Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint

Richard Kijowski, Donna G. Blankenbaker, Kirkland W. Davis, Kazuhiko Shinki, Lee Kaplan, Arthur A. De Smet

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

104 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performance of 1.5- and 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging protocols for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients. Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was performed with a waiver of informed consent from the institutional review board. The study group consisted of 200 symptomatic patients undergoing MR examination of the knee at 1.5 T (61 men, 39 women; mean age, 38.9 years) or 3.0 T (52 men, 48 women; mean age, 39.1 years), who also underwent subsequent arthroscopic knee surgery. All MR examinations consisted of multiplanar fast spin-echo sequences with similar tissue contrast at 1.5 and 3.0 T. All articular surfaces were graded at arthroscopy by using the Noyes classification system. Three musculoskeletal radiologists retrospectively and independently graded all articular surfaces seen at MR imaging by using a similar classification system. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 1.5- and 3.0-T MR protocols for detecting cartilage lesions were determined by using arthroscopy as the reference standard. The z test was used to compare sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values at 1.5 and 3.0 T. Results: For all readers combined, the respective sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MR imaging for detecting cartilage lesions were 69.3%, 78.0%, and 74.5% at 1.5 T (n = 241) and 70.5%, 85.9%, and 80.1% at 3.0 T (n = 226). The MR imaging protocol had significantly higher specificity and accuracy (P < .05) but not higher sensitivity (P = .73) for detecting cartilage lesions at 3.0 T than at 1.5 T. Conclusion: A 3.0-T MR protocol has improved diagnostic performance for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients when compared with a 1.5-T protocol.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)839-848
Number of pages10
JournalRadiology
Volume250
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Articular Cartilage
Knee Joint
Arthroscopy
Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Cartilage
Sensitivity and Specificity
Knee
Joints
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
Research Ethics Committees
Informed Consent

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Kijowski, R., Blankenbaker, D. G., Davis, K. W., Shinki, K., Kaplan, L., & De Smet, A. A. (2009). Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint. Radiology, 250(3), 839-848. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2503080822

Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint. / Kijowski, Richard; Blankenbaker, Donna G.; Davis, Kirkland W.; Shinki, Kazuhiko; Kaplan, Lee; De Smet, Arthur A.

In: Radiology, Vol. 250, No. 3, 01.03.2009, p. 839-848.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kijowski, R, Blankenbaker, DG, Davis, KW, Shinki, K, Kaplan, L & De Smet, AA 2009, 'Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint', Radiology, vol. 250, no. 3, pp. 839-848. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2503080822
Kijowski, Richard ; Blankenbaker, Donna G. ; Davis, Kirkland W. ; Shinki, Kazuhiko ; Kaplan, Lee ; De Smet, Arthur A. / Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint. In: Radiology. 2009 ; Vol. 250, No. 3. pp. 839-848.
@article{75fe04563f96463381f2127ab738f381,
title = "Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint",
abstract = "Purpose: To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performance of 1.5- and 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging protocols for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients. Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was performed with a waiver of informed consent from the institutional review board. The study group consisted of 200 symptomatic patients undergoing MR examination of the knee at 1.5 T (61 men, 39 women; mean age, 38.9 years) or 3.0 T (52 men, 48 women; mean age, 39.1 years), who also underwent subsequent arthroscopic knee surgery. All MR examinations consisted of multiplanar fast spin-echo sequences with similar tissue contrast at 1.5 and 3.0 T. All articular surfaces were graded at arthroscopy by using the Noyes classification system. Three musculoskeletal radiologists retrospectively and independently graded all articular surfaces seen at MR imaging by using a similar classification system. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 1.5- and 3.0-T MR protocols for detecting cartilage lesions were determined by using arthroscopy as the reference standard. The z test was used to compare sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values at 1.5 and 3.0 T. Results: For all readers combined, the respective sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MR imaging for detecting cartilage lesions were 69.3{\%}, 78.0{\%}, and 74.5{\%} at 1.5 T (n = 241) and 70.5{\%}, 85.9{\%}, and 80.1{\%} at 3.0 T (n = 226). The MR imaging protocol had significantly higher specificity and accuracy (P < .05) but not higher sensitivity (P = .73) for detecting cartilage lesions at 3.0 T than at 1.5 T. Conclusion: A 3.0-T MR protocol has improved diagnostic performance for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients when compared with a 1.5-T protocol.",
author = "Richard Kijowski and Blankenbaker, {Donna G.} and Davis, {Kirkland W.} and Kazuhiko Shinki and Lee Kaplan and {De Smet}, {Arthur A.}",
year = "2009",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1148/radiol.2503080822",
language = "English",
volume = "250",
pages = "839--848",
journal = "Radiology",
issn = "0033-8419",
publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of 1.5- And 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint

AU - Kijowski, Richard

AU - Blankenbaker, Donna G.

AU - Davis, Kirkland W.

AU - Shinki, Kazuhiko

AU - Kaplan, Lee

AU - De Smet, Arthur A.

PY - 2009/3/1

Y1 - 2009/3/1

N2 - Purpose: To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performance of 1.5- and 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging protocols for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients. Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was performed with a waiver of informed consent from the institutional review board. The study group consisted of 200 symptomatic patients undergoing MR examination of the knee at 1.5 T (61 men, 39 women; mean age, 38.9 years) or 3.0 T (52 men, 48 women; mean age, 39.1 years), who also underwent subsequent arthroscopic knee surgery. All MR examinations consisted of multiplanar fast spin-echo sequences with similar tissue contrast at 1.5 and 3.0 T. All articular surfaces were graded at arthroscopy by using the Noyes classification system. Three musculoskeletal radiologists retrospectively and independently graded all articular surfaces seen at MR imaging by using a similar classification system. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 1.5- and 3.0-T MR protocols for detecting cartilage lesions were determined by using arthroscopy as the reference standard. The z test was used to compare sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values at 1.5 and 3.0 T. Results: For all readers combined, the respective sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MR imaging for detecting cartilage lesions were 69.3%, 78.0%, and 74.5% at 1.5 T (n = 241) and 70.5%, 85.9%, and 80.1% at 3.0 T (n = 226). The MR imaging protocol had significantly higher specificity and accuracy (P < .05) but not higher sensitivity (P = .73) for detecting cartilage lesions at 3.0 T than at 1.5 T. Conclusion: A 3.0-T MR protocol has improved diagnostic performance for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients when compared with a 1.5-T protocol.

AB - Purpose: To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performance of 1.5- and 3.0-T magnetic resonance (MR) imaging protocols for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients. Materials and Methods: This HIPAA-compliant study was performed with a waiver of informed consent from the institutional review board. The study group consisted of 200 symptomatic patients undergoing MR examination of the knee at 1.5 T (61 men, 39 women; mean age, 38.9 years) or 3.0 T (52 men, 48 women; mean age, 39.1 years), who also underwent subsequent arthroscopic knee surgery. All MR examinations consisted of multiplanar fast spin-echo sequences with similar tissue contrast at 1.5 and 3.0 T. All articular surfaces were graded at arthroscopy by using the Noyes classification system. Three musculoskeletal radiologists retrospectively and independently graded all articular surfaces seen at MR imaging by using a similar classification system. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 1.5- and 3.0-T MR protocols for detecting cartilage lesions were determined by using arthroscopy as the reference standard. The z test was used to compare sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy values at 1.5 and 3.0 T. Results: For all readers combined, the respective sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MR imaging for detecting cartilage lesions were 69.3%, 78.0%, and 74.5% at 1.5 T (n = 241) and 70.5%, 85.9%, and 80.1% at 3.0 T (n = 226). The MR imaging protocol had significantly higher specificity and accuracy (P < .05) but not higher sensitivity (P = .73) for detecting cartilage lesions at 3.0 T than at 1.5 T. Conclusion: A 3.0-T MR protocol has improved diagnostic performance for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint in symptomatic patients when compared with a 1.5-T protocol.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=62649111189&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=62649111189&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1148/radiol.2503080822

DO - 10.1148/radiol.2503080822

M3 - Article

C2 - 19164121

AN - SCOPUS:62649111189

VL - 250

SP - 839

EP - 848

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

SN - 0033-8419

IS - 3

ER -