Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Clinical Rheumatology 12/2008

01-12-2008 | Original Article

Validity of the sonographic longitudinal sagittal image for assessment of the cartilage thickness in the knee osteoarthritis

Authors: Chong-Hyeon Yoon, Hyun-Sook Kim, Ji Hyeon Ju, Won-Hee Jee, Sung-Hwan Park, Ho-Youn Kim

Published in: Clinical Rheumatology | Issue 12/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

We compared the validity of the sonographic longitudinal sagittal image with the suprapatellar transverse axial image for assessment of thickness of femoral cartilage in osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Fifty-one patients with knee OA were enrolled in this study. Cartilage thicknesses of medial and lateral femoral condyles were measured with longitudinal sagittal and suprapatellar transverse axial image using sonography. Fat-suppressed 3D spoiled gradient-echo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was also used to get the reference value. The joint space width (JSW) and Kellgren and Lawrence (K–L) grade were measured in weight-bearing anteroposterior knee radiograph. The kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to determine inter- and intra-observer agreement of the ultrasound sonography (US) measurements. In medial femoral condyle, the opportunity to obtain cartilage thickness was increased significantly using the longitudinal US scan as compared with tansverse scan (48 cases vs. 36 cases, p < 0.05). There was a good correlation between longitudinal US scan and MRI in the maximum and minimum cartilage thicknesses of medial condyle (r = 0.568; r = 0.844, respectively, p < 0.01). However, there was no correlation between suprapatellar transverse US scan and MRI in medial condyle. In lateral condyle, both US scans showed good correlations with MRI. In Bland–Altman analysis, longitudinal US scan showed good agreement with MRI except in the minimal cartilage thickness of lateral condyle. There was high overall intra- and inter-observer agreement in US scan. US scan in the longitudinal plane is a more feasible method than suprapatellar transverse scan for measuring cartilage thickness of medial femoral condyle in knee OA patient.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Harris ED Jr (2001) The bone and joint decade: a catalyst for progress. Arthritis Rheum 44:1969–1970PubMedCrossRef Harris ED Jr (2001) The bone and joint decade: a catalyst for progress. Arthritis Rheum 44:1969–1970PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference March LM, Bachmeier CJ (1997) Economics of osteoarthritis: a global perspective. Bailliere’s Clin Rheumatol 11:817–834CrossRef March LM, Bachmeier CJ (1997) Economics of osteoarthritis: a global perspective. Bailliere’s Clin Rheumatol 11:817–834CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Eckstein F, Glaser C (2004) Measuring cartilage morphology with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 8:329–353PubMedCrossRef Eckstein F, Glaser C (2004) Measuring cartilage morphology with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 8:329–353PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Cicuttini FM, Wluka AE, Wang Y et al (2004) Longitudinal study of changes in tibial and femoral cartilage in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 50:94–97PubMedCrossRef Cicuttini FM, Wluka AE, Wang Y et al (2004) Longitudinal study of changes in tibial and femoral cartilage in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 50:94–97PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Graichen H, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Vogl T et al (2004) Quantitative assessment of cartilage status in osteoarthritis by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: technical validation for use in analysis of cartilage volume and further morphologic parameters. Arthritis Rheum 50:811–816PubMedCrossRef Graichen H, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Vogl T et al (2004) Quantitative assessment of cartilage status in osteoarthritis by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: technical validation for use in analysis of cartilage volume and further morphologic parameters. Arthritis Rheum 50:811–816PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Dieppe PA, Cushnaghan J, Shepstone L (1997) The Bristol ‘OA500’ study: progression of osteoarthritis (OA) over 3 years and the relationship between clinical and radiographic changes at the knee joint. Osteoarthr Cartil 5:87–97PubMedCrossRef Dieppe PA, Cushnaghan J, Shepstone L (1997) The Bristol ‘OA500’ study: progression of osteoarthritis (OA) over 3 years and the relationship between clinical and radiographic changes at the knee joint. Osteoarthr Cartil 5:87–97PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Winalski CS, Gupta KB (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging of focal articular cartilage lesions. Top Magn Reson Imaging 14:131–144PubMedCrossRef Winalski CS, Gupta KB (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging of focal articular cartilage lesions. Top Magn Reson Imaging 14:131–144PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Disler DG, McCauley TR, Wirth CR et al (1995) Detection of knee hyaline cartilage defects using fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging: comparison with standard MR imaging and correlation with arthroscopy. Am J Roentgenol 165:377–382 Disler DG, McCauley TR, Wirth CR et al (1995) Detection of knee hyaline cartilage defects using fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging: comparison with standard MR imaging and correlation with arthroscopy. Am J Roentgenol 165:377–382
10.
go back to reference Grassi W, Lamanna G, Farina A et al (1999) Sonographic imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage. Semin Arthritis Rheum 28:398–403PubMedCrossRef Grassi W, Lamanna G, Farina A et al (1999) Sonographic imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage. Semin Arthritis Rheum 28:398–403PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Tarhan S, Unlu Z (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonographic evaluation of the patients with knee osteoarthritis: a comparative study. Clin Rheumatol 22:181–188PubMedCrossRef Tarhan S, Unlu Z (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonographic evaluation of the patients with knee osteoarthritis: a comparative study. Clin Rheumatol 22:181–188PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Meenagh G et al (2006) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. Clin Exp Rheumatol 24:1–5PubMed Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Meenagh G et al (2006) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. Clin Exp Rheumatol 24:1–5PubMed
13.
go back to reference Boutry N, Morel M, Flipo RM et al (2007) Early rheumatoid arthritis: a review of MRI and sonographic findings. Am J Roentgenol 189:1502–1509CrossRef Boutry N, Morel M, Flipo RM et al (2007) Early rheumatoid arthritis: a review of MRI and sonographic findings. Am J Roentgenol 189:1502–1509CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Khoury V, Cardinal E, Bureau NJ (2007) Musculoskeletal sonography: a dynamic tool for usual and unusual disorders. Am J Roentgenol 188:W63–W73CrossRef Khoury V, Cardinal E, Bureau NJ (2007) Musculoskeletal sonography: a dynamic tool for usual and unusual disorders. Am J Roentgenol 188:W63–W73CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Iagnocco A, Perella C, Naredo E et al (2008) Etanercept in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: clinical follow-up over one year by ultrasonography. Clin Rheumatol 27:491–496PubMedCrossRef Iagnocco A, Perella C, Naredo E et al (2008) Etanercept in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: clinical follow-up over one year by ultrasonography. Clin Rheumatol 27:491–496PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG et al (2000) The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis Rheum 43:2762–2770PubMedCrossRef Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG et al (2000) The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis Rheum 43:2762–2770PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Schmidt WA, Schmidt H, Schicke B et al (2004) Standard reference values for musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis 63:988–994PubMedCrossRef Schmidt WA, Schmidt H, Schicke B et al (2004) Standard reference values for musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis 63:988–994PubMedCrossRef
18.
19.
go back to reference Backhaus M, Burmester G-R, Gerber T et al (2001) Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis 60:641–649PubMedCrossRef Backhaus M, Burmester G-R, Gerber T et al (2001) Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis 60:641–649PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D et al (1986) Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum 29:1039–1049PubMedCrossRef Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D et al (1986) Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum 29:1039–1049PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH et al (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840PubMed Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH et al (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840PubMed
22.
go back to reference Bae SC, Lee HS, Yun HR et al (2001) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Korean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) and Lequesne osteoarthritis indices for clinical research. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 9:746–750PubMedCrossRef Bae SC, Lee HS, Yun HR et al (2001) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Korean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) and Lequesne osteoarthritis indices for clinical research. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 9:746–750PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Ahlback S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 277(Suppl):7–72 Ahlback S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 277(Suppl):7–72
24.
go back to reference Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16:494–502PubMedCrossRef Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16:494–502PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMed Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310PubMed
26.
go back to reference Dewitte K, Fierens C, Stockl D et al (2002) Application of the Bland–Altman plot for interpretation of method-comparison studies: a critical investigation of its practice. Clin Chem 48:799–801PubMed Dewitte K, Fierens C, Stockl D et al (2002) Application of the Bland–Altman plot for interpretation of method-comparison studies: a critical investigation of its practice. Clin Chem 48:799–801PubMed
27.
go back to reference Kramer M, Feinstein A (1981) Clinical biostatistics LIV; the biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther 29:111–123PubMed Kramer M, Feinstein A (1981) Clinical biostatistics LIV; the biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther 29:111–123PubMed
28.
go back to reference Eckstein F, Charles HC, Buck RJ et al (2005) Accuracy and precision of quantitative assessment of cartilage morphology by magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0T. Arthritis Rheum 52:3132–3136PubMedCrossRef Eckstein F, Charles HC, Buck RJ et al (2005) Accuracy and precision of quantitative assessment of cartilage morphology by magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0T. Arthritis Rheum 52:3132–3136PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Tsai CY, Lee CL, Chai CY et al (2007) The validity of in vitro ultrasonographic grading of osteoarthritic femoral condylar cartilage—a comparison with histologic grading. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 15:245–250PubMedCrossRef Tsai CY, Lee CL, Chai CY et al (2007) The validity of in vitro ultrasonographic grading of osteoarthritic femoral condylar cartilage—a comparison with histologic grading. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 15:245–250PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Validity of the sonographic longitudinal sagittal image for assessment of the cartilage thickness in the knee osteoarthritis
Authors
Chong-Hyeon Yoon
Hyun-Sook Kim
Ji Hyeon Ju
Won-Hee Jee
Sung-Hwan Park
Ho-Youn Kim
Publication date
01-12-2008
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Clinical Rheumatology / Issue 12/2008
Print ISSN: 0770-3198
Electronic ISSN: 1434-9949
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-008-0956-3

Other articles of this Issue 12/2008

Clinical Rheumatology 12/2008 Go to the issue