Yanke Adam B, Shin Jason J, Pearson Ian, Bach Bernard R, Romeo Anthony A, Cole Brian J, Verma Nikhil N
Sports Medicine Division, Department of Orthopaedics, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A..
Department of Orthopaedics, Royal University Hospital, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Arthroscopy. 2017 Apr;33(4):709-715. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.08.025. Epub 2016 Dec 4.
To assess the ability of 3-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI, 1.5 and 3 tesla [T]) to quantify glenoid bone loss in a cadaveric model compared with the current gold standard, 3D computed tomography (CT).
Six cadaveric shoulders were used to create a bone loss model, leaving the surrounding soft tissues intact. The anteroposterior (AP) dimension of the glenoid was measured at the glenoid equator and after soft tissue layer closure the specimen underwent scanning (CT, 1.5-T MRI, and 3-T MRI) with the following methods (0%, 10%, and 25% defect by area). Raw axial data from the scans were segmented using manual mask manipulation for bone and reconstructed using Mimics software to obtain a 3D en face glenoid view. Using calibrated Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine images, the diameter of the glenoid at the equator and the area of the glenoid defect was measured on all imaging modalities.
In specimens with 10% or 25% defects, no difference was detected between imaging modalities when comparing the measured defect size (10% defect P = .27, 25% defect P = .73). All 3 modalities demonstrated a strong correlation with the actual defect size (CT, ρ = .97; 1.5-T MRI, ρ = .93; 3-T MRI, ρ = .92, P < .0001). When looking at the absolute difference between the actual and measured defect area, no significance was noted between imaging modalities (10% defect P = .34, 25% defect P = .47). The error of 3-T 3D MRI increased with increasing defect size (P = .02).
Both 1.5- and 3-T-based 3D MRI reconstructions of glenoid bone loss correlate with measurements from 3D CT scan data and actual defect size in a cadaveric model. Regardless of imaging modality, the error in bone loss measurement tends to increase with increased defect size. Use of 3D MRI in the setting of shoulder instability could obviate the need for CT scans.
The goal of our work was to develop a reproducible method of determining glenoid bone loss from 3D MRI data and hence eliminate the need for CT scans in this setting. This will lead to decreased cost of care as well as decreased radiation exposure to patients. The long-term goal is a fully automated system that is as approachable for clinicians as current 3D CT technology.
与当前的金标准三维计算机断层扫描(CT)相比,评估三维(3D)磁共振成像(MRI,1.5和3特斯拉[T])在尸体模型中量化肩胛盂骨质流失的能力。
使用六个尸体肩部创建骨质流失模型,周围软组织保持完整。在肩胛盂赤道处测量肩胛盂的前后(AP)尺寸,在软组织层闭合后,对标本进行扫描(CT、1.5-T MRI和3-T MRI),采用以下方法(按面积计为0%、10%和25%的缺损)。扫描得到的原始轴向数据通过手动掩膜操作对骨骼进行分割,并使用Mimics软件重建,以获得肩胛盂的三维正面视图。使用校准的医学数字成像和通信图像,在所有成像模式下测量肩胛盂赤道处的直径和肩胛盂缺损的面积。
在有10%或25%缺损的标本中,比较测量的缺损大小时,各成像模式之间未检测到差异(10%缺损P = .27,25%缺损P = .73)。所有三种模式与实际缺损大小均显示出强烈相关性(CT,ρ = .97;1.5-T MRI,ρ = .93;3-T MRI,ρ = .92,P < .0001)。观察实际缺损面积与测量缺损面积之间的绝对差异时,各成像模式之间未发现显著差异(10%缺损P = .34,25%缺损P = .47)。3-T 3D MRI的误差随缺损大小增加而增大(P = .02)。
基于1.5-T和3-T的肩胛盂骨质流失的3D MRI重建与尸体模型中3D CT扫描数据的测量值及实际缺损大小相关。无论成像模式如何,骨质流失测量的误差往往随缺损大小增加而增大。在肩关节不稳定的情况下使用3D MRI可避免进行CT扫描。
我们工作的目标是开发一种从3D MRI数据确定肩胛盂骨质流失的可重复方法,从而在此情况下无需进行CT扫描。这将降低护理成本,并减少患者的辐射暴露。长期目标是开发一个全自动系统,对临床医生来说像当前的3D CT技术一样易于使用。