Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Radiology
Published in: European Radiology 5/2009

01-05-2009 | Musculoskeletal

Evaluation and comparison of cartilage repair tissue of the patella and medial femoral condyle by using morphological MRI and biochemical zonal T2 mapping

Authors: Goetz H. Welsch, Tallal C. Mamisch, Sebastian Quirbach, Lukas Zak, Stefan Marlovits, Siegfried Trattnig

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 5/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to use advanced MR techniques to evaluate and compare cartilage repair tissue after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) in the patella and medial femoral condyle (MFC). Thirty-four patients treated with MACT underwent 3-T MRI of the knee. Patients were treated on either patella (n = 17) or MFC (n = 17) cartilage and were matched by age and postoperative interval. For morphological evaluation, the MR observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) score was used, with a 3D-True-FISP sequence. For biochemical assessment, T2 mapping was prepared by using a multiecho spin-echo approach with particular attention to the cartilage zonal structure. Statistical evaluation was done by analyses of variance. The MOCART score showed no significant differences between the patella and MFC (p ≥ 0.05). With regard to biochemical T2 relaxation, higher T2 values were found throughout the MFC (p < 0.05). The zonal increase in T2 values from deep to superficial was significant for control cartilage (p < 0.001) and cartilage repair tissue (p < 0.05), with an earlier onset in the repair tissue of the patella. The assessment of cartilage repair tissue of the patella and MFC afforded comparable morphological results, whereas biochemical T2 values showed differences, possibly due to dissimilar biomechanical loading conditions.
Literature
1.
Hjelle K, Solheim E, Strand T, Muri R, Brittberg M (2002) Articular cartilage defects in 1,000 knee arthroscopies. Arthroscopy 18:730–734PubMedCrossRef
2.
Cohen ZA, Mow VC, Henry JH, Levine WN, Ateshian GA (2003) Templates of the cartilage layers of the patellofemoral joint and their use in the assessment of osteoarthritic cartilage damage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 11:569–579PubMedCrossRef
3.
Eckstein F, Winzheimer M, Westhoff J et al (1998) Quantitative relationships of normal cartilage volumes of the human knee joint–assessment by magnetic resonance imaging. Anat Embryol (Berl) 197:383–390CrossRef
4.
Clark AL, Barclay LD, Matyas JR, Herzog W (2003) In situ chondrocyte deformation with physiological compression of the feline patellofemoral joint. J Biomech 36:553–568PubMedCrossRef
5.
Kurkijarvi JE, Nissi MJ, Kiviranta I, Jurvelin JS, Nieminen MT (2004) 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 52:41–46PubMedCrossRef
6.
Lyyra T, Kiviranta I, Vaatainen U, Helminen HJ, Jurvelin JS (1999) In vivo characterization of indentation stiffness of articular cartilage in the normal human knee. J Biomed Mater Res 48:482–487PubMedCrossRef
7.
Alparslan L, Winalski CS, Boutin RD, Minas T (2001) Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage repair. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 5:345–363PubMedCrossRef
8.
Brittberg M, Winalski CS (2003) Evaluation of cartilage injuries and repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(A Suppl 2):58–69
9.
Recht M, White LM, Winalski CS, Miniaci A, Minas T, Parker RD (2003) MR imaging of cartilage repair procedures. Skeletal Radiol 32:185–200PubMed
10.
Trattnig S, Millington SA, Szomolanyi P, Marlovits S (2007) MR imaging of osteochondral grafts and autologous chondrocyte implantation. Eur Radiol 17:103–118PubMedCrossRef
11.
Marlovits S, Singer P, Zeller P, Mandl I, Haller J, Trattnig S (2006) Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol 57:16–23PubMedCrossRef
12.
Burstein D, Velyvis J, Scott KT et al (2001) Protocol issues for delayed Gd(DTPA)(2−)-enhanced MRI: (dGEMRIC) for clinical evaluation of articular cartilage. Magn Res Med 45:36–41CrossRef
13.
Lammentausta E, Kiviranta P, Nissi MJ et al (2006) T2 relaxation time and delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI of cartilage (dGEMRIC) of human patellar cartilage at 1.5 T and 9.4 T: Relationships with tissue mechanical properties. J Orthop Res 24:366–374PubMedCrossRef
14.
Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ (2004) Cartilage MRI T2 relaxation time mapping: overview and applications. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 8:355–368PubMedCrossRef
15.
Smith HE, Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ et al (2001) Spatial variation in cartilage T2 of the knee. J Magn Reson Imaging 14:50–55PubMedCrossRef
16.
Goodwin DW, Wadghiri YZ, Dunn JF (1998) Micro-imaging of articular cartilage: T2, proton density, and the magic angle effect. Acad Radiol 5:790–798PubMedCrossRef
17.
Goodwin DW, Zhu H, Dunn JF (2000) In vitro MR imaging of hyaline cartilage: correlation with scanning electron microscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:405–409PubMed
18.
Rubenstein JD, Kim JK, Morova-Protzner I, Stanchev PL, Henkelman RM (1993) Effects of collagen orientation on MR imaging characteristics of bovine articular cartilage. Radiology 188:219–226PubMed
19.
Watrin-Pinzano A, Ruaud JP, Cheli Y et al (2004) Evaluation of cartilage repair tissue after biomaterial implantation in rat patella by using T2 mapping. Magn Reson Mater Phy 17:219–228CrossRef
20.
White LM, Sussman MS, Hurtig M, Probyn L, Tomlinson G, Kandel R (2006) Cartilage T2 assessment: differentiation of normal hyaline cartilage and reparative tissue after arthroscopic cartilage repair in equine subjects. Radiology 241:407–414PubMedCrossRef
21.
Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Domayer SE et al (2008) Cartilage T2 assessment at 3-T MR imaging: in vivo differentiation of normal hyaline cartilage from reparative tissue after two cartilage repair procedures–initial experience. Radiology 247:154–161PubMedCrossRef
22.
Hangody L, Vasarhelyi G, Hangody LR et al (2008) Autologous osteochondral grafting—technique and long-term results. Injury 39(Suppl 1):S32–39
23.
Buckwalter JA, Martin JA, Olmstead M, Athanasiou KA, Rosenwasser MP, Mow VC (2003) Osteochondral repair of primate knee femoral and patellar articular surfaces: implications for preventing post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Iowa Orthop J 23:66–74PubMed
24.
Duc SR, Pfirrmann CW, Koch PP, Zanetti M, Hodler J (2008) Internal knee derangement assessed with 3-minute three-dimensional isovoxel true FISP MR sequence: preliminary study. Radiology 246:526–535PubMedCrossRef
25.
Marlovits S, Striessnig G, Resinger CT et al (2004) Definition of pertinent parameters for the evaluation of articular cartilage repair tissue with high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 52:310–319PubMedCrossRef
26.
Duc SR, Koch P, Schmid MR, Horger W, Hodler J, Pfirrmann CW (2007) Diagnosis of articular cartilage abnormalities of the knee: prospective clinical evaluation of a 3D water-excitation true FISP sequence. Radiology 243:475–482PubMedCrossRef
27.
Duc SR, Pfirrmann CW, Schmid MR et al (2007) Articular cartilage defects detected with 3D water-excitation true FISP: prospective comparison with sequences commonly used for knee imaging. Radiology 245:216–223PubMedCrossRef
28.
Marlovits S, Zeller P, Singer P, Resinger C, Vecsei V (2006) Cartilage repair: generations of autologous chondrocyte transplantation. Eur J Radiol 57:24–31PubMedCrossRef
29.
Brittberg M, Lindahl A, Nilsson A, Ohlsson C, Isaksson O, Peterson L (1994) Treatment of deep cartilage defects in the knee with autologous chondrocyte transplantation. New Engl J Med 331:889–895PubMedCrossRef
30.
Kiviranta P, Rieppo J, Korhonen RK, Julkunen P, Toyras J, Jurvelin JS (2006) Collagen network primarily controls Poisson’s ratio of bovine articular cartilage in compression. J Orthop Res 24:690–699PubMedCrossRef
31.
Ahmed AM, Burke DL (1983) In-vitro measurement of static pressure distribution in synovial joints—part I: tibial surface of the knee. J Biomech Eng 105:216–225PubMed
32.
Ahmed AM, Burke DL, Yu A (1983) In-vitro measurement of static pressure distribution in synovial joints—part II: retropatellar surface. J Biomech Eng 105:226–236PubMedCrossRef
33.
Athanasiou KA, Rosenwasser MP, Buckwalter JA, Malinin TI, Mow VC (1991) Interspecies comparisons of in situ intrinsic mechanical properties of distal femoral cartilage. J Orthop Res 9:330–340PubMedCrossRef
34.
Behrens P, Bitter T, Kurz B, Russlies M (2006) Matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation/implantation (MACT/MACI)—5-year follow-up. Knee 13:194–202PubMedCrossRef
35.
Dardzinski BJ, Laor T, Schmithorst VJ, Klosterman L, Graham TB (2002) Mapping T2 relaxation time in the pediatric knee: feasibility with a clinical 1.5-T MR imaging system. Radiology 225:233–239PubMedCrossRef
36.
Mosher TJ, Collins CM, Smith HE et al (2004) Effect of gender on in vivo cartilage magnetic resonance imaging T2 mapping. J Magn Reson Imaging 19:323–328PubMedCrossRef
37.
Gomez S, Toffanin R, Bernstorff S et al (2000) Collagen fibrils are differently organized in weight-bearing and not-weight-bearing regions of pig articular cartilage. J Exp Zool 287:346–352PubMedCrossRef
38.
39.
Xia Y (2000) Magic-angle effect in magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage—a review. Invest Radiol 35:602–621PubMedCrossRef
40.
Hambly K, Bobic V, Wondrasch B, Van Assche D, Marlovits S (2006) Autologous chondrocyte implantation postoperative care and rehabilitation: science and practice. Am J Sports Med 34:1020–1038PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Evaluation and comparison of cartilage repair tissue of the patella and medial femoral condyle by using morphological MRI and biochemical zonal T2 mapping
Authors
Goetz H. Welsch
Tallal C. Mamisch
Sebastian Quirbach
Lukas Zak
Stefan Marlovits
Siegfried Trattnig
Publication date
01-05-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Radiology / Issue 5/2009
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1249-6

Other articles of this Issue 5/2009

European Radiology 5/2009 Go to the issue

Interpretation Corner

Herlyn-Werner-Wunderlich syndrome: a rare cause of infertility (2009: 2b)

Chest

Initial experience with a chest pain protocol using 320-slice volume MDCT

Oncology

Automated measurement of lymph nodes: a phantom study

Magnetic Resonance

Diagnosis of temporomandibular dysfunction syndrome—image quality at 1.5 and 3.0 Tesla magnetic resonance imaging

Computed Tomography

Dose reduction in computed tomography: the effect of eye and testicle shielding on radiation dose measured in patients with beryllium oxide-based optically stimulated luminescence dosimetry

Cardiac

64-Slice spiral computed tomography of the coronary arteries: dose reduction using an optimized imaging protocol including individual weight-adaptation of voltage and current–time product