Premium
Comparison of quantitative cartilage measurements acquired on two 3.0T MRI systems from different manufacturers
Author(s) -
Kornaat Peter R.,
Koo Seungbum,
Andriacchi Thomas P.,
Bloem Johan L.,
Gold Garry E.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.20561
Subject(s) - cartilage , magnetic resonance imaging , condyle , osteoarthritis , biomedical engineering , femoral condyle , volume (thermodynamics) , nuclear medicine , medicine , materials science , anatomy , radiology , pathology , physics , alternative medicine , quantum mechanics
Purpose To investigate the comparability of two osteoarthritis (OA) surrogate endpoints—average cartilage thickness and cartilage volume—acquired from healthy volunteers on two 3.0T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems from different manufacturers. Materials and Methods Ten knees of five healthy volunteers were scanned on a 3.0T General Electric (GE) and a 3.0T Philips scanner using a fast three‐dimensional fat‐suppressed spoiled gradient (SPGR) imaging sequence. The acquisition parameters were optimized beforehand and were kept as comparable as possible on both scanners. For quantitative analysis, the average cartilage thickness and volume of the load‐bearing regions of the femoral condyles were compared. Data were analyzed using a univariate repeated‐measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to examine the effects of position, condyle, and imaging system on the measurements. Results The average cartilage thickness and volume of the load‐bearing regions of the femoral condyles did not differ between the two different 3.0T MRI systems ( P > 0.05). There was no significant effect of position or condyle on the average cartilage thickness measurements ( P > 0.05; range = 0.41–0.93) or cartilage volume ( P > 0.05; range = 0.14–0.87). Conclusion Two OA surrogate endpoints—average cartilage thickness and cartilage volume—acquired on two 3.0T MRI systems from different manufacturers are comparable. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.