Clinical validation of fully automated laminar knee cartilage transverse relaxation time (T2) analysis in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured knees- on behalf of the osteoarthritis (OA)-Bio consortium

Felix Eckstein,Nicholas M Brisson,Susanne Maschek,Anna Wisser,Francis Berenbaum,Georg N Duda,Wolfgang Wirth
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-24-194
2024-07-01
Abstract:Background: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) cartilage transverse relaxation time (T2) reflects cartilage composition, mechanical properties, and early osteoarthritis (OA). T2 analysis requires cartilage segmentation. In this study, we clinically validate fully automated T2 analysis at 1.5 Tesla (T) in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL)-injured and healthy knees. Methods: We studied 71 participants: 20 ACL-injured patients with, and 22 without dynamic knee instability, 13 with surgical reconstruction, and 16 healthy controls. Sagittal multi-echo-spin-echo (MESE) MRIs were acquired at baseline and 1-year follow-up. Femorotibial cartilage was segmented manually; a convolutional neural network (CNN) algorithm was trained on MRI data from the same scanner. Results: Dice similarity coefficients (DSCs) of automated versus manual segmentation in the 71 participants were 0.83 (femora) and 0.89 (tibiae). Deep femorotibial T2 was similar between automated (45.7±2.6 ms) and manual (45.7±2.7 ms) segmentation (P=0.828), whereas superficial layer T2 was slightly overestimated by automated analysis (53.2±2.2 vs. 52.1±2.1 ms for manual; P<0.001). T2 correlations were r=0.91-0.99 for deep and r=0.86-0.97 for superficial layers across regions. The only statistically significant T2 increase over 1 year was observed in the deep layer of the lateral femur [standardized response mean (SRM) =0.58 for automated vs. 0.52 for manual analysis; P<0.001]. There was no relevant difference in baseline/longitudinal T2 values/changes between the ACL-injured groups and healthy participants, with either segmentation method. Conclusions: This clinical validation study suggests that automated cartilage T2 analysis from MESE at 1.5T is technically feasible and accurate. More efficient 3D sequences and longer observation intervals may be required to detect the impact of ACL injury induced joint instability on cartilage composition (T2).
What problem does this paper attempt to address?