Vladimir Mlynarik1,2, Stefan Zbyn1, Markus Schreiner3, Vladimir Juras1, Pavol Szomolanyi1, Didier Laurent4, and Siegfried Trattnig1,2
1Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy, High Field MR Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 2CD Laboratory for Clinical Molecular MR Imaging, Vienna, Austria, 3Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, 4Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research, Basel, Switzerland
Synopsis
There are several methodological and data
processing issues in gagCEST, which complicate the translation of this method into clinical
practice. For assessing performance of the gagCEST protocol optimized in our
laboratory, corrected signal intensities from sodium images were used as a
reference. The results demonstrate a good correlation between both methods,
although the small magnitude of the gagCEST effect and the low resolution in
sodium images require carefully optimized methodology and long measurement
times. It can be concluded that the gagCEST method can be useful in evaluating
early degeneration of articular cartilage at 7 Tesla.Target audience
MR physicists and radiologists interested in the evaluation of
biochemical status of articular cartilage
Introduction
A decrease in
concentration of glycosaminoglycans (GAG) in articular cartilage is associated with early manifestation of osteoarthritis. However, quantification of GAGs in
articular cartilage in vivo is difficult. Several methods have been suggested
to be sensitive to the changes in GAG concentration, namely dGEMRIC, T
1ρ
mapping, sodium imaging and recently gagCEST. The gagCEST method is promising
since it is noninvasive, it does not need extra hardware and the relation of
gagCEST values to the GAG concentration have been demonstrated in vitro on
naturally degenerated cartilage specimens (1). Similarly, sodium MRI has been validated
for the evaluation of GAG concentration in cartilage (2). In our study, we
attempted to validate the performance of the optimized gagCEST method for the GAG content evaluation in vivo at 7 Tesla by using corrected
sodium signal intensities (cSI) as a reference.
Subjects & Methods
Five patients with
acute cartilage injury were measured twice with an interval of 8 days between
the examinations. The gagCEST and sodium MRI experiments were done on a 7T MR
System (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) using a 28-channel knee array coil and a 15-channel
sodium-only array coil (both Quality Electrodynamics LLC, Cleveland, OH),
respectively. For gagCEST, a segmented 3D RF-spoiled gradient-echo (GRE)
sequence (TE=3.15ms, TR=7.9ms, resolution=0.9×0.9×2.2mm
3) was used
in combination with presaturation before each segment by means of ten 60-ms
adiabatic full passage hs2 RF pulses followed by spoiling gradients. The
nominal frequency of the pulses in the train was varied in a range of ± 20 Hz. Nineteen
scans with equidistant (93 Hz) offsets in the range of 1680 Hz around the water
resonance and a scan without saturation were collected, resulting in a scan
time of 20 min. The amplitude of the saturation pulses corresponded to about
80% of the SAR limit. Z-spectra were extracted from registered images and their
asymmetry (MTR
asym) was calculated from integrals over the offset
range ±∂ = 0.6–1.8 ppm relative to the minimum of each individual Z-spectrum.
Sodium images were measured using a 3D vTE-GRE sequence with variable echo
times, TR=9.2 ms, TE
min/TE
max =1.22/1.82 ms, FA=51º,
bandwidth=100 Hz/pixel, resolution=1.6×1.6×3.0 mm
3 and a scan time
of 25 min.
Results
In the sagittal
sodium images and gagCEST maps (Fig. 1), regions of interest were selected in
weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing zones of femoral condyles, in patellar and
tibial cartilage. For the correlation between cSI and MTR
asym
values, mean values of two measurements in the selected regions were
used. A good agreement between results of these two methods was observed (Fig.
2). Without considering an outlier, the correlation coefficient was about 0.9. It was also observed that cartilage
properties may not be strictly bound to its weight-bearing or
non-weight-bearing function and may vary in a relatively broad range.
Discussion
Sodium signal
intensities can be affected by hardware imperfections and by partial volume
effect due to low spatial resolution of sodium images. In this study, the
reported sodium signal intensities were corrected for inhomogeneous B
1
field (3) and for the partial volume effects. On the other hand, the gagCEST
values can be affected by the mode of saturation (including direct saturation of
water), by the exchange rate and by relaxation times of water and exchangeable protons in the tissue
(4). In spite of these limitations, a good agreement between the MTR
asym
and cSI values was observed. Because the relation between sodium signal intensities
and the GAG concentrations is relatively straightforward and has been proven
experimentally, it can be concluded that gagCEST can also be useful in estimating
GAG concentration in knee cartilage in vivo. The outlying value in Fig. 2 indicates that corrections for unusual properties of cartilage might be necessary in some cases.
Acknowledgements
The study was supported by a grant provided by Vienna Science and Technology Fund, Project WWTF-LS11-018.References
1. Brix M, Mlynarik V, Schmitt B, et al. Evaluation of the GAG content
of articular cartilage in the knee joint using gagCEST: correlation to the
gold-standard with multicompartmental biochemically analyzed GAG content. Proc
Intl Soc Mag Reson Med 22, 3985 (2014).
2. Wheaton AJ, Borthakur A, Dodge GR, et al. Sodium magnetic resonance
imaging of proteoglycan depletion in an in vivo model of osteoarthritis. Acad
Radiol. 2004;11:21-8.
3. Zbýn Š, Brix MO, Juras V, et al. Sodium magnetic resonance imaging of
ankle joint in cadaver specimens, volunteers, and patients after different
cartilage repair techniques at 7 T: initial results. Invest Radiol. 2015;
50:246-54.
4. Zaiss M and Bachert P. Chemical exchange
saturation transfer (CEST) and MR Z-spectroscopy in vivo: a review of
theoretical approaches and methods. Phys Med Biol. 2013; 58:R221–R269.