while static MRI is widely used clinically for the assessment of several joints, it often fails to provide information on their biomechanical and functional status. On the other hand, dynamic MRI allows to gather information on the normal and impaired musculoskeletal function during motion but is technically more challenging. This presentation will cover some of the technical factors needed to perform and analyze a dynamic MRI experiment of the joints, and will highlight some clinical and research applications where dynamic MRI can add useful information to conventional static imaging.
The main objectives of this talk are to highlight technical factors needed in dynamic MRI of the joints, and to illustrate some clinical and research applications of these methods. In particular, the presentation will cover:
1) Understanding the different approaches for dynamic MRI data of joints
2) Technical considerations in designing and performing a dynamic MRI exam
3) Utilizing dynamic MRI to generate relevant clinical information on the status of the joints
From a technical point of view, dynamic imaging can be performed following two main approaches: in real time or in a segmented/trigged fashion (CINE MRI). Real time MRI does not require repetition of the motion task1–3, and is therefore more suitabke for the study of non-repetitive motion of for patients who experience pain during a motion task. On the other hand, CINE MRI approaches require the motion task to be repeated several times, and the motion to be synchronized with the scanner acquisition4,5. Non-cartesian k-space sampling approaches also allow to continuously acquire k-space lines and assign them to the individual time frames retrospectively, without the need for perfect synchronization of the motion task with the scanner acquisition6,7. Phase Contrast can be coupled to dynamic acquisition to determine velocities of bony segments 8–10 and muscles 4,5,11,12 during a specific motion task.
3D dynamic MRI methods offer the potential to simultaneously assess bone kinetics and soft tissue deformation, but are currently hampered by acquisition speed. Recent developments in image acquisition allowed 3D dynamic imaging of the knee joint, by making use of undersampled acquisition and compressed sensing reconstruction 6,7. Besides enabling a volumetric visualization of bones and soft tissue structures during motion, acceleration techniques in the context of dynamic MRI, have also been shown to increase the repeatability of the dynamic MRI experiment 13.
In order to increase the physiological and biomechanical value of a dynamic MRI experiment, the joint should be imaged in physiologically relevant loading conditions14. To this aim, appropriate MR compatible loading devices have been designed15–17. Furthermore, dedicated coils are needed for the data collection 7,15.
Additional technical considerations can be found in review papers on the topic14,18.
Dynamic MRI methods have been used to assess skeletal kinematics in a range of joints including knee19, shoulder20, wrist3,21, ankle22, and hip23. Besides providing a non-invasive, highly repeatable way to assess healthy joint kinematics9, dynamic MRI techniques have been employed to evaluate joint mechanics in musculoskeletal disorders24,25. Altered knee kinematics was measured using dynamic MRI in patients following ACL reconstruction26. Furthermore, dynamic MRI has been shown to be sensitive enough to detect changes in kinematics following surgical27 and non-surgical interventions24.
One of the most promising application of dynamic MRI is to provide a better understanding of pain mechanisms28. Additionally, functional parameters measured using dynamic MRI also play a crucial role in the field of biomechanics and musculoskeletal modeling18. Dynamic MRI has been used, inter alia, to measure tendon29, and muscle22,30 moment arms under different loading conditions. Dynamic MRI also allows to quantify cartilage contact patterns19,31, which are clinically relevant to better understand the development of osteoarthritis.
Additional applications of Dynamic musculoskeletal MRI are highlighted in a recent review32.
1. Pierrart, J. et al.New dynamic three-dimensional MRI technique for shoulder kinematic analysis. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging39,729–734 (2014).
2. Dragoo, J. L. et al.Mechanics of the anterior interval of the knee using open dynamic MRI. Clin. Biomech.25,433–437 (2010).
3. Mazzoli, V. et al.Water and fat separation in real-time MRI of joint movement with phase-sensitive bSSFP. Magn. Reson. Med.00,(2016).
4. Deligianni, X.et al.Synchronous MRI of muscle motion induced by electrical stimulation. Magn. Reson. Med.672,664–672 (2016).
5. Sinha, S. et al.Muscle kinematics during isometric contraction: Development of phase contrast and spin tag techniques to study healthy and atrophied muscles. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging20,1008–1019 (2004).
6. Kaiser, J., Bradford, R., Johnson, K., Wieben, O. & Thelen, D. G. Measurement of tibiofemoral kinematics using highly accelerated 3D radial sampling. Magn. Reson. Med.69,1310–1316 (2013).
7. Mazzoli, V. et al.Accelerated 4D self-gated MRI of tibiofemoral kinematics. NMR Biomed.30,(2017).
8. Asakawa, D. S.et al.Cine phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging as a tool for quantification of skeletal muscle motion. Semin. Musculoskelet. Radiol.7,287–295 (2003).
9. Rebmann, A. J. & Sheehan, F. T. Precise 3D skeletal kinematics using fast phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging17,206–213 (2003).
10. Sheehan, F. T. The finite helical axis of the knee joint (a non-invasive in vivo study using fast-PC MRI). J. Biomech.40,1038–1047 (2007).
11. Sinha, U. et al.Age-related differences in strain rate tensor of the medial gastrocnemius muscle during passive plantarflexion and active isometric contraction using velocity encoded MR imaging: Potential index of lateral force transmission. Magn. Reson. Med.73,1852–1863 (2015).
12. Mazzoli, V. et al.Accelerated 4D phase contrast MRI in skeletal muscle contraction. Magn. Reson. Med.1–13 (2018).
13. Mazzoli, V. et al.Accelerated 4D phase contrast MRI in skeletal muscle contraction. Magn. Reson. Med.80,(2018).
14. D’Entremont, A. G. & Wilson, D. R. Joint mechanics measurement using magnetic resonance imaging. Top Magn Reson Imaging21,325–334 (2010).
15. D’Entremont, A. G., Nordmeyer-Massner, J. A., Bos, C., Wilson, D. R. & Pruessmann, K. P. Do dynamic-based MR knee kinematics methods produce the same results as static methods? Magn. Reson. Med.69,1634–1644 (2013).
16. Silder, A., Westphal, C. J. & Thelen, D. G. A Magnetic Resonance-Compatible Loading Device for Dynamically Imaging Shortening and Lengthening Muscle Contraction Mechanics. J. Med. Device.3,034504 (2009).
17. Carpenter, R. D. et al.A New Device for Measuring Knee Rotational Kinematics Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging. J. Med. Device.2,044501 (2008).
18. Blemker, S. S., Asakawa, D. S., Gold, G. E. & Delp, S. L. Image-based musculoskeletal modeling: Applications, advances, and future opportunities. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging25,441–451 (2007).
19. Borotikar, B. S., Sipprell, W. H., Wible, E. E. & Sheehan, F. T. A methodology to accurately quantify patellofemoral cartilage contact kinematics by combining 3D image shape registration and cine-PC MRI velocity data. J. Biomech.45,1117–1122 (2012).
20. Tempelaere, C. et al.Dynamic three-dimensional shoulder Mri during active motion for investigation of rotator cuff diseases. PLoS One11,1–12 (2016).
21. Langner, I., Fischer, S., Eisenschenk, A. & Langner, S. Cine MRI: a new approach to the diagnosis of scapholunate dissociation. Skeletal Radiol.44,1103–1110 (2015).
22. Clarke, E. C. et al.A non-invasive, 3D, dynamic MRI method for measuring muscle moment arms in vivo: Demonstration in the human ankle joint and Achilles tendon. Med. Eng. Phys.37,93–99 (2015).
23. Gilles, B., Perrin, R., Magnenat-Thalmann, N. & Vallee, J. P. Bone motion analysis from dynamic MRI: Acquisition and tracking. Acad. Radiol.12,1285–1292 (2005).
24. Draper, C. E. et al.Using real-time MRI to quantify altered joint kinematics in subjects with patellofemoral pain and to evaluate the effects of a patellar brace or sleeve on joint motion. J. Orthop. Res.27,571–577 (2009).
25. Barrance, P. J., Williams, G. N., Snyder-Mackler, L. & Buchanan, T. S. Altered knee kinematics in ACL-deficient non-copers: A comparison using dynamic MRI. J. Orthop. Res.24,132–140 (2006).
26. Kaiser, J. M., Vignos, M. F., Kijowski, R., Baer, G. & Thelen, D. G. Effect of Loading on In Vivo Tibiofemoral and Patellofemoral Kinematics of Healthy and ACL-Reconstructed Knees. Am. J. Sports Med.45,3272–3279 (2017).
27. D’Entremont, A. G. et al.Effect of opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy on the three-dimensional kinematics of the knee. Bone Jt. J.96B,1214–1221 (2014).
28. Thomeer, L. T., Sheehan, F. T. & N, J. J. Normalized patellofemoral joint reaction force is greater in individuals with patellofemoral pain. J. Biomech.60,238–242 (2017).
29. Westphal, C. J., Schmitz, A., Reeder, S. B. & Thelen, D. G. Load-dependent variations in knee kinematics measured with dynamic MRI. J. Biomech.46,2045–2052 (2013).
30. Fiorentino, N. M. et al.Rectus Femoris Knee Muscle Moment Arms Measured in Vivo During Dynamic Motion With Real-Time Magnetic Resonance Imaging. J. Biomech. Eng.135,044501 (2013).
31. Kaiser, J., Vignos, M. F., Liu, F., Kijowski, R. & Thelen, D. G. American Society of Biomechanics Clinical Biomechanics Award 2015: MRI Assessments of Cartilage Mechanics, Morphology and Composition Following Reconstruction of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament. Clin. Biomech.34,38–44 (2016).
32. Borotikar, B. et al.Dynamic MRI to quantify musculoskeletal motion: A systematic review of concurrent validity and reliability, and perspectives for evaluation of musculoskeletal disorders. PLoS One12,1–26 (2017).