SpringerLink
Log in

In vivo evaluation of biomechanical properties in the patellofemoral joint after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation by means of quantitative T2 MRI

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

To determine in vivo biomechanical properties of articular cartilage and cartilage repair tissue of the patella, using biochemical MRI by means of quantitative T2 map**.

Methods

Twenty MR scans were achieved at 3T MRI, using a new 8-channel multi-function coil allowing controlled bending of the knee. Multi-echo spin-echo T2 map** was prepared in healthy volunteers and in age- and sex-matched patients after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) of the patella. MRI was performed at 0° and 45° of flexion of the knee after 0 min and after 1 h. A semi-automatic region-of-interest analysis was performed for the whole patella cartilage. To allow stratification with regard to the anatomical (collagen) structure, further subregional analysis was carried out (deep–middle–superficial cartilage layer). Statistical analysis of variance was performed.

Results

During 0° flexion (decompression), full-thickness T2 values showed no significant difference between volunteers (43 ms) and patients (41 ms). Stratification was more pronounced for healthy cartilage compared to cartilage repair tissue. During 45° flexion (compression), full-thickness T2 values within volunteers were significantly increased (54 ms) compared to patients (44 ms) (p < 0.001). Again, stratification was more pronounced in volunteers compared to patients. The volunteer group showed no significant increase in T2 values measured in straight position and in bended position. There was no significant difference between the 0- and the 60-min MRI examination. T2 values in the patient group increased between the 0- and the 60-min examination. However, the increase was only significant in the superior cartilage layer of the straight position (p = 0.021).

Conclusion

During compression (at 45° flexion), healthy patellar cartilage showed a significant increase in T2-values, indicating adaptations of water content and collagen fibril orientation to mechanical load. This could not be observed within the patella cartilage after cartilage repair (MACT) of the patella, most obvious due to a lack of biomechanical adjustment.

Level of evidence

III.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alparslan L, Winalski CS, Boutin RD et al (2001) Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage repair. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 5(4):345–363

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Apprich S, Mamisch TC, Welsch GH et al (2011) Quantitative T2 map** of the patella at 3.0T is sensitive to early cartilage degeneration, but also to loading of the knee. Eur J Radiol 81(4):e438–e443

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Battaglia M, Vannini F, Buda R et al (2011) Arthroscopic autologous chondrocyte implantation in osteochondral lesions of the talus: mid-term T2-map** MRI evaluation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19(8):1376–1384

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brittberg M, Faxen E, Peterson L (1994) Carbon fiber scaffolds in the treatment of early knee osteoarthritis. A prospective 4-year followup of 37 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 307:155–164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brittberg M, Lindahl A, Nilsson A et al (1994) Treatment of deep cartilage defects in the knee with autologous chondrocyte transplantation. N Engl J Med 331(14):889–895

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bydder M, Rahal A, Fullerton GD et al (2007) The magic angle effect: a source of artifact, determinant of image contrast, and technique for imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 25(2):290–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Chung CB, Frank LR, Resnick D (2001) Cartilage imaging techniques: current clinical applications and state of the art imaging. Clin Orthop Relat Res 391(Suppl):S370–S378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. D’Anchise R, Manta N, Prospero E et al (2005) Autologous implantation of chondrocytes on a solid collagen scaffold: clinical and histological outcomes after two years of follow-up. J Orthopaed Traumatol 6:36–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Eckstein F, Lemberger B, Gratzke C et al (2005) In vivo cartilage deformation after different types of activity and its dependence on physical training status. Ann Rheum Dis 64(2):291–295

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Felson DT (2004) Risk factors for osteoarthritis: understanding joint vulnerability. Clin Orthop Relat Res 427(Suppl):S16–S21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Goodwin DW, Zhu H, Dunn JF (2000) In vitro MR imaging of hyaline cartilage: correlation with scanning electron microscopy. Am J Roentgenol (AJR) 174(2):405–409

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Huberti HH, Hayes WC (1984) Patellofemoral contact pressures. The influence of q-angle and tendofemoral contact. J Bone Joint Surg Am 66(5):715–724

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Jones CW, Willers C, Keogh A et al (2008) Matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation in sheep: objective assessments including confocal arthroscopy. J Orthop Res 26(3):292–303

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kocher MS, Steadman JR, Briggs KK et al (2004) Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm knee scale for various chondral disorders of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A(6):1139–1145

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Liess C, Lusse S, Karger N et al (2002) Detection of changes in cartilage water content using MRI T2-map** in vivo. Osteoarthr Cartil 10(12):907–913

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Madry H, van Dijk CN, Mueller-Gerbl M (2010) The basic science of the subchondral bone. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18(4):419–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mamisch TC, Trattnig S, Quirbach S et al (2010) Quantitative T2 map** of knee cartilage: differentiation of healthy control cartilage and cartilage repair tissue in the knee with unloading—initial results. Radiology 254(3):818–826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marcacci M, Berruto M, Brocchetta D et al (2005) Articular cartilage engineering with Hyalograft C: 3-year clinical results. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435:96–105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Marlovits S, Kutscha-Lissberg F, Aldrian S et al (2004) Autologous chondrocyte transplantation for the treatment of articular cartilage defects in the knee joint. Techniques and results. Radiologe 44(8):763–772

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Marlovits S, Trattnig S (2006) Cartilage repair. Eur J Radiol 57(1):1–2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ, Smith MB (2000) Human articular cartilage: influence of aging and early symptomatic degeneration on the spatial variation of T2-preliminary findings at 3 T. Radiology 214(1):259–266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mosher TJ, Smith HE, Collins C et al (2005) Change in knee cartilage T2 at MR imaging after running: a feasibility study. Radiology 234(1):245–249

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Poole AR, Kojima T, Yasuda T et al (2001) Composition and structure of articular cartilage: a template for tissue repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 391(Suppl):S26–S33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Recht M, White LM, Winalski CS et al (2003) MR imaging of cartilage repair procedures. Skeletal Radiol 32(4):185–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rubenstein JD, Kim JK, Henkelman RM (1996) Effects of compression and recovery on bovine articular cartilage: appearance on MR images. Radiology 201(3):843–850

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Salsich GB, Ward SR, Terk MR et al (2003) In vivo assessment of patellofemoral joint contact area in individuals who are pain free. Clin Orthop Relat Res 417:277–284

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Shiomi T, Nishii T, Myoui A et al (2010) Influence of knee positions on T2, T*2, and dGEMRIC map** in porcine knee cartilage. Magn Reson Med 64(3):707–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Smith HE, Mosher TJ, Dardzinski BJ et al (2001) Spatial variation in cartilage T2 of the knee. J Magn Reson Imaging 14(1):50–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:43–49

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Trattnig S, Ba-Ssalamah A, Pinker K et al (2005) Matrix-based autologous chondrocyte implantation for cartilage repair: noninvasive monitoring by high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 23(7):779–787

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Watrin-Pinzano A, Ruaud JP, Cheli Y et al (2004) Evaluation of cartilage repair tissue after biomaterial implantation in rat patella by using T2 map**. MAGMA 17(3–6):219–228

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Domayer SE et al (2008) Cartilage T2 assessment at 3-T MR imaging: in vivo differentiation of normal hyaline cartilage from reparative tissue after two cartilage repair procedures—initial experience. Radiology 247(1):154–161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Welsch GH, Mamisch TC, Zak L et al (2010) Evaluation of cartilage repair tissue after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation using a hyaluronic-based or a collagen-based scaffold with morphological MOCART scoring and biochemical T2 map**: preliminary results. Am J Sports Med 38(5):934–942

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. White LM, Sussman MS, Hurtig M et al (2006) Cartilage T2 assessment: differentiation of normal hyaline cartilage and reparative tissue after arthroscopic cartilage repair in equine subjects. Radiology 241(2):407–414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors disclose that there are no financial and/or personal relationships with other individuals or organizations that could inappropriately influence (bias) this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, MR Center, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    M. L. Pachowsky, S. Trattnig, S. Apprich & Goetz H. Welsch

  2. Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Erlangen, Krankenhausstr. 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany

    M. L. Pachowsky, A. Mauerer, Goetz H. Welsch & M. Blanke

  3. Norwegian Research Center for Active Rehabilitation, Norwegian School of Sports Science, Oslo, Norway

    B. Wondrasch

  4. Department of Trauma Surgery, Center of Joint and Cartilage, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    S. Marlovits

  5. Vienna Sports Medicine Center, Vienna, Austria

    B. Wondrasch & S. Marlovits

Authors
  1. M. L. Pachowsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. S. Trattnig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. B. Wondrasch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Apprich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Marlovits
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. A. Mauerer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Goetz H. Welsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. M. Blanke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Goetz H. Welsch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pachowsky, M.L., Trattnig, S., Wondrasch, B. et al. In vivo evaluation of biomechanical properties in the patellofemoral joint after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation by means of quantitative T2 MRI. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22, 1360–1369 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2527-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2527-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation