Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI

Abstract Background Imaging cannot be performed during natural weightbearing in biomechanical studies using conventional closed-bore MRI, which has necessitated simulating weightbearing load on the joint. Upright, open MRI (UO-MRI) allows for joint imaging during natural weightbearing and may have t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Andrew M. Schmidt, David J. Stockton, Michael A. Hunt, Andrew Yung, Bassam A. Masri, David R. Wilson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2020-11-01
Series:BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03786-1
id doaj-b68e6e64ff2a447590fd3d8e816bf897
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b68e6e64ff2a447590fd3d8e816bf8972020-12-06T12:20:13ZengBMCBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders1471-24742020-11-012111910.1186/s12891-020-03786-1Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRIAndrew M. Schmidt0David J. Stockton1Michael A. Hunt2Andrew Yung3Bassam A. Masri4David R. Wilson5Centre for Hip Health and Mobility, University of British ColumbiaCentre for Hip Health and Mobility, University of British ColumbiaCentre for Hip Health and Mobility, University of British ColumbiaCentre for Hip Health and Mobility, University of British ColumbiaDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of British ColumbiaCentre for Hip Health and Mobility, University of British ColumbiaAbstract Background Imaging cannot be performed during natural weightbearing in biomechanical studies using conventional closed-bore MRI, which has necessitated simulating weightbearing load on the joint. Upright, open MRI (UO-MRI) allows for joint imaging during natural weightbearing and may have the potential to better characterize the biomechanical effect of tibiofemoral pathology involving soft tissues. However open MRI scanners have lower field strengths than closed-bore scanners, which limits the image quality that can be obtained. Thus, there is a need to establish the reliability of measurements in upright weightbearing postures obtained using UO-MRI. Methods Knees of five participants with prior anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture were scanned standing in a 0.5 T upright open MRI scanner using a 3D DESS sequence. Manual segmentation of cartilage regions in contact was performed and centroids of these contact areas were automatically determined for the medial and lateral tibiofemoral compartments. Inter-rater, test-retest, and intra-rater reliability were determined and quantified using intra-class correlation (ICC3,1), standard error of measurement (SEM), and smallest detectable change with 95% confidence (SDC95). Accuracy was assessed by using a high-resolution 7 T MRI as a reference. Results Contact area and centroid location reliability (inter-rater, test-retest, and intra-rater) for sagittal scans in the medial compartment had ICC3,1 values from 0.95–0.99 and 0.98–0.99 respectively. In the lateral compartment, contact area and centroid location reliability ICC3,1 values ranged from 0.83–0.91 and 0.95–1.00 respectively. The smallest detectable change in contact area was 1.28% in the medial compartment and 0.95% in the lateral compartment. Contact area and centroid location reliability for coronal scans in the medial compartment had ICC3,1 values from 0.90–0.98 and 0.98–1.00 respectively, and in the lateral compartment ICC3,1 ranged from 0.76–0.94 and 0.93–1.00 respectively. The smallest detectable change in contact area was 0.65% in the medial compartment and 1.41% in the lateral compartment. Contact area was accurate to within a mean absolute error of 11.0 mm2. Conclusions Knee contact area and contact centroid location can be assessed in upright weightbearing MRI with good to excellent reliability. The lower field strength used in upright, weightbearing MRI does not compromise the reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location measures.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03786-1Standing MRIContact areaTibiofemoral jointKneeAnterior cruciate ligamentReliability
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Andrew M. Schmidt
David J. Stockton
Michael A. Hunt
Andrew Yung
Bassam A. Masri
David R. Wilson
spellingShingle Andrew M. Schmidt
David J. Stockton
Michael A. Hunt
Andrew Yung
Bassam A. Masri
David R. Wilson
Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Standing MRI
Contact area
Tibiofemoral joint
Knee
Anterior cruciate ligament
Reliability
author_facet Andrew M. Schmidt
David J. Stockton
Michael A. Hunt
Andrew Yung
Bassam A. Masri
David R. Wilson
author_sort Andrew M. Schmidt
title Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI
title_short Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI
title_full Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI
title_fullStr Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI
title_full_unstemmed Reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open MRI
title_sort reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location in upright, open mri
publisher BMC
series BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
issn 1471-2474
publishDate 2020-11-01
description Abstract Background Imaging cannot be performed during natural weightbearing in biomechanical studies using conventional closed-bore MRI, which has necessitated simulating weightbearing load on the joint. Upright, open MRI (UO-MRI) allows for joint imaging during natural weightbearing and may have the potential to better characterize the biomechanical effect of tibiofemoral pathology involving soft tissues. However open MRI scanners have lower field strengths than closed-bore scanners, which limits the image quality that can be obtained. Thus, there is a need to establish the reliability of measurements in upright weightbearing postures obtained using UO-MRI. Methods Knees of five participants with prior anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture were scanned standing in a 0.5 T upright open MRI scanner using a 3D DESS sequence. Manual segmentation of cartilage regions in contact was performed and centroids of these contact areas were automatically determined for the medial and lateral tibiofemoral compartments. Inter-rater, test-retest, and intra-rater reliability were determined and quantified using intra-class correlation (ICC3,1), standard error of measurement (SEM), and smallest detectable change with 95% confidence (SDC95). Accuracy was assessed by using a high-resolution 7 T MRI as a reference. Results Contact area and centroid location reliability (inter-rater, test-retest, and intra-rater) for sagittal scans in the medial compartment had ICC3,1 values from 0.95–0.99 and 0.98–0.99 respectively. In the lateral compartment, contact area and centroid location reliability ICC3,1 values ranged from 0.83–0.91 and 0.95–1.00 respectively. The smallest detectable change in contact area was 1.28% in the medial compartment and 0.95% in the lateral compartment. Contact area and centroid location reliability for coronal scans in the medial compartment had ICC3,1 values from 0.90–0.98 and 0.98–1.00 respectively, and in the lateral compartment ICC3,1 ranged from 0.76–0.94 and 0.93–1.00 respectively. The smallest detectable change in contact area was 0.65% in the medial compartment and 1.41% in the lateral compartment. Contact area was accurate to within a mean absolute error of 11.0 mm2. Conclusions Knee contact area and contact centroid location can be assessed in upright weightbearing MRI with good to excellent reliability. The lower field strength used in upright, weightbearing MRI does not compromise the reliability of tibiofemoral contact area and centroid location measures.
topic Standing MRI
Contact area
Tibiofemoral joint
Knee
Anterior cruciate ligament
Reliability
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03786-1
work_keys_str_mv AT andrewmschmidt reliabilityoftibiofemoralcontactareaandcentroidlocationinuprightopenmri
AT davidjstockton reliabilityoftibiofemoralcontactareaandcentroidlocationinuprightopenmri
AT michaelahunt reliabilityoftibiofemoralcontactareaandcentroidlocationinuprightopenmri
AT andrewyung reliabilityoftibiofemoralcontactareaandcentroidlocationinuprightopenmri
AT bassamamasri reliabilityoftibiofemoralcontactareaandcentroidlocationinuprightopenmri
AT davidrwilson reliabilityoftibiofemoralcontactareaandcentroidlocationinuprightopenmri
_version_ 1724399009971306496