HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Welsch, G. H. Articles by Trattnig, S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Welsch, G. H. Articles by Trattnig, S.

Cartilage T2 Assessment at 3-T MR Imaging: In Vivo Differentiation of Normal Hyaline Cartilage from Reparative Tissue after Two Cartilage Repair Procedures—Initial Experience¹

¹ From the MR Center, Department of Radiology (G.H.W., S.T.), Department of Orthopedic Surgery (S.E.D., R.D.), and Department of Trauma Surgery (F.K., S.M.), Medical University of Vienna, Lazarettgasse 14, A-1090 Vienna, Austria; Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland (T.C.M.); and Department of Medical Imaging, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada (L.M.W.). Received April 18, 2007; revision requested June 14; revision received July 15; accepted August 16; final version accepted October 8. Supported by Austrian Science Fund, FWF-TRP-Project L243-B15. Address correspondence to G.H.W. (e-mail: welsch{at}bwh.harvard.edu).

Purpose: To prospectively compare cartilage T2 values after microfracture therapy (MFX) and matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) repair procedures.

Materials and Methods: The study had institutional review board approval by the ethics committee of the Medical University of Vienna; informed consent was obtained. Twenty patients who underwent MFX or MACT (10 in each group) were enrolled. For comparability, patients of each group were matched by mean age (MFX, 40.0 years ± 15.4 [standard deviation]; MACT, 41.0 years ± 8.9) and postoperative interval (MFX, 28.6 months ± 5.2; MACT, 27.4 months ± 13.1). Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging was performed with a 3-T MR imager, and T2 maps were calculated from a multiecho spin-echo measurement. Global, as well as zonal, quantitative T2 values were calculated within the cartilage repair area and within cartilage sites determined to be morphologically normal articular cartilage. Additionally, with consideration of the zonal organization, global regions of interest were subdivided into deep and superficial areas. Differences between cartilage sites and groups were calculated by using a three-way analysis of variance.

Results: Quantitative T2 assessment of normal native hyaline cartilage showed similar results for all patients and a significant trend of increasing T2 values from deep to superficial zones (P < .05). In cartilage repair areas after MFX, global mean T2 was significantly reduced (P < .05), whereas after MACT, mean T2 was not reduced (P .05). For zonal variation, repair tissue after MFX showed no significant trend between different depths (P .05), in contrast to repair tissue after MACT, in which a significant increase from deep to superficial zones (P < .05) could be observed.

Conclusion: Quantitative T2 mapping seems to reflect differences in repair tissues formed after two surgical cartilage repair procedures.

© RSNA, 2008