Non-traumatic anterior cruciate ligament abnormalities and their relationship to osteoarthritis using morphological grading and cartilage T2 relaxation times: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI).

Musculoskeletal and Quantitative Imaging Research Group, Department of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, University of California San Francisco, 185 Berry Street, Suite 350, San Francisco, CA, 94107, USA.
Skeletal Radiology (Impact Factor: 1.74). 02/2012; 41(11):1435-43. DOI: 10.1007/s00256-012-1379-4
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this work was to study anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) degeneration in relation to MRI-based morphological knee abnormalities and cartilage T(2) relaxation times in subjects with symptomatic osteoarthritis.
Two radiologists screened the right knee MRI of 304 randomly selected participants in the Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort with symptomatic OA, for ACL abnormalities. Of the 52 knees with abnormalities, 28 had mucoid degeneration, 12 had partially torn ACLs, and 12 had completely torn ACLs. Fifty-three randomly selected subjects with normal ACLs served as controls. Morphological knee abnormalities were graded using the WORMS score. Cartilage was segmented and compartment-specific T(2) values were calculated.
Compared to normal ACL knees, those with ACL abnormalities had a greater prevalence of, and more severe, cartilage, meniscal, bone marrow, subchondral cyst, and medial collateral ligament lesions (all p < 0.05). T(2) measurements did not significantly differ by ACL status.
ACL abnormalities were associated with more severe degenerative changes, likely because of greater joint instability. T2 measurements may not be well suited to assess advanced cartilage degeneration.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: The aim of this review is to describe imaging techniques for evaluation of non-osteochondral structures such as the synovium, menisci in the knee, labrum in the hip, ligaments and muscles and to review the literature from recent clinical and epidemiological studies of OA. Methods: This is a non-systematic narrative review of published literature on imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in OA. PubMed and MEDLINE search for articles published up to 2014, using the keywords osteoarthritis, synovitis, meniscus, labrum, ligaments, plica, muscles, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), scintigraphy, and positron emission tomography (PET). Results: Published literature showed imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in OA relies primarily on MRI and ultrasound. The use of semiquantitative and quantitative imaging biomarkers of non-osteochondral tissues in clinical and epidemiological OA studies is reported. We highlight studies that have compared both imaging methodologies directly, and those that have established a relationship between imaging biomarkers and clinical outcomes. We provide recommendations as to which imaging protocols should be used to assess disease-specific changes regarding synovium, meniscus in the knee, labrum in the hip, and ligaments, and highlight potential pitfalls in their usage. Conclusion: MRI and ultrasound are currently the most useful imaging modalities for evaluation of non-osteochondral tissues in OA. MRI evaluation of any tissue needs to be performed using appropriate MR pulse sequences. Ultrasound may be particularly useful for evaluation of small joints of the hand. Nuclear medicine and CT play a limited role in imaging of non-osteochondral tissues in OA.
    Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 10/2014; 22(10):1590-1605. DOI:10.1016/j.joca.2014.05.001 · 4.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Arthroscopy-based semiquantitative scoring systems such as Outerbridge and Noyes' scores were the first to be developed for the purpose of grading cartilage defects. As magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) became available faor evaluation of the osteoarthritic knee joint, these systems were adapted for use with MRI. Later on, grading methods such as the Whole Organ Magnetic Resonance Score, the Boston-Leeds Osteoarthritis Knee Score and the MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score were designed specifically for performing whole-organ assessment of the knee joint structures, including cartilage. Cartilage grades on MRI obtained with these scoring systems represent optimal outcome measures for longitudinal studies, and are designed to enhance understanding of the knee osteoarthritis disease process. The purpose of this narrative review is to describe cartilage assessment in knee osteoarthritis using currently available MRI-based semiquantitative whole-organ scoring systems, and to provide an update on the risk factors for cartilage loss in knee osteoarthritis as assessed with these scoring systems. Key Points • Radiography is neither specific nor sensitive to progression of knee osteoarthritis • Semiquantitative MRI-based outcome measures are useful to identify knee osteoarthritis risk factors • Several MRI-based semiquantitative scoring systems for knee cartilage lesions are available.
    European Radiology 11/2014; 25(3). DOI:10.1007/s00330-014-3464-7 · 4.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Efforts to reduce the ever-increasing rates of osteoarthritis (OA) in the developed world require the ability to non-invasively detect the degradation of joint tissues before advanced damage has occurred. This is particularly relevant for damage to articular cartilage because this soft tissue lacks the capacity to repair itself following major damage and is essential to proper joint function. While conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides sufficient contrast to visualize articular cartilage morphology, more advanced imaging strategies are necessary for understanding the underlying biochemical composition of cartilage that begins to break down in the earliest stages of OA. This review discusses the biochemical basis and the advantages and disadvantages associated with each of these techniques. Recent implementations for these techniques are touched upon, and future considerations for improving the research and clinical power of these imaging technologies are also discussed.
    Current Rheumatology Reports 11/2014; 16(11):462. DOI:10.1007/s11926-014-0462-3 · 2.45 Impact Factor


Available from
Jun 5, 2014