Assessment of articular cartilage thickness of the humeral head: MR-anatomic correlation in cadavers.

Hodler, Juerg; Loredo, Rebecca A; Longo, Carlos Henrique; Trudell, Debra; Yu, Joseph S.; Resnick, Donald

doi:10.2214/ajr.165.3.7645480

Cited by 60 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Most of the studies performed on the knee show that the mean crror of cartilage mcasurcment is <12%. In contrast, Hodler et a1 (42) found a difference of 35% betwccn the measurements made on MRI and those made on anatomic sections of hunicral head. Using a dedicated coil and a very high spatial resolution for the evaluation of the interphalangeal cartilage, Robson et a1 (44) found a measurement error of <lo%.…”

Section: Mri Patterns Of Normal Cartilagementioning

confidence: 88%

“…For a given spatial resolution, the error of measurement incrcases when the articular cartilage thickness decreases. Thcrcfore, it is not surprising that the accuracy of articular cartilage thickness measurements is greater in the fcmoropatellar joint (mean thickness 4 mm) than in the shoulder (mean thickness 1.23 nim) (42) or the hip (mean thickness 1.3 mm) (43). Most of the studies performed on the knee show that the mean crror of cartilage mcasurcment is <12%.…”

Section: Mri Patterns Of Normal Cartilagementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Magnetic resonance imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage

Lœuille

Olivier

Mainard

et al. 1998

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Mri Patterns Of Normal Cartilagementioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Mri Patterns Of Normal Cartilagementioning

confidence: 99%

Magnetic resonance imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage

Lœuille

Olivier

Mainard

et al. 1998

Arthritis & Rheumatism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Two sequences may be required to define articular cartilage accurately [15,18]. The assessment of articular cartilage can be improved by contrast material, but even then, the mean magnetic resonance/anatomic difference was 0.37 mm for gradient-echo images of the humeral head [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of cartilage thickness in the human knee-joint by magnetic resonance imaging using a three-dimensional gradient-echo sequence

Kladny¹,

Martus²,

Schiwy-Bochat

et al. 1999

International Orthopaedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied human specimens and compared data on cartilage thickness measurements with magnetic resonance imaging by using an image analysing system with corresponding histological sections in the middle of each sector. The findings are based on 768 measurements in 26 knee joints. Overall, there was very good magnetic resonance/anatomic correlation (r=0.88). The poorest correlation was in the sectors of the femur (r=0.69). The correlation seemed not to be dependent on the grade of osteoarthritic cartilage lesions. Despite good correlation rates, the mean magnetic resonance/anatomic difference (absolute values) was 0.41 mm (standard deviation (SD) 0.34 mm) or 18.08% (SD 18.9%). Imaging techniques need to be improved if the assessment of cartilage thickness by this means is to be of clinical relevance .Résumé Nous avons examiné des speciments humains et comparé les dates des mesures de l'épaisseur du cartilage avec le MRI utilisant un système "image analysing" avec les séctions histologiques correspondantes dans le centre de chaque secteur. Les résultats sont fondés sur 768 mesures de 26 articulations du genou. Tous ensemble, la correlation magnetique resonance/anatomique était tres bien (r=0.88). La correlation plus petite dans notre exanination était dans les secteurs du femur (r=0.69). La correlation était apparement independante du degré des lésions osteoarthritique du cartilage. En dépit des taux positifs de correlation, la difference moyenne magnetique resonance/anatomique (valeurs absolues) était 0.41 mm (écart-type (EC): 0.34 mm) ou 18.08% (EC 18.9%). Les techniques d`images ont besoin d`améloriation si les mesures de l'épaisseur du cartilage avec le MRI semble important pour les questions médicales. Il faut considérer les differences selon la localisation en évaluant l'épaisseur du cartilage avec le MRI. IntroductionIn the evaluation of cartilage lesions, arthroscopy is still the "gold standard". However, arthroscopy is invasive and is less informative about cartilage thickness. Ultrasonography has the potential to provide information on the cartilage layer but access to the knee joint is restricted. Techniques to assess cartilage thickness by arthrography and X-ray measurements have been described [4,8,12]; however, they mainly provide information on the joint space. These methods are of only minor value. By contrast, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) provides a non-invasive image of the cartilage layer. It has been recommended that in cartilage imaging with MRI there should be high resolution, thin planar slices without gaps and with good discrimination of the cartilage relative to the surrounding tissue [9]. A sequence termed "fast imaging with steady state precession" (FISP) has proved to be very effective in the evaluation of knee disorders [7,24] and meets these criteria. The following study of human knee joints compares cartilage thickness measurements by MRI with corresponding histological sections. Materials and methodsWe removed 30 fully encapsulated human knee joints at autopsy. Gross de...

show abstract

“…In a cadaveric study, Hodler et al [19] found that various routine MR sequences both with and without contrast tended to overestimate cartilage thickness on the humeral head in areas of thin cartilage (periphery), and to underestimate this measurement in areas of thick cartilage. Furthermore, areas in which there was no anatomic presence of articular cartilage tended to have up to 1.6 mm of cartilage measured from the imaging.…”

Section: Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Management of cartilage defects in the shoulder

DePalma

Gruson

2012

Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Articular cartilage lesions of the glenohumeral joint are an especially difficult clinical problem to manage, particularly in the younger, more active patient. Left untreated, these lesions may progress in the long-term, leading to further pain and disability. While shoulder arthroplasty remains a viable option in older patients with glenohumeral arthritis, concerns over component longevity and loosening in younger patients make it less attractive in that age group. Arthroscopic joint debridement with loose body removal, often with capsular release, has been successful in select, more sedentary patients. More recent techniques, including autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), osteochondral grafting (allograft versus autograft), interpositional arthroplasty, and microfracture surgery, have been evaluated for use in the shoulder. These procedures have experienced success in weight bearing joints, including the knee and ankle. Despite the good clinical results in the shoulder with short-term follow-up reported in some small series, the treatment of chondral injuries in the glenohumeral joint remains a challenging problem.

show abstract

Assessment of articular cartilage thickness of the humeral head: MR-anatomic correlation in cadavers.

Cited by 60 publications

References 18 publications

Magnetic resonance imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage

Magnetic resonance imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage

Measurement of cartilage thickness in the human knee-joint by magnetic resonance imaging using a three-dimensional gradient-echo sequence

Management of cartilage defects in the shoulder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About