Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Skeletal Radiology
Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology 3/2014

01.03.2014 | Scientific Article

Using the dGEMRIC technique to evaluate cartilage health in the presence of surgical hardware at 3T: comparison of inversion recovery and saturation recovery approaches

verfasst von: Agnes G. d’Entremont, Shannon H. Kolind, Burkhard Mädler, David R. Wilson, Alexander L. MacKay

Erschienen in: Skeletal Radiology | Ausgabe 3/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the effect of metal artifact reduction techniques on dGEMRIC T1 calculation with surgical hardware present.

Materials and methods

We examined the effect of stainless-steel and titanium hardware on dGEMRIC T1 maps. We tested two strategies to reduce metal artifact in dGEMRIC: (1) saturation recovery (SR) instead of inversion recovery (IR) and (2) applying the metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS), in a gadolinium-doped agarose gel phantom and in vivo with titanium hardware. T1 maps were obtained using custom curve-fitting software and phantom ROIs were defined to compare conditions (metal, MARS, IR, SR).

Results

A large area of artifact appeared in phantom IR images with metal when TI ≤ 700 ms. IR maps with metal had additional artifact both in vivo and in the phantom (shifted null points, increased mean T1 (+151 % IR ROIartifact) and decreased mean inversion efficiency (f; 0.45 ROIartifact, versus 2 for perfect inversion)) compared to the SR maps (ROIartifact: +13 % T1 SR, 0.95 versus 1 for perfect excitation), however, SR produced noisier T1 maps than IR (phantom SNR: 118 SR, 212 IR). MARS subtly reduced the extent of artifact in the phantom (IR and SR).

Conclusions

dGEMRIC measurement in the presence of surgical hardware at 3T is possible with appropriately applied strategies. Measurements may work best in the presence of titanium and are severely limited with stainless steel. For regions near hardware where IR produces large artifacts making dGEMRIC analysis impossible, SR-MARS may allow dGEMRIC measurements. The position and size of the IR artifact is variable, and must be assessed for each implant/imaging set-up.
Literatur
1.
Bashir A, Gray ML, Hartke J, Burstein D. Nondestructive imaging of human cartilage glycosaminoglycan concentration by MRI. Magn Reson Med. 1999;41:857–65.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Kurkijärvi JE, Nissi MJ, Kiviranta I, Jurvelin JS, Nieminen MT. Delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) and T2 characteristics of human knee articular cartilage: topographical variation and relationships to mechanical properties. Magn Reson Med. 2004;52:41–6.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Burstein D, Velyvis J, Scott KT, Stock KW, Kim YJ, Jaramillo D, et al. Protocol issues for delayed Gd(DTPA)(2-)-enhanced MRI (dGEMRIC) for clinical evaluation of articular cartilage. Magn Reson Med. 2001;45:36–41.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Gillis A, Bashir A, McKeon B, Scheller A, Gray ML, Burstein D. Magnetic resonance imaging of relative glycosaminoglycan distribution in patients with autologous chondrocyte transplants. Invest Radiol. 2001;36:743–8.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Kurkijärvi JE, Mattila L, Ojala RO, Vasara AI, Jurvelin JS, Kiviranta I, et al. Evaluation of cartilage repair in the distal femur after autologous chondrocyte transplantation using T2 relaxation time and dGEMRIC. Osteoarthr Cart. 2007;15:372–8.CrossRef
6.
Tiderius CJ, Svensson J, Leander P, Ola T, Dahlberg L. dGEMRIC (delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage) indicates adaptive capacity of human knee cartilage. Magn Reson Med. 2004;51:286–90.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Roos EM, Dahlberg L. Positive effects of moderate exercise on glycosaminoglycan content in knee cartilage: a four-month, randomized, controlled trial in patients at risk of osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52:3507–14.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Williams A, Sharma L, McKenzie CA, Prasad PV, Burstein D. Delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage in knee osteoarthritis: findings at different radiographic stages of disease and relationship to malalignment. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52:3528–35.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Nojiri T, Watanabe N, Namura T, Narita W, Ikoma K, Suginoshita T, et al. Utility of delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI (dGEMRIC) for qualitative evaluation of articular cartilage of patellofemoral joint. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14:718–23.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Tiderius CJ, Olsson LE, Nyquist F, Dahlberg L. Cartilage glycosaminoglycan loss in the acute phase after an anterior cruciate ligament injury: delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage and synovial fluid analysis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52:120–7.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Owman H, Tiderius CJ, Neuman P, Nyquist F, Dahlberg LE. Association between findings on delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage and future knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58:1727–30.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Tiderius CJ, Olsson LE, Leander P, Ekberg O, Dahlberg L. Delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) in early knee osteoarthritis. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49:488–92.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Yamashita T, Watanabe A, Ochiai S, Matsuki K, Kamikawa K, Toyone T, et al. Time course evaluation of extracellular matrix after high tibial osteotomy using delayed gadolinium enhanced MR imaging of cartilage. Osteoarthritis Research Society International; 2008. p. Abstract 415.
14.
Young AA, Stanwell P, Williams A, Rohrsheim JA, Parker DA, Giuffre B, et al. Glycosaminoglycan content of knee cartilage following posterior cruciate ligament rupture demonstrated by delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage (dGEMRIC). J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87-A:2763–8.CrossRef
15.
Parker DA, Beatty KT, Giuffre B, Scholes CJ, Coolican MRJ. Articular cartilage changes in patients with osteoarthritis after osteotomy. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39:1039–45.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Rutgers M, Bartels LW, Tsuchida AI, Castelein RM, Dhert WJ, Vincken KL, et al. dGEMRIC as a tool for measuring changes in cartilage quality following high tibial osteotomy: a feasibility study. Osteoarthr Cart Elsevier Ltd. 2012;20:1134–41.CrossRef
17.
Kolind SH, MacKay AL, Munk PL, Xiang QS. Quantitative evaluation of metal artifact reduction techniques. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;20:487–95.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Chang SD, Lee MJ, Munk PL, Janzen DL, MacKay A, Xiang QS. MRI of spinal hardware: comparison of conventional T1-weighted sequence with a new metal artifact reduction sequence. Skelet Radiol. 2001;30:213–8.CrossRef
19.
Lee MJ, Janzen DL, Munk PL, MacKay A, Xiang QS, McGowen A. Quantitative assessment of an MR technique for reducing metal artifact: application to spin-echo imaging in a phantom. Skelet Radiol. 2001;30:398–401.CrossRef
20.
Olsen RV, Munk PL, Lee MJ, Janzen DL, MacKay AL, Xiang Q-S, et al. Metal artifact reduction sequence: early clinical applications. Radiographics. 2000;20:699–712.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Norris D. Adiabatic radiofrequency pulse forms in biomedical nuclear magnetic resonance. Concepts Magn Reson. 2002;14:89–101.CrossRef
22.
Kim YJ, Jaramillo D, Millis MB, Gray ML, Burstein D. Assessment of early osteoarthritis in hip dysplasia with delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:1987–92.PubMed
23.
Cho ZH, Kim DJ, Kim YK. Total inhomogeneity correction including chemical shifts and susceptibility by view angle tilting. Med Phys. 1988;15:7–11.PubMedCrossRef
24.
McKenzie CA, Williams A, Prasad PV, Burstein D. Three-dimensional delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) at 1.5 T and 3.0 T. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;24:928–33.PubMedCrossRef
25.
White LM, Buckwalter KA. Technical considerations: CT and MR imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 2002;6:5–17.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Eustace S, Goldberg R, Williamson D, Melhem ER, Oladipo O, Yucel EK, et al. MR imaging of soft tissues adjacent to orthopaedic hardware: techniques to minimize susceptibility artefact. Clin Radiol. 1997;52:589–94.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Lee M, Kim S, Lee S, Song H, Huh Y, Kim D, et al. Overcoming artifacts from metallic orthopedic implants at high-field-strength MR imaging and multi-detector CT. Radiographics. 2007;27:791–804.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Harris CA, White LM. Metal artifact reduction in musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Orthop Clin North Am. 2006;37:349–59. vi.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Suh JS, Jeong EK, Shin KH, Cho JH, Na JB, Kim DH, et al. Minimizing artifacts caused by metallic implants at MR imaging: experimental and clinical studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:1207–13.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Laakman RW, Kaufman B, Han JS, Nelson AD, Clampitt M, O’Block AM, et al. MR imaging in patients with metallic implants. Radiology. 1985;157:711–4.PubMed
31.
Koch KM, Busse RF, Lewein TA, Potter HG, Hinks RS, King KF. Multiple resonant frequency offset acquisitions for imaging of metallic implants. Toronto: The International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine; 2008. p. 1250.
32.
Lu W, Pauly KB, Gold GE, Pauly JM, Hargreaves BA. SEMAC: Slice encoding for metal artifact correction in MRI. Magn Reson Med. 2009;62:66–76.
Metadaten
Titel
Using the dGEMRIC technique to evaluate cartilage health in the presence of surgical hardware at 3T: comparison of inversion recovery and saturation recovery approaches
verfasst von
Agnes G. d’Entremont
Shannon H. Kolind
Burkhard Mädler
David R. Wilson
Alexander L. MacKay
Publikationsdatum
01.03.2014
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Skeletal Radiology / Ausgabe 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-013-1777-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2014

Skeletal Radiology 3/2014 Zur Ausgabe

Case Report

Progressive destructive bone changes in patients with cystinosis

Scientific Article

T2 relaxometry of the infrapatellar fat pad after arthroscopic surgery

Scientific Article

The distribution of urate deposition within the extremities in gout: a review of 148 dual-energy CT cases

Case Report

Hemi-body port-wine stains and progressive paresis due to territorial perineuriomas

Scientific Article

Comparison of acetabular version angle measurements between prone and reformatted supine computed tomography images

Case Report

Intraneural perineurioma of the sciatic nerve: An under-recognized nerve neoplasm with characteristic MRI findings

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

Screening-Mammografie offenbart erhöhtes Herz-Kreislauf-Risiko

26.04.2024 Mammografie Nachrichten

Routinemäßige Mammografien helfen, Brustkrebs frühzeitig zu erkennen. Anhand der Röntgenuntersuchung lassen sich aber auch kardiovaskuläre Risikopatientinnen identifizieren. Als zuverlässiger Anhaltspunkt gilt die Verkalkung der Brustarterien.

S3-Leitlinie zu Pankreaskrebs aktualisiert

23.04.2024 Pankreaskarzinom Nachrichten

Die Empfehlungen zur Therapie des Pankreaskarzinoms wurden um zwei Off-Label-Anwendungen erweitert. Und auch im Bereich der Früherkennung gibt es Aktualisierungen.

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

18.04.2024 Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin Nachrichten

Im Choosing-Wisely-Programm, das für die deutsche Initiative „Klug entscheiden“ Pate gestanden hat, sind erstmals Empfehlungen zum Umgang mit Notfällen von Kindern erschienen. Fünf Dinge gilt es demnach zu vermeiden.

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

13.04.2024 Klinik aktuell Kongressbericht

Die Teilnehmer eines Forums beim DGIM-Kongress waren sich einig: Fehler in der Medizin sind häufig in ungeeigneten Prozessen und mangelnder Kommunikation begründet. Gespräche mit Patienten und im Team können helfen.

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise