Computed tomography (CT) is the gold standard imaging modality for the assessment of 3D bony morphology but incurs the cost of ionizing radiation exposure. High-resolution 3D magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with CT-like bone contrast (CLBC) may provide an alternative to CT in allowing complete evaluation of both bony and soft tissue structures with a single MRI examination.
Purpose
To review the technical aspects of an optimized stack-of-stars 3D gradient recalled echo pulse sequence method (3D-Bone) in generating 3D MR images with CLBC, and to present a pictorial review of the utility of 3D-Bone in the clinical assessment of common musculoskeletal conditions.
Material and Methods
3D-Bone is a black-bone imaging technique for acquiring high-resolution 3D MR images with strong CLBC, achieved by first rendering as high a signal as possible from non-cortical bone tissues, and second by minimizing signal contrast between non-cortical bone tissues.
Results
3D-Bone can be used in the clinical evaluation of bony morphology in common musculoskeletal conditions. Advantages include strong bone-soft tissue contrast, resistance to motion artefacts, simple hardware and software requirements, and straightforward image processing. Disadvantages include non-specificity for cortical bone, sensitivity to susceptibility artefacts, a lack of quantitative tissue measurements, as well as overall lower image resolution and bone-soft tissue contrast compared to CT.
Conclusion
The use of 3D MRI pulse sequences providing CLBC such as 3D-Bone could potentially offer complete clinical evaluation of bony morphology and soft tissues with a single MRI study for certain clinical indications, negating the need for ionizing radiation exposure from CT and reducing costs.
KwonYWPowellKAYumJK, et al.Use of three-dimensional computed tomography for the analysis of the glenoid anatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2005;14:85–90.
2.
RerkoMAPanXDonaldsonC, et al.Comparison of various imaging techniques to quantify glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2013;22:528–534.
3.
LiAEFishmanE. Cervical spine trauma: evaluation by multidetector CT and three-dimensional volume rendering. Emerg Radiol2003;10:34–39.
4.
PretoriusESFishmanEK. Spiral CT and three-dimensional CT of musculoskeletal pathology: emergency room applications. Radiol Clin North Am1999;37:953–974.
5.
KaewlaiRAveryLLAsraniAV, et al.Multidetector CT of carpal injuries: anatomy, fractures, and fracture-dislocations. Radiographics2008;28:1771–1784.
6.
FayadLMJohnsonPFishmanEK. Multidetector CT of musculoskeletal disease in the pediatric patient: principles, techniques, and clinical applications. Radiographics2005;25:603–618.
7.
ChangEYDuJChungCB. UTE imaging in the musculoskeletal system. J Magn Reson Imaging2015;41:870–883.
8.
HuijsmansPEHaenPSKiddM, et al.Quantification of a glenoid defect with three-dimensional computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging: a cadaveric study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2007;16:803–809.
9.
GyftopoulosSHasanSBencardinoJ, et al.Diagnostic accuracy of MRI in the measurement of glenoid bone loss. AJR Am J Roentgenol2012;199:873–878.
10.
LeeRKGriffithJFTongMM, et al.Glenoid bone loss: assessment with MR imaging. Radiology2013;267:496–502.
11.
YankeABShinJJPearsonI, et al.Three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging quantification of glenoid bone loss is equivalent to 3-dimensional computed tomography quantification: cadaveric study. Arthroscopy2017;33:709–715.
12.
MoroderPReschHSchnaitmannS, et al.The importance of CT for the pre-operative surgical planning in recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2013;133:219–226.
13.
BökerSMAdamsLCBenderYY, et al.Evaluation of vertebral body fractures using susceptibility-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol2018;28:2228–2235.
14.
HanX. MR-based synthetic CT generation using a deep convolutional neural network method. Med Phys2017;44:1408–1419.
15.
AydıngözÜYıldızAEErgenFB. Zero echo time musculoskeletal MRI: technique, optimization, applications, and pitfalls. Radiographics2022;42:1398–1414.
16.
Chong LR, Lee K, Sim FY. 3D MRI with CT-like bone contrast: an overview of current approaches and practical clinical implementation. Eur J Radiol 2021;143:109915.
17.
TianCYShangYZhengZZ. Glenoid bone lesions: comparison between 3D VIBE images in MR arthrography and nonarthrographic MSCT. J Magn Reson Imaging2012;36:231–236.
18.
LanderSTLilesJLKimBI, et al.Comparison of computed tomography and 3D magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating glenohumeral instability bone loss. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2022;31:2217–2224.
19.
Ferreira BotelhoMPKoktzoglouICollinsJD, et al.MR imaging of iliofemoral peripheral vascular calcifications using proton density-weighted, in-phase three-dimensional stack-of-stars gradient echo. Magn Reson Med2017;77:2146–2152.
20.
EleyKAMcIntyreAGWatt-SmithSR, et al. “Black bone” MRI: a partial flip angle technique for radiation reduction in craniofacial imaging. Br J Radiol2012;85:272–278.
21.
SpuentrupEKatohMBueckerA, et al.Free-breathing 3D steady-state free precession coronary MR angiography with radial k-space sampling: comparison with cartesian k-space sampling and cartesian gradient-echo coronary MR angiography–pilot study. Radiology2004;231:581–586.
22.
ChandaranaHBlockTKRosenkrantzAB, et al.Free-breathing radial 3D fat-suppressed T1-weighted gradient echo sequence: a viable alternative for contrast-enhanced liver imaging in patients unable to suspend respiration. Invest Radiol2011;46:648–653.
23.
BlockKTChandaranaHMillaS, et al.Towards routine clinical use of radial stack-of-stars 3D gradient-echo sequences for reducing motion sensitivity. J Korean Soc Magn Reson Med2014;18:87–106.
24.
ChoHHChoiYHCheonJE, et al.Free-breathing radial 3D fat-suppressed T1-weighted gradient-echo sequence for contrast-enhanced pediatric spinal imaging: comparison with T1-weighted turbo spin-echo sequence. AJR Am J Roentgenol2016;207:177–182.
25.
ChandaranaHBlockKTWinfeldMJ, et al.Free-breathing contrast-enhanced T1-weighted gradient-echo imaging with radial k-space sampling for paediatric abdominopelvic MRI. Eur Radiol2014;24:320–326.
26.
BencardinoJTGyftopoulosSPalmerWE. Imaging in anterior glenohumeral instability. Radiology2013;269:323–337.
27.
SkendzelJGSekiyaJK. Diagnosis and management of humeral head bone loss in shoulder instability. Am J Sports Med2012;40:2633–2644.
28.
WhalenRJProvencherMT. Editorial commentary: both 3-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography are valuable for determination of glenoid and humeral bone loss in patients with on- and off-track shoulder instability. Arthroscopy2024;40:1789–1792.
29.
KeelingLEWagalaNRyanPM, et al.Bone loss in shoulder instability: putting it all together. Ann Jt2023;8:27.
30.
TriggSDSchroederJDHulsoppleC. Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome. Curr Sports Med Rep2020;19:360–366.
31.
RankinATBleakleyCMCullenM. Hip joint pathology as a leading cause of groin pain in the sporting population: a 6-year review of 894 cases. Am J Sports Med2015;43:1698–1703.
32.
MascarenhasVVRegoPDantasP, et al.Imaging prevalence of femoroacetabular impingement in symptomatic patients, athletes, and asymptomatic individuals: a systematic review. Eur J Radiol2016;85:73–95.
33.
PetchprapaCNDunhamKSLattanziR, et al.Demystifying radial imaging of the hip. Radiographics2013;33:E97–E112.
34.
TakagiIEliyasJKStadlanN. Cervical spondylosis: an update on pathophysiology, clinical manifestation, and management strategies. Dis Mon2011;57:583–591.
35.
KatzJNHarrisMB. Clinical practice. Lumbar spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med2008;358:818–825.
36.
LiNAmarasingheSBoudreauxK, et al.Spondylolysis. Orthop Rev (Pavia)2022;14:37470.
37.
KierRWainSLAppleJ,et al.Osteoarthritis of the sternoclavicular joint: radiographic features and pathologic correlation. Invest Radiol1986;21:227–233.
38.
AslamMRajeshAEntwisleJ, et al.Pictorial review: MRI of the sternum and sternoclavicular joints. Br J Radiol2002;75:627–634.
39.
Van den BergRde HoogeMRudwaleitM, et al.ASAS modification of the Berlin algorithm for diagnosing axial spondyloarthritis: results from the SPondyloArthritis Caught Early (SPACE)-cohort and from the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS)-cohort. Ann Rheum Dis2013;72:1646–1653.
40.
LambertRGBakkerPAvan der HeijdeD, et al.Defining active sacroiliitis on MRI for classification of axial spondyloarthritis: update by the ASAS MRI working group. Ann Rheum Dis2016;75:1958–1963.
41.
ØstergaardM. MRI of the sacroiliac joints: what is and what is not sacroiliitis?Curr Opin Rheumatol2020;32:357–364.
42.
Santiago RestrepoCGiménezCRMcCarthyK. Imaging of osteomyelitis and musculoskeletal soft tissue infections: current concepts. Rheum Dis Clin North Am2003;29:89–109.
