PLoS ONE (Jan 2021)

High resolution flat-panel CT arthrography vs. MR arthrography of artificially created osteochondral defects in ex vivo upper ankle joints.

  • Gesa H Pöhler,
  • Lena Sonnow,
  • Sarah Ettinger,
  • Alexandra Rahn,
  • Filip Klimes,
  • Christoph Becher,
  • Christian von Falck,
  • Frank K Wacker,
  • Christian Plaass

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255616
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 16, no. 8
p. e0255616

Abstract

Read online

PurposeHigh resolution flat-panel computed tomography arthrography (FPCT-A) and magnetic resonance arthrography (MR-A) are well suited to evaluate osteochondral lesions. The current study compares the performance of FPCT-A versus MR-A in an experimental setting.MethodsFourteen cadaveric ankles were prepared with artificial osteochondral defects of various sizes in four separate talar locations. After intra-articular contrast injection, FPCT-A and 3-T MR-A were acquired. Each defect was then filled with synthetic pallets. The resulting cast was used as reference. Two independent radiologists measured the dimensions of all defects with FPCT-A and MR-A. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. Data were compared using t-tests and Bland-Altman plots.ResultsThe correlation for FPCT-A and cast was higher compared to MR-A and cast (ICC 0.876 vs. 0.799 for surface [length x width]; ICC 0.887 vs. 0.866 for depth, p0.05). Depth measurements were significantly smaller by MR-A (mean difference -1.1 mm, pConclusionsEx vivo FPCT-A and MR-A both deliver high diagnostic accuracy for the evaluation of osteochondral defects. FPCT-A was slightly more accurate than MR-A, which was most significant when measuring lesion depth.