Cartilage Morphology at 3.0T: Assessment of Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Techniques JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING Chen, C. A., Kijowski, R., Shapiro, L. M., Tuite, M. J., Davis, K. W., Klaers, J. L., Block, W. F., Reeder, S. B., Gold, G. E. 2010; 32 (1): 173-183


To compare six new three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance (MR) methods for evaluating knee cartilage at 3.0T.We compared: fast-spin-echo cube (FSE-Cube), vastly undersampled isotropic projection reconstruction balanced steady-state free precession (VIPR-bSSFP), iterative decomposition of water and fat with echo asymmetry and least-squares estimation combined with spoiled gradient echo (IDEAL-SPGR) and gradient echo (IDEAL-GRASS), multiecho in steady-state acquisition (MENSA), and coherent oscillatory state acquisition for manipulation of image contrast (COSMIC). Five-minute sequences were performed twice on 10 healthy volunteers and once on five osteoarthritis (OA) patients. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured from the volunteers. Images of the five volunteers and the five OA patients were ranked on tissue contrast, articular surface clarity, reformat quality, and lesion conspicuity. FSE-Cube and VIPR-bSSFP were compared to IDEAL-SPGR for cartilage volume measurements.FSE-Cube had top rankings for lesion conspicuity, overall SNR, and CNR (P < 0.02). VIPR-bSSFP had top rankings in tissue contrast and articular surface clarity. VIPR and FSE-Cube tied for best in reformatting ability. FSE-Cube and VIPR-bSSFP compared favorably to IDEAL-SPGR in accuracy and precision of cartilage volume measurements.FSE-Cube and VIPR-bSSFP produce high image quality with accurate volume measurement of knee cartilage.

View details for DOI 10.1002/jmri.22213

View details for Web of Science ID 000279439600021

View details for PubMedID 20578024

View details for PubMedCentralID PMC3065186