Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic performance of CT-arthrography and 1.5T MR-arthrography for the assessment of glenohumeral joint cartilage: a comparative study with arthroscopic correlation

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

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the diagnostic performance of multi-detector CT arthrography (CTA) and 1.5-T MR arthrography (MRA) in detecting hyaline cartilage lesions of the shoulder, with arthroscopic correlation.

Patients and methods

CTA and MRA prospectively obtained in 56 consecutive patients following the same arthrographic procedure were independently evaluated for glenohumeral cartilage lesions (modified Outerbridge grade ≥2 and grade 4) by two musculoskeletal radiologists. The cartilage surface was divided in 18 anatomical areas. Arthroscopy was taken as the reference standard. Diagnostic performance of CTA and MRA was compared using ROC analysis. Interobserver and intraobserver agreement was determined by κ statistics.

Results

Sensitivity and specificity of CTA varied from 46.4 to 82.4 % and from 89.0 to 95.9 % respectively; sensitivity and specificity of MRA varied from 31.9 to 66.2 % and from 91.1 to 97.5 % respectively. Diagnostic performance of CTA was statistically significantly better than MRA for both readers (all p ≤ 0.04). Interobserver agreement for the evaluation of cartilage lesions was substantial with CTA (κ = 0.63) and moderate with MRA (κ = 0.54). Intraobserver agreement was almost perfect with both CTA (κ = 0.94–0.95) and MRA (κ = 0.83–0.87).

Conclusion

The diagnostic performance of CTA and MRA for the detection of glenohumeral cartilage lesions is moderate, although statistically significantly better with CTA.

Key points

• CTA has moderate diagnostic performance for detecting glenohumeral cartilage substance loss.

• MRA has moderate diagnostic performance for detecting glenohumeral cartilage substance loss.

• CTA is more accurate than MRA for detecting cartilage substance loss.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gross CE, Chalmers PN, Chahal J, Van Thiel G, Bach BR, Cole BJ et al (2012) Operative treatment of chondral defects in the glenohumeral joint. Arthroscopy 28:1889–1901

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Elser F, Braun S, Dewing CB, Millett PJ (2010) Glenohumeral joint preservation: current options for managing articular cartilage lesions in young, active patients. Arthroscopy 26:685–696

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Guntern DV, Pfirrmann CWA, Schmid MR, Zanetti M, Binkert CA, Schneeberger AG et al (2003) Articular cartilage lesions of the glenohumeral joint: diagnostic effectiveness of MR arthrography and prevalence in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. Radiology 226:165–170

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Spencer BA, Dolinskas CA, Seymour PA, Thomas SJ, Abboud JA (2013) Glenohumeral articular cartilage lesions: prospective comparison of non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and findings at arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 29:1466–1470

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Rubenstein JD, Li JG, Majumdar S, Henkelman RM (1997) Image resolution and signal-to-noise ratio requirements for MR imaging of degenerative cartilage. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:1089–1096

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gold GE, Reeder SB, Beaulieu CF (2004) Advanced MR imaging of the shoulder: dedicated cartilage techniques. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 12:143–159, vii

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yeh LR, Kwak S, Kim YS et al (1998) Evaluation of articular cartilage thickness of the humeral head and the glenoid fossa by MR arthrography: anatomic correlation in cadavers. Skeletal Radiol 27:500–504

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Dietrich TJ, Zanetti M, Saupe N, Pfirrmann CWA, Fucentese SF, Hodler J (2010) Articular cartilage and labral lesions of the glenohumeral joint: diagnostic performance of 3D water-excitation true FISP MR arthrography. Skeletal Radiol 39:473–480

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lecouvet FE, Simoni P, Koutaïssoff S, Vande Berg BC, Malghem J, Dubuc J-E (2008) Multidetector spiral CT arthrography of the shoulder. Clinical applications and limits, with MR arthrography and arthroscopic correlations. Eur J Radiol 68:120–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Omoumi P, Teixeira P, Delgado G, Chung CB (2009) Imaging of lower limb cartilage. Top Magn Reson Imaging 20:189–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Omoumi P, Bafort A-C, Dubuc J-E, Malghem J, Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE (2012) Evaluation of rotator cuff tendon tears: comparison of multidetector CT arthrography and 1.5-T MR arthrography. Radiology 264:812–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rhee RB, Chan KK, Lieu JG, Kim BS, Steinbach LS (2012) MR and CT arthrography of the shoulder. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 16:3–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hodler J, Kursunoglu-Brahme S, Snyder SJ et al (1992) Rotator cuff disease: assessment with MR arthrography versus standard MR imaging in 36 patients with arthroscopic confirmation. Radiology 182:431–436

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zanetti M, Weishaupt D, Gerber C, Hodler J (1998) Tendinopathy and rupture of the tendon of the long head of the biceps brachii muscle: evaluation with MR arthrography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 170:1557–1561

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bencardino JT, Beltran J, Rosenberg ZS et al (2000) Superior labrum anterior-posterior lesions: diagnosis with MR arthrography of the shoulder. Radiology 214:267–271

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jee WH, McCauley TR, Katz LD, Matheny JM, Ruwe PA, Daigneault JP (2001) Superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions of the glenoid labrum: reliability and accuracy of MR arthrography for diagnosis. Radiology 218:127–132

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Acid S, Le Corroller T, Aswad R, Pauly V, Champsaur P (2012) Preoperative imaging of anterior shoulder instability: diagnostic effectiveness of MDCT arthrography and comparison with MR arthrography and arthroscopy. Am J Roentgenol 198:661–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Outerbridge RE (1961) The etiology of chondromalacia patellae. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 43-B:752–757

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Noyes FR, Stabler CL (1989) A system for grading articular cartilage lesions at arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med 17:505–513

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143:29–36

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44:837–845

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van Erkel AR, Pattynama PM (1998) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis: basic principles and applications in radiology. Eur J Radiol 27:88–94

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rand T, Brossmann J, Pedowitz R, Ahn JM, Haghigi P, Resnick D (2000) Analysis of patellar cartilage: comparison of conventional MR imaging and MR and CT arthrography in cadavers. Acta Radiol 41:492–497

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Li J, Zheng Z-Z, Li X, Yu J-K (2009) Three dimensional assessment of knee cartilage in cadavers with high resolution MR-arthrography and MSCT-arthrography. Acad Radiol 16:1049–1055

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 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. AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:629–636

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hayes ML, Collins MS, Morgan JA, Wenger DE, Dahm DL (2010) Efficacy of diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging for articular cartilage lesions of the glenohumeral joint in patients with instability. Skeletal Radiol 39:1199–1204

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Lecouvet FE, Dorzée B, Dubuc JE, Vande Berg BC, Jamart J, Malghem J (2007) Cartilage lesions of the glenohumeral joint: diagnostic effectiveness of multidetector spiral CT arthrography and comparison with arthroscopy. Eur Radiol 17:1763–1771

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yeh L, Kwak S, Kim YS, Pedowitz R, Trudell D, Muhle C et al (1998) Anterior labroligamentous structures of the glenohumeral joint: correlation of MR arthrography and anatomic dissection in cadavers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1229–1236

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Vande Berg 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  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Hodler J, Loredo RA, Longo C, Trudell D, Yu JS, Resnick D (1995) Assessment of articular cartilage thickness of the humeral head: MR-anatomic correlation in cadavers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 165:615–620

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Andreisek G, Duc SR, Froehlich JM, Hodler J, Weishaupt D (2007) MR arthrography of the shoulder, hip, and wrist: evaluation of contrast dynamics and image quality with increasing injection-to-imaging time. AJR Am J Roentgenol 188:1081–1088

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Omoumi P, Verdun FR, Salah YB et al (2014) Low-dose multidetector computed tomography of the cervical spine: optimization of iterative reconstruction strength levels. Acta Radiol 55:335–344

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Becce F, Ben Salah Y, Verdun FR, Vande Berg BC, Lecouvet FE, Meuli R et al (2013) Computed tomography of the cervical spine: comparison of image quality between a standard-dose and a low-dose protocol using filtered back-projection and iterative reconstruction. Skeletal Radiol 42:937–945

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gervaise A, Teixeira P, Villani N, Lecocq S, Louis M, Blum A (2013) CT dose optimisation and reduction in osteoarticular disease. Diagn Interv Imaging 94:371–388

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Jung JY, Yoon YC, Choi SH, Kwon JW, Yoo J, Choe BK (2009) Three-dimensional isotropic shoulder MR arthrography: comparison with two-dimensional MR arthrography for the diagnosis of labral lesions at 3.0 T. Radiology 250498

  37. Kijowski R, Blankenbaker DG, Davis KW, Shinki K, Kaplan LD, De Smet AA (2009) Comparison of 1.5- and 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint. Radiology 250:839–848

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Notohamiprodjo M, Horng A, Pietschmann MF et al (2009) MRI of the knee at 3T: first clinical results with an isotropic PDfs-weighted 3D-TSE-sequence. Invest Radiol 44:585–597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Becce F, Richarme D, Omoumi P, Djahangiri A, Farron A, Meuli R et al (2012) Direct MR arthrography of the shoulder under axial traction: feasibility study to evaluate the superior labrum-biceps tendon complex and articular cartilage. J Magn Reson Imaging 37:1228–1233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Patrick Omoumi. 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. The authors state that this work has not received any funding. No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper. Institutional review board approval was obtained. Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects (patients) in this study. Some study subjects or cohorts have been previously reported in “Evaluation of rotator cuff tendon tears: comparison of multidetector CT arthrography and 1.5-T MR arthrography” (Radiology 264(3):812–822, 2012. doi:10.1148/radiol.12112062). Methodology: prospective, diagnostic or prognostic study, performed at one institution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Cliniques Universitaires St Luc – Université Catholique de Louvain, Hippocrate Avenue 10/2942, 1200, Brussels, Belgium

    Patrick Omoumi, Alexandra Rubini, Bruno C. Vande Berg & Frédéric E. Lecouvet

  2. Department of Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital, Bugnon 46, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Patrick Omoumi

  3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Cliniques Universitaires St Luc – Université Catholique de Louvain, Hippocrate Avenue 10/2942, 1200, Brussels, Belgium

    Jean-Emile Dubuc

Authors
  1. Patrick Omoumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexandra Rubini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean-Emile Dubuc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bruno C. Vande Berg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Frédéric E. Lecouvet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Omoumi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Omoumi, P., Rubini, A., Dubuc, JE. et al. Diagnostic performance of CT-arthrography and 1.5T MR-arthrography for the assessment of glenohumeral joint cartilage: a comparative study with arthroscopic correlation. Eur Radiol 25, 961–969 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3469-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3469-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation