Quantitative imaging of excised osteoarthritic cartilage using spectral CT

European Radiology volume 27, pages384–392(2017)Cite this article

Abstract

Objectives

To quantify iodine uptake in articular cartilage as a marker of glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content using multi-energy spectral CT.

Methods

We incubated a 25-mm strip of excised osteoarthritic human tibial plateau in 50 % ionic iodine contrast and imaged it using a small-animal spectral scanner with a cadmium telluride photon-processing detector to quantify the iodine through the thickness of the articular cartilage. We imaged both spectroscopic phantoms and osteoarthritic tibial plateau samples. The iodine distribution as an inverse marker of GAG content was presented in the form of 2D and 3D images after applying a basis material decomposition technique to separate iodine in cartilage from bone. We compared this result with a histological section stained for GAG.

Results

The iodine in cartilage could be distinguished from subchondral bone and quantified using multi-energy CT. The articular cartilage showed variation in iodine concentration throughout its thickness which appeared to be inversely related to GAG distribution observed in histological sections.

Conclusions

Multi-energy CT can quantify ionic iodine contrast (as a marker of GAG content) within articular cartilage and distinguish it from bone by exploiting the energy-specific attenuation profiles of the associated materials.

Key points

• Contrast-enhanced articular cartilage and subchondral bone can be distinguished using multi-energy CT.

• Iodine as a marker of glycosaminoglycan content is quantifiable with multi-energy CT.

• Multi-energy CT could track alterations in GAG content occurring in osteoarthritis.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Abbreviations

ASIC:

Application-specific integrated circuit

CdTe:

Cadmium telluride

CNR:

Contrast to noise ratio

CT:

Computed tomography

dGEMRIC:

Delayed gadolinium contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage

DTPA:

Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid

EDTA:

Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid

GAG:

Glycosaminoglycan(s)

HU:

Hounsfield unit

MARS:

Medipix All Resolution System

MD:

Material decomposition

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

PBS:

Phosphate buffered saline

SART:

Simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique

References

  1. 1.

    Oei EH, van Tiel J, Robinson WH, Gold GE (2014) Quantitative radiologic imaging techniques for articular cartilage composition: toward early diagnosis and development of disease-modifying therapeutics for osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res 66:1129–1141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Hayashi D, Guermazi A, Kwoh CK (2014) Clinical and translational potential of MRI evaluation in knee osteoarthritis. Curr Rheumatol Rep 16:391

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Palmer AW, Guldberg RE, Levenston ME (2006) Analysis of cartilage matrix fixed charge density and three-dimensional morphology via contrast-enhanced microcomputed tomography. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:19255–19260

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Martel-Pelletier J, Boileau C, Pelletier J-P, Roughley PJ (2008) Cartilage in normal and osteoarthritis conditions. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 22:351–384

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Benders KE, Malda J, Saris DB, Dhert WJ, Steck R et al (2010) Formalin fixation affects equilibrium partitioning of an ionic contrast agent-microcomputed tomography (EPIC-muCT) imaging of osteochondral samples. Osteoarthr Cartil 18:1586–1591

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Farndale RW, Buttle DJ, Barrett AJ (1986) Improved quantitation and discrimination of sulphated glycosaminoglycans by use of dimethylmethylene blue. Biochim Biophys Acta 883:173–177

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Taylor C, Carballido-Gamio J, Majumdar S, Li X (2009) Comparison of quantitative imaging of cartilage for osteoarthritis: T2, T1rho, dGEMRIC and contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Magn Reson Imaging 27:779–784

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Matzat SJ, Kogan F, Fong GW, Gold GE (2014) Imaging strategies for assessing cartilage composition in osteoarthritis. Curr Rheumatol Rep 16:1–9

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Zbyn S, Mlynarik V, Juras V, Szomolanyi P, Trattnig S (2014) Sodium MR imaging of articular cartilage pathologies. Curr Radiol Rep 2:41

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Xie L, Lin AS, Levenston ME, Guldberg RE (2009) Quantitative assessment of articular cartilage morphology via EPIC-microCT. Osteoarthr Cartil 17:313–320

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Silvast TS, Kokkonen HT, Jurvelin JS, Quinn TM, Nieminen MT, Toyras J (2009) Diffusion and near equilibrium distribution of MRI and CT contrast agents in articular cartilage. Phys Med Biol 54:6823–6836

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Taguchi K, Iwanczyk JS (2013) Vision 20/20: single photon counting x-ray detectors in medical imaging. Med Phys 40:100901

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Anderson NG, Butler AP (2014) Clinical applications of spectral molecular imaging: potential and challenges. Contrast Media Mol imaging 9:3–12

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Anderson NG, Butler AP, Scott NJ, Cook NJ, Butzer JS et al (2010) Spectroscopic (multi-energy) CT distinguishes iodine and barium contrast material in MICE. Eur Radiol 20:2126–2134

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Ronaldson JP, Zainon R, Scott N, Gieseg SP, Butler AP, Butler PH et al (2012) Towards quantifying the composition of soft-tissues by spectral CT with Medipix3. Med Phys 39:6847–6857

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Ballabriga R, Alozy J, Blaj G, Campbell M, Fiederle M et al (2013) The Medipix3RX: a high resolution, zero dead-time pixel detector readout chip allowing spectroscopic imaging. J Inst 8:C02016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Panta RK, Walsh M, Bell S, Anderson N, Butler A, Butler P (2014) Energy calibration of the pixels of spectral x-ray detectors. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 34:697–706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Burghardt AJ, Kazakia GJ, Laib A, Majumdar S (2008) Quantitative assessment of bone tissue mineralization with polychromatic micro-computed tomography. Calcif Tissue Int 83:129–138

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Bateman CJ, Rajendran K, de Ruiter NJ, Butler AP, Butler PH, Renaud PF (2015) The hidden K-edge signal in K-edge imaging. arXiv preprint arXiv:150604223

  20. 20.

    Schon BS, Schrobback K, van der Ven M, Stroebel S, Hooper GJ, Woodfield TBF (2012) Validation of a high-throughput microtissue fabrication process for 3D assembly of tissue engineered cartilage constructs. Cell Tissue Res 347:629–642

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Tang ND, de Ruiter N, Mohr J, Butler AP, Butler PH, Aamir R (2012) Using algebraic reconstruction in computed tomography. Proceedings of the 27th conference on image and vision computing New Zealand, ACM, Dunedin, pp 216–221

  22. 22.

    Andersen AH, Kak AC (1984) Simultaneous algebraic reconstruction technique (SART): a superior implementation of the art algorithm. Ultrason Imaging 6:81–94

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Leng S, Yu L, Wang J, Fletcher JG, Mistretta CA, McCollough CH (2011) Noise reduction in spectral CT: reducing dose and breaking the trade-off between image noise and energy bin selection. Med Phys 38:4946–4957

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Palmer AJ, Brown CP, McNally EG, Price AJ, Tracey I et al (2013) Non-invasive imaging of cartilage in early osteoarthritis. Bone Joint J 95-B:738–746

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Hunter DJ (2011) Osteoarthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 25:801–814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Trattnig S, Millington SA, Szomolanyi P, Marlovits S (2007) MR imaging of osteochondral grafts and autologous chondrocyte implantation. Eur Radiol 17:103–118

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Lu XL, Mow VC (2008) Biomechanics of articular cartilage and determination of material properties. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40:193–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Rajendran K, Walsh M, de Ruiter N, Chernaglazov A, Panta R et al (2014) Reducing beam hardening effects and metal artifacts using Medipix3RX: with applications from biomaterial science. J Inst 9:P03015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Nicolaou S, Liang T, Murphy DT, Korzan JR, Ouellette H, Munk P (2012) Dual-energy CT: a promising new technique for assessment of the musculoskeletal system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199:S78–S86

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Stewart RC, Bansal PN, Entezari V, Lusic H, Nazarian RM et al (2013) Contrast-enhanced CT with a high-affinity cationic contrast agent for imaging ex vivo bovine, intact ex vivo rabbit, and in vivo rabbit cartilage. Radiology 266:141–150

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Nigel Anderson. The authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies: MARS Bioimaging Ltd.: Nigel Anderson holds 14 shares. Anthony Butler is a director and shareholder. This study has received funding by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, New Zealand (grant number: UOCX0805) and Arthritis Foundation New Zealand (grant number: R210). We are also grateful to Medipix2 and Medipix3 collaborations at CERN, and X-ray Imaging Europe, GmbH. The first author would like to acknowledge support from the Royal Society of New Zealand through the R. H. T. Bates award. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional review board approval was obtained: Upper South B Regional Ethics Committee (URB/07/04/014). Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study.

Methodology: prospective, experimental, performed at one institution.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Otago - Christchurch, 2 Riccarton Ave, Christchurch, 8140, New Zealand

    Kishore Rajendran, Christopher J. Bateman, Raja Aamir Younis, Niels J. A. de Ruiter, Mohsen Ramyar, Anthony P. H. Butler & Nigel G. Anderson

  2. Christchurch Regenerative Medicine and Tissue Engineering Group, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Caroline Löbker, Benjamin S. Schon, Gary J. Hooper & Tim B. F. Woodfield

  3. Department of Developmental BioEngineering, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

    Caroline Löbker

  4. Human Interface Technology Laboratory New Zealand, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Alex I. Chernoglazov

  5. European Organisation for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland

    Anthony P. H. Butler

  6. MARS Bioimaging, Christchurch, New Zealand

    Anthony P. H. Butler

Authors
  1. Kishore Rajendran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caroline Löbker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benjamin S. Schon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christopher J. Bateman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Raja Aamir Younis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Niels J. A. de Ruiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Alex I. Chernoglazov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Mohsen Ramyar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Gary J. Hooper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Anthony P. H. Butler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Tim B. F. Woodfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Nigel G. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nigel G. Anderson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rajendran, K., Löbker, C., Schon, B.S. et al. Quantitative imaging of excised osteoarthritic cartilage using spectral CT. Eur Radiol 27, 384–392 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4374-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Osteoarthritis
  • Articular cartilage
  • Spectral CT
  • Glycosaminoglycan
  • Ionic contrast media