Background: Current diagnostic strategies for detection of structural articular cartilage abnormalities, the earliest structural signs of osteoarthritis, often do not capture the condition until it is too far advanced for the most potential benefit of noninvasive interventions.
Purpose: To systematically review the literature relative to the following questions: (1) Is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) a valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable instrument to identify knee articular cartilage abnormalities compared with arthroscopy? (2) Is MRI a sensitive tool that can be utilized to identify early cartilage degeneration?
Study Design: Systematic review.
Methods: A systematic search was performed in November 2010 using PubMed MEDLINE (from 1966), CINAHL (from 1982), SPORTDiscus (from 1985), SCOPUS (from 1996), and EMBASE (from 1974) databases.
Results: Fourteen level I and 13 level II studies were identified that met inclusion criteria and provided information related to diagnostic performance of MRI compared with arthroscopic evaluation. The diagnostic performance of MRI demonstrated a large range of sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies. The sensitivity for identifying articular cartilage abnormalities in the knee joint was reported between 26% and 96%. Specificity and accuracy were reported between 50% and 100% and between 49% and 94%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for identifying early osteoarthritis were reported between 0% and 86%, 48% and 95%, and 5% and 94%, respectively. As a result of inconsistencies between imaging techniques and methodological shortcomings of many of the studies, a meta-analysis was not performed, and it was difficult to fully synthesize the information to state firm conclusions about the diagnostic performance of MRI.
Conclusion: There is evidence in some MRI protocols that MRI is a relatively valid, sensitive, specific, accurate, and reliable clinical tool for identifying articular cartilage degeneration. Because of heterogeneity of MRI sequences, it is not possible to make definitive conclusions regarding its global clinical utility for guiding diagnosis and treatment strategies.
Clinical Relevance: Traumatic sports injuries to the knee may be significant precursor events to early onset of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Magnetic resonance imaging may aid in early identification of structural injuries to articular cartilage as evidenced by articular cartilage degeneration grading.
AltmanRAschEBlochD. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis: classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29(8):1039-1049.
2.
AltmanRD. Early management of osteoarthritis. Am J Manag Care. 2010;16 Suppl Management:S41-S47.
3.
BachmannGHeinrichsCJurgensenIRomingerMScheiterARauWS. [Comparison of different MRT techniques in the diagnosis of degenerative cartilage diseases: in vitro study of 50 joint specimens of the knee at T1.5]. Rofo. 1997;166(5):429-436.
4.
BachmannGFBasadERauberKDamianMSRauWS. Degenerative joint disease on MRI and physical activity: a clinical study of the knee joint in 320 patients. Eur Radiol. 1999;9(1):145-152.
5.
BlackburnWDJrBernreuterWKRomingerMLooseLL. Arthroscopic evaluation of knee articular cartilage: a comparison with plain radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging. J Rheumatol. 1994;21(4):675-679.
6.
BorthakurAShapiroEMBeersJKudchodkarSKneelandJBReddyR. Sensitivity of MRI to proteoglycan depletion in cartilage: comparison of sodium and proton MRI. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2000;8(4):288-293.
7.
BredellaMATirmanPFPeterfyCG. Accuracy of T2-weighted fast spin-echo MR imaging with fat saturation in detecting cartilage defects in the knee: comparison with arthroscopy in 130 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172(4):1073-1080.
8.
BroderickLSTurnerDARenfrewDLSchnitzerTJHuffJPHarrisC. Severity of articular cartilage abnormality in patients with osteoarthritis: evaluation with fast spin-echo MR vs arthroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;162(1):99-103.
9.
BrossmannJFrankLRPaulyJM. Short echo time projection reconstruction MR imaging of cartilage: comparison with fat-suppressed spoiled GRASS and magnetization transfer contrast MR imaging. Radiology. 1997;203(2):501-507.
10.
BrownTRQuinnSF. Evaluation of chondromalacia of the patellofemoral compartment with axial magnetic resonance imaging. Skeletal Radiol. 1993;22(5):325-328.
11.
CremaMDRoemerFWMarraMD. Articular cartilage in the knee: current MR imaging techniques and applications in clinical practice and research. Radiographics. 2011;31(1):37-61.
12.
De SmetAAMonuJUFisherDRKeeneJSGrafBK. Signs of patellar chondromalacia on sagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Skeletal Radiol. 1992;21(2):103-105.
13.
DislerDG. Fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-recalled MR imaging: assessment of articular and physeal hyaline cartilage. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(4):1117-1123.
14.
DislerDGMcCauleyTRKelmanCG. Fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging of hyaline cartilage defects in the knee: comparison with standard MR imaging and arthroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996;167(1):127-132.
15.
DislerDGMcCauleyTRWirthCRFuchsMD. Detection of knee hyaline cartilage defects using fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging: comparison with standard MR imaging and correlation with arthroscopy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;165(2):377-382.
16.
DislerDGRaymondEMayDAWayneJSMcCauleyTR. Articular cartilage defects: in vitro evaluation of accuracy and interobserver reliability for detection and grading with US. Radiology. 2000;215(3):846-851.
17.
DucSRPfirrmannCWSchmidMR. Articular cartilage defects detected with 3D water-excitation true FISP: prospective comparison with sequences commonly used for knee imaging. Radiology. 2007;245(1):216-223.
18.
DuchateauFVande BergBC. MR imaging of the articular cartilage of the knee with arthroscopy as gold standard: assessment of methodological quality of clinical studies. Eur Radiol. 2002;12(12):2977-2981.
19.
DunnTCLuYJinHRiesMDMajumdarS. T2 relaxation time of cartilage at MR imaging: comparison with severity of knee osteoarthritis. Radiology. 2004;232(2):592-598.
20.
EnglundMLohmanderLS. Risk factors for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis fifteen to twenty-two years after meniscectomy. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(9):2811-2819.
21.
FaberKJDillJRAmendolaAThainLSpougeAFowlerPJ. Occult osteochondral lesions after anterior cruciate ligament rupture: six-year magnetic resonance imaging follow-up study. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27(4):489-494.
22.
FicatRPPhilippeJHungerfordDS. Chondromalacia patellae: a system of classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;144:55-62.
23.
FigueroaDCalvoRVaismanACarrascoMAMoragaCDelgadoI. Knee chondral lesions: incidence and correlation between arthroscopic and magnetic resonance findings. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(3):312-315.
24.
FrankLRBrossmannJBuxtonRBResnickD. MR imaging truncation artifacts can create a false laminar appearance in cartilage. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(2):547-554.
25.
FriemertBOberländerYSchwarzW. Diagnosis of chondral lesions of the knee joint: can MRI replace arthroscopy? A prospective study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2004;12(1):58-64.
26.
GagliardiJAChungEMChandnaniVP. Detection and staging of chondromalacia patellae: relative efficacies of conventional MR imaging, MR arthrography, and CT arthrography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1994;163(3):629-636.
27.
GaleaAGiuffreBDimmickSCoolicanMRParkerDA. The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging scanning and its influence on management decisions in knee surgery. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(5):473-480.
28.
GluckertKKladnyBBlank-SchalAHofmannG. MRI of the knee joint with a 3-D gradient echo sequence: equivalent to diagnostic arthroscopy?Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1992;112(1):5-14.
29.
GoldGEFullerSEHargreavesBAStevensKJBeaulieuCF. Driven equilibrium magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage: initial clinical experience. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005;21(4):476-481.
30.
GolightlyYMMarshallSWCallahanLFGuskiewiczK. Early-onset arthritis in retired National Football League players. J Phys Act Health. 2009;6(5):638-643.
31.
GuckelCJundtGSchnabelKGachterA. Spin-echo and 3D gradient-echo imaging of the knee joint: a clinical and histopathological comparison. Eur J Radiol. 1995;21(1):25-33.
32.
HalbrechtJLJacksonDW. Office arthroscopy: a diagnostic alternative. Arthroscopy. 1992;8(3):320-326.
33.
HandelbergFShahabpourMCasteleynPP. Chondral lesions of the patella evaluated with computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and arthroscopy. Arthroscopy. 1990;6(1):24-29.
34.
HargreavesBAGoldGEBeaulieuCFVasanawalaSSNishimuraDGPaulyJM. Comparison of new sequences for high-resolution cartilage imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49(4):700-709.
35.
HeronCWCalvertPT. Three-dimensional gradient-echo MR imaging of the knee: comparison with arthroscopy in 100 patients. Radiology. 1992;183(3):839-844.
36.
HuegliRWMoellekenSMStorkA. MR imaging of post-traumatic articular cartilage injuries confined to the femoral trochlea: arthroscopic correlation and clinical significance. Eur J Radiol. 2005;53(1):90-95.
37.
IrieKYamadaTInoueK. A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic evaluation of chondral lesions of the knee. Orthopedics. 2000;23(6):561-564.
38.
JungiusKPSchmidMRZanettiMHodlerJKochPPfirrmannCW. Cartilaginous defects of the femorotibial joint: accuracy of coronal short inversion time inversion-recovery MR sequence. Radiology. 2006;240(2):482-488.
39.
KijowskiRBlankenbakerDGDavisKWShinkiKKaplanLDDe SmetAA. Comparison of 1.5- and 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint. Radiology. 2009;250(3):839-848.
40.
KijowskiRBlankenbakerDGKlaersJLShinkiKDe SmetAABlockWF. Vastly undersampled isotropic projection steady-state free precession imaging of the knee: diagnostic performance compared with conventional MR. Radiology. 2009;251(1):185-194.
41.
KijowskiRBlankenbakerDGWoodsMAShinkiKDe SmetAAReederSB. 3.0-T evaluation of knee cartilage by using three-dimensional IDEAL GRASS imaging: comparison with fast spin-echo imaging. Radiology. 2010;255(1):117-127.
42.
KijowskiRDavisKWWoodsMA. Knee joint: comprehensive assessment with 3D isotropic resolution fast spin-echo MR imaging. Diagnostic performance compared with that of conventional MR imaging at 3.0 T. Radiology. 2009;252(2):486-495.
43.
KramerJRechtMPImhofHStiglbauerREngelA. Postcontrast MR arthrography in assessment of cartilage lesions. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1994;18(2):218-224.
44.
KuikkaPIBostmanOMKiuruMJSalminenSTMikkolaSPihlajamakiHK. One screening magnetic resonance imaging sequence in evaluation of chondral and meniscal lesions of the knee: a pilot study. Open Orthop J. 2008;2:19-22.
45.
LawrenceRCFelsonDTHelmickCG. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States: part II. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(1):26-35.
46.
LawrenceRCHelmickCGArnettFC. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and selected musculoskeletal disorders in the United States. Arthritis Rheum. 1998;41(5):778-799.
47.
LeeSHSuhJSChoJKimSJ. Evaluation of chondromalacia of the patella with axial inversion recovery-fast spin-echo imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2001;13(3):412-416.
48.
LeeSYJeeWHKimSKKohIJKimJM. Differentiation between grade 3 and grade 4 articular cartilage defects of the knee: fat-suppressed proton density-weighted versus fat-suppressed three-dimensional gradient-echo MRI. Acta Radiol. 2010;51(4):455-461.
49.
LevyASLohnesJSculleySLeCroyMGarrettW. Chondral delamination of the knee in soccer players. Am J Sports Med. 1996;24(5):634-639.
50.
LiXYuCWuH. Prospective comparison of 3D FIESTA versus fat-suppressed 3D SPGR MRI in evaluating knee cartilage lesions. Clin Radiol. 2009;64(10):1000-1008.
51.
LohmanderLSEnglundPMDahlLLRoosEM. The long-term consequence of anterior cruciate ligament and meniscus injuries: osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(10):1756-1769.
52.
LohmanderLSOstenbergAEnglundMRoosH. High prevalence of knee osteoarthritis, pain, and functional limitations in female soccer players twelve years after anterior cruciate ligament injury. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(10):3145-3152.
53.
LosinaEWalenskyRPKesslerCL. Cost-effectiveness of total knee arthroplasty in the United States: patient risk and hospital volume. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(12):1113-1121, discussion 1121-1122.
54.
LundbergMOdenstenMThuomasKAMessnerK. The diagnostic validity of magnetic resonance imaging in acute knee injuries with hemarthrosis: a single-blinded evaluation in 69 patients using high-field MRI before arthroscopy. Int J Sports Med. 1996;17(3):218-222.
55.
MacariniLMurroneMMariniSMarianoMZaccheoNMorettiB. MR in the study of knee cartilage pathologies: influence of location and grade on the effectiveness of the method. Radiol Med. 2003;105(4):296-307.
56.
MaffulliNLongoUGGougouliasNLoppiniMDenaroV. Long-term health outcomes of youth sports injuries. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44(1):21-25.
57.
MankinHJ. The response of articular cartilage to mechanical injury. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64(3):460-466.
58.
MarshallKWMikulisDJGuthrieBM. Quantitation of articular cartilage using magnetic resonance imaging and three-dimensional reconstruction. J Orthop Res. 1995;13(6):814-823.
59.
MohrA. The value of water-excitation 3D FLASH and fat-saturated PDw TSE MR imaging for detecting and grading articular cartilage lesions of the knee. Skeletal Radiol. 2003;32(7):396-402.
60.
MoriROchiMSakaiYAdachiNUchioY. Clinical significance of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for focal chondral lesions. Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;17(8):1135-1140.
61.
MosherTJPruettSW. Magnetic resonance imaging of superficial cartilage lesions: role of contrast in lesion detection. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1999;10(2):178-182.
62.
MurphyBJ. Evaluation of grades 3 and 4 chondromalacia of the knee using T2*-weighted 3D gradient-echo articular cartilage imaging. Skeletal Radiol. 2001;30(6):305-311.
63.
NakanishiKInoueMHaradaK. Subluxation of the patella: evaluation of patellar articular cartilage with MR imaging. Br J Radiol. 1992;65(776):662-667.
64.
NikolaouVSChronopoulosESavvidouC. MRI efficacy in diagnosing internal lesions of the knee: a retrospective analysis. J Trauma Manag Outcomes. 2008;2(1):4.
65.
NojiriTWatanabeNNamuraT. Utility of delayed gadolinium-enhanced MRI (dGEMRIC) for qualitative evaluation of articular cartilage of patellofemoral joint. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2006;14(8):718-723.
66.
NoyesFRStablerCL. A system for grading articular cartilage lesions at arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 1989;17(4):505-513.
67.
OakleySPLassereMN. A critical appraisal of quantitative arthroscopy as an outcome measure in osteoarthritis of the knee. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2003;33(2):83-105.
68.
OakleySPPortekISzomorZ. Arthroscopy: a potential “gold standard” for the diagnosis of the chondropathy of early osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005;13(5):368-378.
69.
OchiMSumenYKandaTIkutaYItohK. The diagnostic value and limitation of magnetic resonance imaging on chondral lesions in the knee joint. Arthroscopy. 1994;10(2):176-183.
70.
OuterbridgeREDunlopJA. The problem of chondromalacia patellae. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975;110:177-196.
71.
PortneyLGWatkinsMP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. 3rd ed.Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2009.
72.
PotterHGLinklaterJMAllenAAHannafinJAHaasSB. Magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage in the knee: an evaluation with use of fast-spin-echo imaging. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80(9):1276-1284.
73.
RechtMPPirainoDWPalettaGASchilsJPBelhobekGH. Accuracy of fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo FLASH MR imaging in the detection of patellofemoral articular cartilage abnormalities. Radiology. 1996;198(1):209-212.
74.
ReiserMFBongartzGErlemannR. Magnetic resonance in cartilaginous lesions of the knee joint with three-dimensional gradient-echo imaging. Skeletal Radiol. 1988;17(7):465-471.
RubensteinJDKimJKHenkelmanRM. Effects of compression and recovery on bovine articular cartilage: appearance on MR images. Radiology. 1996;201(3):843-850.
77.
RubensteinJDLiJGMajumdarSHenkelmanRM. Image resolution and signal-to-noise ratio requirements for MR imaging of degenerative cartilage. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169(4):1089-1096.
78.
SchmidMRPfirrmannCWAKochPZanettiMKuehnBHodlerJ. Imaging of patellar cartilage with a 2D multiple-echo data image combination sequence. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(6):1744-1748.
SoninAHPensyRAMulliganMEHatemS. Grading articular cartilage of the knee using fast spin-echo proton density-weighted MR imaging without fat suppression. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(5):1159-1166.
81.
SpeerKPSpritzerCEGoldnerJLGarrettWEJr. Magnetic resonance imaging of traumatic knee articular cartilage injuries. Am J Sports Med. 1991;19(4):396-402.
82.
SpiersASMeagherTOstlereSJWilsonDJDoddCA. Can MRI of the knee affect arthroscopic practice? A prospective study of 58 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993;75(1):49-52.
83.
SuhJSChoJHShinKHKimSJ. Chondromalacia of the knee: evaluation with a fat-suppression three-dimensional SPGR imaging after intravenous contrast injection. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;6(6):884-888.
84.
VallottonJAMeuliRALeyvrazPFLandryM. Comparison between magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopy in the diagnosis of patellar cartilage lesions: a prospective study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1995;3(3):157-162.
85.
von EngelhardtLVKraftCNPennekampPHSchildHHSchmitzAvon FalkenhausenM. The evaluation of articular cartilage lesions of the knee with a 3-Tesla magnet. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(5):496-502.
86.
von EngelhardtLVLahnerMKlussmannA. Arthroscopy vs. MRI for a detailed assessment of cartilage disease in osteoarthritis: diagnostic value of MRI in clinical practice. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2010;11:75.
87.
WangYX. In vivo magnetic resonance imaging of animal models of knee osteoarthritis. Lab Anim. 2008;42(3):246-264.
88.
WelschGHMamischTCDomayerSE. 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. 2008;247(1):154-161.
89.
WilliamsASharmaLMcKenzieCAPrasadPVBursteinD. Delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage in knee osteoarthritis: findings at different radiographic stages of disease and relationship to malalignment. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(11):3528-3535.
90.
WongSSteinbachLZhaoJStehlingCMaCBLinkTM. Comparative study of imaging at 3.0 T versus 1.5 T of the knee. Skeletal Radiol. 2009;38(8):761-769.
91.
WrightRWBoyceRHMichenerTShyrYMcCartyECSpindlerKP. Radiographs are not useful in detecting arthroscopically confirmed mild chondral damage. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;442:245-251.
92.
WrightRWBrandRADunnWSpindlerKP. How to write a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;455:23-29.
93.
YoshiokaHStevensKHargreavesBA. Magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage of the knee: comparison between fat-suppressed three-dimensional SPGR imaging, fat-suppressed FSE imaging, and fat-suppressed three-dimensional DEFT imaging, and correlation with arthroscopy. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2004;20(5):857-864.
94.
ZhangWDohertyMPeatG. EULAR evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(3):483-489.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
