English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objectives The purpose of this study was to validate T2* mapping as an objective, noninvasive method for the prediction of acetabular cartilage damage. Methods This is the second step in the validation of T2*. In a previous study, we established a quantitative predictive model for identifying and grading acetabular cartilage damage. In this study, the model was applied to a second cohort of 27 consecutive hips to validate the model. A clinical 3.0-T imaging protocol with T2* mapping was used. Acetabular regions of interest (ROI) were identified on magnetic resonance and graded using the previously established model. Each ROI was then graded in a blinded fashion by arthroscopy. Accurate surgical location of ROIs was facilitated with a 2-dimensional map projection of the acetabulum. A total of 459 ROIs were studied. Results When T2* mapping and arthroscopic assessment were compared, 82% of ROIs were within 1 Beck group (of a total 6 possible) and 32% of ROIs were classified identically. Disease prediction based on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.713 and a specificity of 0.804. Model stability evaluation required no significant changes to the predictive model produced in the initial study. Conclusions These results validate that T2* mapping provides statistically comparable information regarding acetabular cartilage when compared to arthroscopy. In contrast to arthroscopy, T2* mapping is quantitative, noninvasive, and can be used in follow-up. Unlike research quantitative magnetic resonance protocols, T2* takes little time and does not require a contrast agent. This may facilitate its use in the clinical sphere.

T2* Mapping Provides Information That Is Statistically Comparable to an Arthroscopic Evaluation of Acetabular Cartilage