Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at San Antonio, One UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX, 78249, USA.
Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
MAGMA. 2019 Dec;32(6):607-615. doi: 10.1007/s10334-019-00774-y. Epub 2019 Sep 4.
The Goutallier classification system is the most commonly used method for grading intramuscular fatty infiltration in rotator cuff tears. This grading system presents low inter-observer reliability and an inability to provide quantitative and repeatable outcomes for intramuscular fat. We determined the correlation and reliability of two methods, the Lava Flex and Ideal IQ MRI techniques, in quantifying volumetric intramuscular fat, while also comparing to the Goutallier method.
The supraspinatus muscles of seventeen cadaveric shoulders were scanned using the Lava Flex and Ideal IQ MRI imaging protocols. Histological analysis was performed on the same muscles. Agreement, reliability, and correlation analyses were performed to compare all outcomes.
The Lava Flex protocol took an average of ~ 4 min, while the Ideal IQ required about ~ 11 min to complete. Bland-Altman analysis showed good agreement between the Lava Flex and Ideal IQ [LOA (- 0.10 and 0.05)], and ICC analyses showed excellent reliability (ICC (1,1) 0.948; ICC (2,1) 0.947). There was a 91% correlation between the Lava Flex and Ideal IQ MR protocols. Weighted Kappa analysis between histology and the Goutallier classification showed fair-to-moderate agreement.
The Lava Flex technique, taking about 30% of the acquisition time, may prevent motion artifacts in outcomes associated with the longer Ideal IQ technique. However, potential magnetic field inhomogeneities should be considered. The Lava Flex technique may be a faster and valid alternative to the Goutallier classification system.
Goutallier 分级系统是目前用于评估肩袖撕裂中肌内脂肪浸润程度最常用的方法。该分级系统观察者间可靠性较低,无法为肌内脂肪提供定量和可重复的结果。我们确定了 Lava Flex 和 Ideal IQ MRI 两种技术在量化容积肌内脂肪方面的相关性和可靠性,同时还与 Goutallier 方法进行了比较。
17 具尸体肩关节的冈上肌分别采用 Lava Flex 和 Ideal IQ MRI 成像方案进行扫描。对同一肌肉进行组织学分析。对所有结果进行一致性、可靠性和相关性分析。
Lava Flex 方案平均用时约 4 分钟,而 Ideal IQ 需要大约 11 分钟才能完成。Bland-Altman 分析显示 Lava Flex 和 Ideal IQ 之间具有良好的一致性 [LOA(-0.10 和 0.05)],ICC 分析显示具有极好的可靠性(ICC(1,1)0.948;ICC(2,1)0.947)。Lava Flex 和 Ideal IQ MR 方案之间具有 91%的相关性。组织学与 Goutallier 分级之间的加权 Kappa 分析显示具有适度至中度一致性。
Lava Flex 技术需要大约 30%的采集时间,可能会防止与较长的 Ideal IQ 技术相关的结果出现运动伪影。然而,应该考虑潜在的磁场不均匀性。Lava Flex 技术可能是一种比 Goutallier 分级系统更快且有效的替代方法。