Yi-Bin Xi1, Fan Guo1, Chun-Li Zhang1, Hu Xu1, Long-Biao Cui1, Chen Li1, Ping Tian1, Wei-Guo LI2, and Hong Yin1
1Xijing Hospital, Fourth Mililtary Medical University, Xi'an, China, People's Republic of, 2Bioengineering, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, United States
Synopsis
Magnetization transfer MRI Evaluation of Autologous Chondrocyte Membrane Transplantation in The Knee JointPurpose Autologous chondrocyte membrane transplantation
(ACMT), by combining autologous
chondrocyte transplantation technique1 and
cell membrane technology2, is a novel technique that forms
an autologous cartilage cell sheet for the treatment of cartilage defects.
Magnetization transfer MRI can effectively quantify in vivo alterations to the
amount of free water and bound water (water bound to collagen) to generate
image contrast within cartilage tissue3. However, the relationship
between MT MRI measurements and ACMT treatment of cartilage defects has not
been established. The objective of the present study was to demonstrate the
feasibility of using MT-MRI for evaluation of knee cartilage recovery following
the treatment of cartilage defects using ACMT.
Methods
The study was approved by the clinical
research ethics committee. Eleven patients underwent arthroscopic implantation
of autologous chondrocyte membrane. The patients were evaluated clinically with
a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and Lysholm scores before surgery, as well
as 6 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months and 36 months respectively
after surgery. MRI evaluations were carried out using a 1.5 T MR scanner (MAGNETOM
Aera, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) with an 8-channel knee coil.
MT-MRI was performed at 24 and 36 months after the ACMT. T2 weighted
images were acquired with the following parameters: TR = 1000 ms, TE = 69 ms,
slice thickness = 3 mm, number of average (NA) = 1, FOV = 160 x 160 mm2,
matrix = 256 x 256, pixel bandwidth = 225 Hz. MT MRI sequence included a
Gaussian pre-saturation pulse followed by a three-dimensional (3D) spoiled
gradient-echo pulse sequence. The Gaussian RF pulse was applied with pulse
length of 10 ms, flip angle (FA) of 600°, and off-resonance frequency of 1.5
kHz. The scanning parameters included: TR = 35 ms, TE = 3.55 ms, FA = 15 degree,
bandwidth = 300Hz/pixel, matrix = 320 × 320, slice thickness = 1 mm, FOV =160 ×
160 mm2, number of slices = 96. MTR maps were generated
voxel-wise using MATLAB software (MathWorks, Natick, MA using the following
equation MTRs = 100 × Msat / M0, where Msat
and M0 represents the signal intensity of images with and without MT
saturation. Region-of-interests were identified and drawn by a radiologist on
the MT weighted images and copied to the corresponding MTR maps.
Results
A representative lesion area in the knee cartilage is shown in
Fig. 1a. Eleven patients were scanned at 24 months after ACMT implantation with
five patients experienced 36-month MRI follow-up to date. The average VAS for pain of the eleven patents decreased from 3.91 pre-surgery
to 0.88 at 36 months after implantation. The average Lysholm
scores increased from 50.45 to 90.67 at 36 months after surgery. T2
weighted images at 24 and 36 months after the ACMT implantation are shown in
Fig. 1b and c. The MT-weighted images and MTR maps overlaid on the MT-weighted
images at 24 and 36 months are shown in Fig.2. A visible increase of MTR values
at the lesion area (circles in Fig.2d) at 36 months after implantation
comparing to 24 months (Fig. 2b). As shown in Fig. 3, an increase of the
average MTRs at the area of ACMT implantation was found from 31.16 ± 3.54 at 24 months from the eleven patients to 35.43 ± 5.64 at 36 months after ACMT implantation, while normal articular
showed consistence of MTRs of 37.84 ± 3.68 at 24 months
and 38.53 ± 4.09.
Discussion
MRI
techniques, such as T1 rho, dGEMRIC, gagCEST, and sodium imaging, require
either ultra-high magnetic field systems or other dedicated hardware or
software, thus having unclear clinical relevance. Preliminary studies showed controversy
results between damaged and repaired cartilage MTR in repair tissue 4,5.
Though further investigations are necessary, our results indicated MTR to be
capable of detecting differences between normal cartilage and areas of
cartilage repair using the ACMT technique and possibly a useful tool in imaging
biochemical changes in cartilage after repair.
Conclusion
Our
study demonstrated the feasibility of MT MRI for evaluation of knee cartilage recovery following the treatment of ACMT in the clinical MRI settings.
Acknowledgements
No acknowledgement found.References
1. Brittberg
M, Lindahl A, Nilsson A, Ohlsson C, Isaksson O, Peterson L. Treatment of deep
cartilage defects in the knee with autologous chondrocyte transplantation. N
Engl J Med. 1994 Oct 6;331(14):889-95.
2. Yang W, Lee S, Jo YH, Lee KM, Nemeno JG, Nam BM, et al. Effects of natural cartilaginous extracellular matrix on
chondrogenic potential for cartilage celltransplantation. Transplant Proc. 2014 May 46(4):1247-50.
3. Regatte
RR, Akella SV, Reddy R. Depth-dependent proton magnetization transfer in
articular cartilage. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005 Aug;22(2):318-23.
4. Welsch GH1, Trattnig S, Scheffler K, Szomonanyi P, Quirbach S,
Marlovits S, Domayer S, Bieri O, Mamisch TC. Magnetization transfer contrast
and T2 mapping in the evaluation of cartilage repair tissue with 3T MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 Oct;28(4):979-86.
5. Palmieri F1, De Keyzer F, Maes F, Van
Breuseghem I. Magnetization transfer analysis of cartilage repair tissue: a
preliminary study. Skeletal Radiol. 2006 Dec;35(12):903-8.