

Mean interobserver agreement for the Quartile classification system (0.93) was higher compared with Goutallier classification system (0.87) and the Bal and Lowe classification system (0.83; range 0.79–0.88; p = 0.04). Intraobserver repeatability was significantly higher for the Quartile classification system (weighted kappa 0.91, 0.89, 0.85) compared with the Bal and Lowe classification system (weighted kappa 0.83, 0.77, 0.75; p < 0.01) and Goutallier classification system (weighted kappa 0.83, 0.77, 0.75; p = 0.04). Agreement with the gold standard measurements was significantly higher in the Quartile classification system (0.88, 0.84, 0.81) compared with the Goutallier classification system (0.80, 0.77, 0.78; p = 0.02) and Bal and Lowe classification system (0.76, 0.74, 0.73; p < 0.01).

Discussion

This study directly compared three clinically used MRI classification systems for fatty gluteal muscle atrophy in THA patients. Our findings demonstrate that although all three classification systems demonstrate good reproducibility and accuracy, the Quartile classification system is superior to the others in terms of intraobserver reliability and accuracy to quantify fatty gluteal degeneration in THA patients.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Zhao K, Kelly M, Bozic KJ. Future young patient demand for primary and revision joint replacement: national projections from 2010 to 2030. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2606–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Halawi MJ, Jongbloed W, Baron S, Savoy L, Williams VJ, Cote MP. Patient dissatisfaction after primary total joint arthroplasty: the patient perspective. J Arthroplast. 2019;34:1093–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Okafor L, Chen AF. Patient satisfaction and total hip arthroplasty: a review. Arthroplasty. 2019;1:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42836-019-0007-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Damm P, Zonneveld J, Brackertz S, Streitparth F, Winkler T. Gluteal muscle damage leads to higher in vivo hip joint loads 3 months after total hip arthroplasty. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0190626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Müller M, Tohtz S, Dewey M, Springer I, Perka C. Evidence of reduced muscle trauma through a minimally invasive anterolateral approach by means of MRI. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:3192–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-010-1378-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Lachiewicz PF. Abductor tendon tears of the hip: evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19:385–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Shellock FG, Mink JH, Curtin S, Friedman MJ. MR imaging and metallic implants for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: assessment of ferromagnetism and artifact. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1992;2:225–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Czervionke LF, Daniels DL, Wehrli FW, Mark LP, Hendrix LE, Strandt JA, et al. Magnetic susceptibility artifacts in gradient-recalled echo MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1988;9:1149–55.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Susa M, Oguro S, Kikuta K, Nishimoto K, Horiuchi K, Jinzaki M, et al. Novel MR imaging method--MAVRIC--for metal artifact suppression after joint replacement in musculoskeletal tumor patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015;16:377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang T, Shao L, Xu W, Chen H, Huang W. Comparison of morphological changes of gluteus medius and abductor strength for total hip arthroplasty via posterior and modified direct lateral approaches. Int Orthop. 2019;43:2467–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Miozzari HH, Dora C, Clark JM, Notzli HP. Late repair of abductor avulsion after the transgluteal approach for hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2010;25:450–457.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Thaunat M, Clowez G, Desseaux A, Murphy CG, Sbiyaa M, Noel E, et al. Influence of muscle fatty degeneration on functional outcomes after endoscopic gluteus medius repair. Arthroscopy. 2018;34:1816–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Berber R, Khoo M, Cook E, Guppy A, Hua J, Miles J, et al. Muscle atrophy and metal-on-metal hip implants: a serial MRI study of 74 hips. Acta Orthop. 2015;86:351–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rai S, Meng C, Wang X, Chaudhary N, Jin S, Yang S, et al. Gluteal muscle contracture: diagnosis and management options. SICOT-J. 2017;3:1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Chi AS, Long SS, Zoga AC, Parker L, Morrison WB. Association of gluteus medius and minimus muscle atrophy and fall-related hip fracture in older individuals using computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2016;40:238–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Goutallier D, Postel J-M, Gleyze P, Leguilloux P, Van Driessche S. Influence of cuff muscle fatty degeneration on anatomic and functional outcomes after simple suture of full-thickness tears. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2003;12:550–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zanetti M, Gerber C, Hodler J. Quantitative assessment of the muscles of the rotator cuff with magnetic resonance imaging. Investig Radiol. 1998;33:163–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Tingart MJ, Apreleva M, Lehtinen JT, Capell B, Palmer WE, Warner JJP. Magnetic resonance imaging in quantitative analysis of rotator cuff muscle volume. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003:104–10.

  19. Spencer EEJ, Dunn WR, Wright RW, Wolf BR, Spindler KP, McCarty E, et al. Interobserver agreement in the classification of rotator cuff tears using magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:99–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Williams MD, Lädermann A, Melis B, Barthelemy R, Walch G. Fatty infiltration of the supraspinatus: a reliability study. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2009;18:581–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Engelken F, Wassilew GI, Kohlitz T, Brockhaus S, Hamm B, Perka C, et al. Assessment of fatty degeneration of the gluteal muscles in patients with THA using MRI: reliability and accuracy of the Goutallier and quartile classification systems. J Arthroplast. 2014;29:149–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bal BS, Lowe JA. Muscle damage in minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty: MRI evidence that it is not significant. Instr Course Lect. 2008;57:223–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Choi S-J, Koch KM, Hargreaves BA, Stevens KJ, Gold GE. Metal artifact reduction with MAVRIC SL at 3-T MRI in patients with hip arthroplasty. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:140–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kwon YM, Liow MHL, Dimitriou D, Tsai TY, Freiberg AA, Rubash HE. What is the natural history of “asymptomatic” pseudotumours in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty? Minimum 4-year metal artifact reduction sequence magnetic resonance imaging longitudinal study. J Arthroplast. 2016.

  25. Fuchs B, Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Gerber C. Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 1999;8:599–605.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Kenn W, Böhm D, Gohlke F, Hümmer C, Köstler H, Hahn D. 2D SPLASH: a new method to determine the fatty infiltration of the rotator cuff muscles. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:2331–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Pfirrmann CWA, Schmid MR, Zanetti M, Jost B, Gerber C, Hodler J. Assessment of fat content in supraspinatus muscle with proton MR spectroscopy in asymptomatic volunteers and patients with supraspinatus tendon lesions. Radiology. 2004;232:709–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Goldstein JM, Fehring TK, Fehring KA. Cystic adverse local tissue reactions in asymptomatic modular metal-on-metal total hips may decrease over time. J Arthroplast. 2016;31:1589–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kwon YM. Evaluation of the painful dual taper modular neck stem total hip arthroplasty: do they all require revision? J Arthroplast. 2016.

  32. Lippe J, Spang JT, Leger RR, Arciero RA, Mazzocca AD, Shea KP. Inter-rater agreement of the Goutallier, Patte, and Warner classification scores using preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in patients with rotator cuff tears. Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg. 2012;28:154–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Oh JH, Kim SH, Choi J-A, Kim Y, Oh CH. Reliability of the grading system for fatty degeneration of rotator cuff muscles. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:1558–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Bridge P, Fielding A, Rowntree P, Pullar A. Intraobserver variability: should we worry? J Med Imaging Radiat Sci. 2016:217–20.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bioengineering Laboratory, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA

    Christian Klemt, F. Joseph Simeone, Christopher M. Melnic, Venkatsaiakhil Tirumala, Liang Xiong & Young-Min Kwon

Authors
  1. Christian Klemt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. F. Joseph Simeone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christopher M. Melnic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Venkatsaiakhil Tirumala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Liang Xiong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Young-Min Kwon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young-Min Kwon.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Klemt, C., Simeone, F.J., Melnic, C.M. et al. MARS MRI assessment of fatty degeneration of the gluteal muscles in patients with THA: reliability and accuracy of commonly used classification systems. Skeletal Radiol 50, 665–672 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-020-03611-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-020-03611-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation