Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of multislice CT arthrography and MR arthrography for the detection of articular cartilage lesions of the elbow

  • Musculoskeletal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the value of multislice CT arthrography and MR arthrography in the assessment of cartilage lesions of the elbow joint. Twenty-six cadaveric elbow specimens were examined with the use of CT arthrography and MR arthrography prior to joint exploration and macroscopic inspection of articular cartilage. Findings at CT and MR arthrography were compared with macroscopic assessments in 104 cartilage areas. At macroscopic inspection, 45 cartilage lesions (six grade 2 lesions, 25 grade 3 lesions, 14 grade 4 lesions) and 59 areas of normal articular cartilage were observed. With macroscopic assessment as the gold standard CT and MR arthrography showed an overall sensitivity/specificity of 80/93% and 78/95% for the detection of cartilage lesions, respectively. Only two of six grade 2 lesions were detected by CT and MR arthrography. For the diagnosis of grade 3 and 4 lesions, the sensitivity/specificity was 87/94% with CT arthrography, and 85/95% with MR arthrography. In an experimental setting multislice CT arthrography and MR arthrography showed a similar performance in the detection of cartilage lesions. Both methods indicated limited value in the diagnosis of grade 2 articular cartilage lesions.

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

References

  1. Bauer M, Jonsson K, Josefsson PO, Linden B (1992) Osteochondrosis dissecans of the elbow. A long-term follow-up. Clin Orthop 284:156–160

    Google Scholar 

  2. Takahara M, Ogino T, Sasaki I, Kato H, Minami A, Kaneda K (1999) Long term outcome of osteochondritis dissecans of the humeral capitellum. Clin Orthop 363:108–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Jackson DW, Scheer MJ, Simon TM (2001) Cartilage substitutes: overview of basic science and treatment options. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 9:37–52

    Google Scholar 

  4. Nehrer S, Minas T (2000) Treatment of articular cartilage defects. Invest Radiol 35:639–646

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ritsila VA, Santavirta S, Alhopuro S, Poussa M, Jaroma H, Rubak JM, Eskola A, Hoikka V, Snellman O, Osterman K (1994) Periosteal and perichondral grafting in reconstructive surgery. Clin Orthop 302:259–265

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ochi M, Sumen Y, Jitsuiki J, Ikuta Y (1995) Allogeneic deep frozen meniscal graft for repair of osteochondral defects in the knee joint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 114:260–266

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nakagawa Y, Matsusue Y, Ikeda N, Asada Y, Nakamura T (2001) Osteochondral grafting and arthroplasty for end-stage osteochondritis dissecans of the capitellum. A case report and review of the literature. Am J Sports Med 29:650–655

    Google Scholar 

  8. Hangody L, Kish G, Karpati Z, Udvarhelyi I, Szigeti I, Bely M (1998) Mosaicplasty for the treatment of articular cartilage defects: application in clinical practice. Orthopedics 21:751–756

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sato M, Ochi M, Uchio Y, Agung M, Baba H (2004) Transplantation of tissue-engineered cartilage for excessive osteochondritis dissecans of the elbow. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13:221–225

    Google Scholar 

  10. Imhoff AB, Ottl GM, Burkart A, Traub S (1999) Autologous osteochondral transplantation on various joints. Orthopade 28:33–44

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hodler J, Resnick D (1996) Current status of imaging of articular cartilage. Skelet Radiol 25:703–709

    Google Scholar 

  12. McCauley TR (2002) MR imaging of chondral and osteochondral injuries of the knee. Radiol Clin N Am 40:1095–1107

    Google Scholar 

  13. Peterfy CG, Genant HK (1996) Emerging applications of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of articular cartilage. Radiol Clin N Am 34:195–213

    Google Scholar 

  14. Disler DG, Recht MP, McCauley TR (2000) MR imaging of articular cartilage. Skelet Radiol 29:367–377

    Google Scholar 

  15. Waldschmidt JG, Rilling RJ, Kajdascy-Balla AA, Boynton MD, Erickson SJ (1997) In vitro and in vivo MR imaging of hyaline cartilage: zonal anatomy, imaging pitfalls, and pathologic conditions. Radiographics 17:1387–1402

    Google Scholar 

  16. Trattnig S, Mlynarik V, Huber M, Ba-Ssalamah A, Puig S, Imhof H (2000) Magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage and evaluation of cartilage disease. Invest Radiol 35:595–601

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gagliardi JA, Chung EM, Chandnani VP et al (1994) Detection and staging of chondromalacia patellae: relative efficacies of conventional MR imaging, MR arthrography, and CT arthrography. Am J Roentgenol 163:629–636

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gylys-Morin VM, Hajek PC, Sartoris DJ, Resnick D (1987) Articular cartilage defects: detectability in cadaver knees with MR. Am J Roentgenol 148:1153–1157

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kramer J, Recht MP, Imhof H, Stiglbauer R, Engel A (1994) Postcontrast MR arthrography in assessment of cartilage lesions. J Comput Assist Tomogr 18:218–224

    Google Scholar 

  20. Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE, Poilvache P, Jamart J, Materne R, Lengele B, Maldague B, Malghem J (2002) Assessment of knee cartilage in cadavers with dual-detector spiral CT arthrography and MR imaging. Radiology 222:430–436

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmid MR, Pfirrmann CW, Hodler J, Vienne P, Zanetti M (2003) Cartilage lesions in the ankle joint: comparison of MR arthrography and CT arthrography. Skelet Radiol 32:259–265

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shahriaree H (1985) Chondromalacia. Contemp Orthop 11:27–33

    Google Scholar 

  23. VandeBerg BC, Lecouvet FE, Maldague B, Malghem J (2004) MR appearance of cartilage defects of the knee: preliminary results of a spiral CT arthrography-guided analysis. Eur Radiol 14:208–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cotten A, Jacobson J, Brossmann J, Hodler J, Trudell D, Resnick D (1997) MR arthrography of the elbow: normal anatomy and diagnostic pitfalls. J Comput Assist Tomogr 21:516–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Putz R, Milz S, Maier M, Boszczyk A (2003) Functional morphology of the elbow joint. Orthopade 328:684–690

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ahrens PM, Redfern DR, Forester AJ (2001) Patterns of articular wear in the cadaveric elbow joint. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 10:52–56

    Google Scholar 

  27. Graichen H, Springer V, Flaman T, Stammberger T, Glaser C, Englmeier KH, Reiser M, Eckstein F (2000) Validation of high-resolution water-excitation magnetic resonance imaging for quantitative assessment of thin cartilage layers. Osteoarthritis 82:106–114

    Google Scholar 

  28. Schenck RC Jr, Athanasiou KA, Constantinides G, Gomez E (1994) A biomechanical analysis of articular cartilage of the human elbow and a potential relationship to osteochondritis dissecans. Clin Orthop 299:305–312

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Strasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany

    S. Waldt, M. Bruegel, K. Ganter, E. J. Rummeny & K. Woertler

  2. Institute of Anatomy, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Pettenkoferstrasse 11, 80336, Munich, Germany

    V. Kuhn

  3. Department of Radiology, University of California, 505 Parnassus Avenue, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA

    T. M. Link

Authors
  1. S. Waldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Bruegel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Ganter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. V. Kuhn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. T. M. Link
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. E. J. Rummeny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. K. Woertler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Waldt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Waldt, S., Bruegel, M., Ganter, K. et al. Comparison of multislice CT arthrography and MR arthrography for the detection of articular cartilage lesions of the elbow. Eur Radiol 15, 784–791 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2585-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2585-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation