Skip to main content

Efficacy of double inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of the synovium in the femoro-patellar joint without contrast enhancement

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the efficacy of double inversion recovery (DIR) sequence for evaluating the synovium of the femoro-patellar joint without contrast enhancement (CE).

Methods

Two radiologists independently evaluated the axial DIR and CE T1-weighted fat-saturated (CET1FS) images of 33 knees for agreement; the visualisation and distribution of the synovium were evaluated using a four-point visual scaling system at each of the five levels of the femoro-patellar joint and the location of the thickest synovium. The maximal synovial thickness at each sequence was measured by consensus.

Results

The interobserver agreement was good (κ = 0.736) for the four-point scale, and was excellent for the location of the thickest synovium on DIR and CET1FS (κ = 0.955 and 0.954). The intersequential agreement for the area with the thickest synovium was also excellent (κ = 0.845 and κ = 0.828). The synovial thickness on each sequence showed excellent correlation (r = 0.872).

Conclusion

The DIR showed as good a correlation as CET1FS for the evaluation of the synovium at the femoro-patellar joint. DIR may be a useful MR technique for evaluating the synovium without CE.

Key Points

• DIR can be useful for evaluating the synovium of the femoro-patellar joint.

• Interobserver and intersequential agreements between DIR and CET1FS were good.

• Mean thickness of the synovium was significantly different between two sequences.

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

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

Abbreviations

CET1FS:

Contrast-enhanced T1-weighted fat-saturated

CNR:

Contrast-to-noise ratio

DIR:

Double inversion recovery

SBR:

Synovium-to-bone signal ratio

SER:

Synovium-to-effusion signal ratio

References

  1. Narváez JA, Narváez J, De Lama E, De Albert M (2010) MR imaging of early rheumatoid arthritis. Radiographics 30:143–163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Guermazi A, Roemer FW, Hayashi D et al (2011) Assessment of synovitis with contrast-enhanced MRI using a whole-joint semiquantitative scoring system in people with, or at high risk of, knee osteoarthritis: the MOST study. Ann Rheum Dis 70:805–811

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wenham CY, Conaghan PG (2010) The role of synovitis in osteoarthritis. Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis 2:349–359

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Farrant JM, O’Connor PJ, Grainger AJ (2007) Advanced imaging in rheumatoid arthritis. Part 1: synovitis. Skeletal Radiol 36:269–279

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nasui OC, Chan MW, Nathanael G et al (2014) Physiologic characterization of inflammatory arthritis in a rabbit model with BOLD and DCE MRI at 1.5 Tesla. Eur Radiol 24:2766–2778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Waterton JC, Ho M, Nordenmark LH et al (2017) Repeatability and response to therapy of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers in rheumatoid arthritis in a large multicentre trial setting. Eur Radiol. doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4736-9

  7. Kim MH, Lee SY, Lee SE et al (2014) Anaphylaxis to Iodinated Contrast Media: Clinical Characteristics Related with Development of Anaphylactic Shock. PLoS ONE 9:e100154

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Violeta V, Mihaela M (2012) Francesco P, et al. Ultrasound of the hand and wrist in rheumatology 14:42–48

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grassi W, Cervini C (1998) Ultrasonography in rheumatology: an evolving technique. Ann Rheum Dis 57:268–271

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Jahng GH, Jin W, Yang DM, Ryu KN (2011) Optimization of a double inversion recovery sequence for noninvasive synovium imaging of joint effusion in the knee. Med Phys 38:2579–2585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Redpath TW, Smith FW (1994) Technical note: use of a double inversion recovery pulse sequence to image selectively grey or white brain matter. Br J Radiol 67:1258–1263

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Calabrese M, De Stefano N, Atzori M, Bernardi V et al (2007) Detection of cortical inflammatory lesions by double inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging in patients with multiple sclerosis. Arch Neurol 64:1416–1422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Geurts JJ, Pouwels PJ, Uitdehaag BM, Polman CH, Barkhof F, Castelijns JA (2005) Intracortical lesions in multiple sclerosis: improved detection with 3D double inversion-recovery MR imaging. Radiology 236:254–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Del Grande F, Santini F, Herzka DA et al (2014) Fat-suppression techniques for 3-T MR imaging of the musculoskeletal system. Radiographics 34:217–233

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Magnotta VA, Friedman L, FIRST BIRN (2006) Measurement of Signal-to-Noise and Contrast-to-Noise in the fBIRN Multicenter Imaging Study. J Digit Imaging 19:140-147

  17. Ostergaard M, Hansen M, Stoltenberg M et al (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging-determined synovial membrane volume as a marker of disease activity and a predictor of progressive joint destruction in the wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 42:918–929

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. McGonagle D, Conaghan PG, O'Connor P et al (1999) The relationship between synovitis and bone changes in early untreated rheumatoid arthritis: a controlled magnetic resonance imaging study. Arthritis Rheum 42:1706–1711

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. McQueen FM, Stewart N, Crabbe J et al (1999) Magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist in early rheumatoid arthritis reveals progression of erosions despite clinical improvement. Ann Rheum Dis 58:156–163

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. McQueen FM (2000) Magnetic resonance imaging in early inflammatory arthritis: what is its role? Rheumatology (Oxford) 39:700–706

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kornaat PR, Ceulemans RY, Kroon HM et al (2005) MRI assessment of knee osteoarthritis: Knee Osteoarthritis Scoring System (KOSS)--inter-observer and intra-observer reproducibility of a compartment-based scoring system. Skeletal Radiol 34:95–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Conaghan P, Edmonds J, Emery P et al (2001) Magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatoid arthritis: summary of OMERACT activities, current status, and plans. J Rheumatol 28:1158–1162

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Østergaard M, Peterfy C, Conaghan P et al (2003) OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies. Core set of MRI acquisitions, joint pathology definitions, and the OMERACT RA-MRI scoring system. J Rheumatol 30:1385–1386

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hunter DJ, Lo GH, Gale D, Grainger AJ, Guermazi A, Conaghan PG (2008) The reliability of a new scoring system for knee osteoarthritis MRI and the validity of bone marrow lesion assessment: BLOKS (Boston Leeds Osteoarthritis Knee Score). Ann Rheum Dis 67:206–211

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. McQueen FM, Stewart N, Crabbe J et al (1998) Magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist in early rheumatoid arthritis reveals a high prevalence of erosions at four months after symptom onset. Ann Rheum Dis 57:350–356

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Kaewlai R, Abujudeh H (2012) Nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 199:W17–W23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Kallmes DF et al (2015) Intracranial Gadolinium Deposition after Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging. Radiology 275:772–782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Shellock FG, Kanal E (1999) Safety of magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. J Magn Reson Imaging 10:477–484

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yoo HJ, Hong SH, Oh HY et al (2016) Diagnostic Accuracy of a Fluid-attenuated Inversion-Recovery Sequence with Fat Suppression for Assessment of Peripatellar Synovitis: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging. Radiology 24:160155

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wook Jin.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Wook Jin.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Funding

This study has received funding by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (Grant No. 2009-0089314).

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• retrospective

• diagnostic or prognostic study

• performed at one institution

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Son, Y.N., Jin, W., Jahng, GH. et al. Efficacy of double inversion recovery magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of the synovium in the femoro-patellar joint without contrast enhancement. Eur Radiol 28, 459–467 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5017-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5017-3

Keywords

  • Knee
  • Synovium
  • Double inversion recovery
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Contrast enhancement