Short tau inversion recovery and proton density-weighted fat suppressed sequences for the evaluation of osteoarthritis of the knee with a 1.0 T dedicated extremity MRI: development of a time-efficient sequence protocol
- 308 Downloads
Aim of this study was to develop a time-efficient sequence protocol for a 1.0 T dedicated MR system to be used for whole-organ scoring of osteoarthritis (OA). Thirty-four knees were examined using a protocol that included fat suppressed fast spin echo proton density weighted sequences (PDFS) in three planes plus a coronal STIR sequence. Two radiologists scored each knee by consensus for five OA features. In separate sessions, all knees were scored using three different combinations of sequences: (1) all four sequences (reference protocol, 16 min 31 s scanning time), (2) three PDFS sequences without STIR (“No STIR”, 12 min 25 s scanning time) and (3) sagittal and axial PDFS sequences plus a coronal STIR sequence (“No PDFS”, 11 min 49 s scanning time). Agreement of the readings using both subsets of sequences compared to the reference protocol was evaluated using weighted kappa statistics. κ-coefficients showed good or excellent agreement for both sequence subsets in comparison to the reference protocol for all assessed features. κ-coefficients for No PDFS/No STIR: bone marrow abnormalities (0.74/0.67), subarticular cysts (0.84/0.63), marginal osteophytes (0.77/0.71), menisci (0.75/0.79), tibial cartilage (0.71/0.78). Optimization of sequence protocols consisting of three sequences results in time savings and cost efficiency in imaging of knee OA without loss of information over a more time consuming protocol.
KeywordsOsteoarthritis MRI Fat suppression STIR Scoring Pulse sequences Cartilage Bone marrow edema
The Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST) is a 7-year cooperative epidemiological study of knee osteoarthritis funded by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) within the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
NIA grant numbers: U01 AG18820, U01 AG19069, U01 AG18832, U01 AG18947.
- 1.Peterfy CG (1998) Magnetic resonance imaging. In: Brandt KD, Doherty M, Lohmander S (eds) Osteoarthritis. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 473–494Google Scholar
- 6.Peterfy CG, Roberts T, Genant HK (1998) Dedicated extremity MR imaging: an emerging technology. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 6:849–870Google Scholar
- 8.Drape JL, Pessis E, Auleley GR, Chevrot A, Dougados M, Ayral X (1998) Quantitative MR imaging evaluation of chondropathy in osteoarthritic knees. Radiology 208:49–55Google Scholar
- 9.Bredella MA, Tirman PF, Peterfy CG, Zarlingo M, Feller JF, Bost FW, Belzer JP, Wischer TK, Genant HK (1999) Accuracy of T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging with fat saturation in detecting cartilage defects in the knee: comparison with arthroscopy in 130 patients. Am J Roentgenol 172:1073–1080PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Brennan P, Silman A (1992) Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures. BMJ 304:1491–1494Google Scholar
- 14.Delfaut EM, Beltran J, Johnson G, Rousseau J, Marchandise X, Cotten A (1999) Fat suppression in MR imaging: techniques and pitfalls. Radiographics 19:373–382Google Scholar
- 15.Mohr A, Roemer FW, Genant HK, Liess C (2003) Using fat-saturated proton density-weighted MR imaging to evaluate articular cartilage. Am J Roentgenol 181:280–281Google Scholar