Direct comparison of intra‐articular versus intravenous delayed gadolinium‐enhanced MRI of hip joint cartilage. Issue 1 (6th June 2013)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zilkens, Christoph; Miese, Falk; Kim, Young‐Jo; Jäger, Marcus; Mamisch, Tallal C.; Hosalkar, Harish; Antoch, Gerald; Krauspe, Rüdiger; Bittersohl, Bernd
• Is Part Of: Journal of magnetic resonance imaging. Volume 39:Issue 1(2014)
• Page Start: 94
• Page End: 102
• Publication Date: 2013-06-06
• Subjects: Magnetic resonance imaging -- Periodicals; 616
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24096
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1053-1807

Abstract

<abstract abstract-type="main"> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec id="jmri24096-sec-0001" sec-type="section"> <title>Purpose</title> <p>To investigate the potential of delayed gadolinium‐enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in cartilage (dGEMRIC) after intra‐articular (ia) contrast agent administration at 3 Tesla (T), a paired study comparing intravenous (iv) dGEMRIC (standard) with ia‐dGEMRIC was performed.</p> </sec> <sec id="jmri24096-sec-0002" sec-type="section"> <title>Materials and Methods</title> <p>Thirty‐five symptomatic patients with suspected cartilage damage underwent <italic>ia</italic>‐ and <italic>iv</italic>‐dGEMRIC. MRI was performed with a 3T system wherein the interval between both measurements was 2 weeks. For <italic>iv</italic>‐dGEMRIC, FDA approved Gd‐DOTA<sup>−</sup> was injected intravenously 45 min before the MRI scan. For <italic>ia</italic>‐dGEMRIC, 10–20 mL of a 2 mM solution of Gd‐ DOTA<sup>−</sup> was injected under fluoroscopic guidance 30 min before the MRI scan.</p> </sec> <sec id="jmri24096-sec-0003" sec-type="section"> <title>Results</title> <p>Both <italic>ia</italic>‐ and <italic>iv</italic>‐dGEMRIC demonstrated the typical T1<sub>Gd</sub> pattern in hip joint cartilage with increasing values toward the superior regions in acetabular cartilage reflecting the higher glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content in the main weight‐bearing area. Correlation analysis revealed a moderate correlation between both techniques (r = 0.439, <italic>P</italic>‐value < 0.001), whereas the T1<sub>Gd</sub> values for <italic>iv</italic>‐dGEMRIC were significantly higher than those for <italic>ia</italic>‐dGEMRIC. This corresponds with the Bland‐Altman plot analysis, which revealed a systemic bias (higher T1<sub>Gd</sub> values after <italic>iv</italic> gadolinium application) of ∼70 ms.</p> </sec> <sec id="jmri24096-sec-0004" sec-type="section"> <title>Conclusion</title> <p> <italic>Ia</italic>‐dGEMRIC was able to reveal the characteristic T1<sub>Gd</sub> pattern in hip joint cartilage confirming the sensitivity of <italic>ia</italic>‐dGEMRIC for GAG. In addition, there was a significant correlation between iv‐dGEMRIC and <italic>ia</italic>‐dGEMRIC. However, the T1<sub>Gd</sub> values after <italic>ia</italic> contrast media application were significantly lower than those after <italic>iv</italic> application that has to be considered for future studies. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2014;39:94–102. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</p> </sec> </abstract>