Comparison between magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and arthrography to identify artificially induced cartilage defects of the equine carpal joints

• Published in: Veterinary radiology & ultrasound 2018-05, Vol.59 (3), p.312-325
• Main Authors: Suarez Sanchez‐Andrade, José, Richter, Henning, Kuhn, Karolin, Bischofberger, Andrea S., Kircher, Patrick R., Hoey, Séamus
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; Arthrography - veterinary; articular cartilage; Cadaver; Carpal Joints - diagnostic imaging; Carpal Joints - pathology; carpus; Cartilage Diseases - diagnostic imaging; Cartilage Diseases - pathology; Cartilage Diseases - veterinary; Cartilage, Articular - diagnostic imaging; Cartilage, Articular - pathology; direct arthrography; Horse Diseases - diagnostic imaging; Horses; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - veterinary; osteoarthritis; Prospective Studies; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - veterinary
• ISSN: 1058-8183; 1740-8261
• DOI: 10.1111/vru.12598

While articular cartilage changes are considered to be one of the initial events in the pathological cascade leading to osteoarthritis, these changes remain difficult to detect using conventional diagnostic imaging modalities such as plain radiography. The aim of this prospective, experimental, methods comparison study was to compare the sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), magnetic resonance arthrography, computed tomography (CT), and CT arthrography in the detection of artificially induced articular cartilage defects in the equine carpal joints. Defects were created in the antebrachiocarpal and middle carpal joint using curettage by a board‐certified equine surgeon. Normal articular cartilage thickness varied from a maximum of 1.22 mm at the level of the distal aspect of the radius to a minimum of 0.17 mm in the proximal articular surface of the third carpal bone. Regarding cartilaginous defect measurements the remaining cartilaginous bed range from a maximum of 0.776 mm in the partial thickness defects, and 0 mm (defect reaches the subchondral bone) when total thickness defect were made. Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were performed followed by CT arthrography and magnetic resonance arthrography after antebrachiocarpal and middle carpal intraarticular contrast administration. All images were reviewed by two board‐certified veterinary radiologists, both of whom were blinded to the location, presence of, and thickness of the cartilage defects. A total number of 72 lesions in nine limbs were created. Mean sensitivity for localizing cartilage defects varied between imaging modalities with CT arthrography showing the best sensitivity (69.9%), followed by magnetic resonance arthrography (53.5%), MRI (33.3%), and CT (18.1%) respectively. The addition of contrast arthrography in both magnetic resonance and CT improved the rate of cartilage lesion detection although no statistical significance was found. Computed tomographic arthrography displayed the best sensitivity for detecting articular cartilage defects in the equine antebrachiocarpal and middle‐carpal joints, compared to magnetic resonance arthrography, MRI, and CT.