Clinical value of weight-bearing CT and radiographs for detecting patellofemoral cartilage visualized by MRI in the MOST study

Systematic review of computed tomography parameters used for the assessment of subchondral bone in osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the published parameters for the assessment of subchondral bone in human osteoarthritis (OA) using computed tomography (CT) and gain an overview of current practices and standards.

DESIGN

A literature search of Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases was performed with search strategies tailored to each database (search from 2010 to January 2023). The search results were screened independently by two reviewers against pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies were deemed eligible if conducted in vivo/ex vivo in human adults (>18 years) using any type of CT to assess subchondral bone in OA. Extracted data from eligible studies were compiled in a qualitative summary and formal narrative synthesis.

RESULTS

This analysis included 202 studies. Four groups of CT modalities were identified to have been used for subchondral bone assessment in OA across nine anatomical locations. Subchondral bone parameters measuring similar features of OA were combined in six categories: (i) microstructure, (ii) bone adaptation, (iii) gross morphology (iv) mineralisation, (v) joint space, and (vi) mechanical properties.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically meaningful parameter categories were identified as well as categories with the potential to become relevant in the clinical field. Furthermore, we stress the importance of quantification of parameters to improve their sensitivity and reliability for the evaluation of OA disease progression and the need for standardised measurement methods to improve their clinical value.

Improved responsiveness to change in joint space width over 24-month follow-up: comparison of 3D JSW on weight-bearing CT vs 2D JSW on radiographs in the MOST study

OBJECTIVE

Radiographic joint space width (JSW) has been a standard for measuring knee osteoarthritis (OA) structural change. Limitations in the responsiveness of this approach might be overcome by instead measuring 3D JSW on weight-bearing CT (WBCT). This study compared the responsiveness of 3D JSW measurements using WBCT with the responsiveness of radiographic 2D JSW.

DESIGN

Standing, fixed-flexion knee radiographs (XR) and WBCT were acquired ancillary to the 144- and 168-month Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study visits. Tibiofemoral JSW was measured on both XR and WBCT. Responsiveness to change was defined by the standardized response mean (SRM) for change in JSW (1) at predetermined mediolateral locations (JSWx) on both modalities and (2) in the following subregions measured on WBCT images: central medial and lateral femur (CMF/CLF) and tibia (CMT/CLT), and anterior and posterior tibia (AMT/ALT, PMT/MLT).

RESULTS

Baseline and 24-month follow-up JSWx measurements were completed for 265 participants (58.1% women). Responsiveness of 3D JSWx for medial tibiofemoral compartment on coronal WBCT (SRM range: -0.18, -0.24) exceeded that for 2D JSWx (-0.10, -0.16). Responsiveness of 3D JSW subregional mean (-0.06, -0.36) and maximal (-1.14, -1.75) CMF and CMT and maximal CLF/CLT 3D JSW changes were statistically significantly greater in comparison with respective medial and lateral 2D JSWx (P ≤ 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Subregional 3D JSW on WBCT is substantially more responsive to 24-month changes in tibiofemoral joint structure compared to radiographic measurements. Use of subregional 3D JSW on WBCT could enable improved detection of OA structural progression over a 24-month duration in comparison with measurements made on XR.

Latest advancements in imaging techniques in OA

The osteoarthritis (OA) research community has been advocating a shift from radiography-based screening criteria and outcome measures in OA clinical trials to a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based definition of eligibility and endpoint. For conventional morphological MRI, various semiquantitative evaluation tools are available. We have lately witnessed a remarkable technological advance in MRI techniques, including compositional/physiologic imaging and automated quantitative analyses of articular and periarticular structures. More recently, additional technologies were introduced, including positron emission tomography (PET)-MRI, weight-bearing computed tomography (CT), photon-counting spectral CT, shear wave elastography, contrast-enhanced ultrasound, multiscale X-ray phase contrast imaging, and spectroscopic photoacoustic imaging of cartilage. On top of these, we now live in an era in which artificial intelligence is increasingly utilized in medicine. Osteoarthritis imaging is no exception. Successful implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) will hopefully improve the workflow of radiologists, as well as the level of precision and reproducibility in the interpretation of images.