Current concepts review: 3T magnetic resonance imaging of the ankle and foot

Foot and Ankle International

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 164-171

  Chhabra, Avneesh ^a   Soldatos, Theodoros ^a   Chalian, Majid ^a   Carrino, John A ^a   Schon, Lew ^b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b UNION MEMORIAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

3T magnetic resonance imaging; Ankle; MRI

Indexed keywords

GADOLINIUM;

ANATOMICAL VARIATION; ANKLE; ARTICULAR CARTILAGE; CARTILAGE INJURY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; FOOT; FOOT DISEASE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; LIGAMENT DISEASE; NEUROPATHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TENDON DISEASE; TIBIALIS POSTERIOR MUSCLE;

ANKLE; CARTILAGE DISEASES; CONTRAST MEDIA; FOOT DISEASES; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

EID: 84859014543     PISSN: 10711007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3113/FAI.2012.0164     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Alecci, M; Collins, CM; Smith, MB; Jezzard, P: Radio frequency magnetic field mapping of a 3 Tesla birdcage coil: experimental and theoretical dependence on sample properties. Magn Reson Med. 46:379-385, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1201
2. Barr, C; Bauer, JS; Malfair, D, et al.: MR imaging of the ankle at 3 Tesla and 1.5 Tesla: protocol optimization and application to cartilage, ligament and tendon pathology in cadaver specimens. Eur Radiol. 17:1518-1528, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00330-006-0446-4 (Pubitemid 46767600)
3. Bauer, JS; Banerjee, S; Henning, TD, et al.: Fast high-spatialresolution MRI of the ankle with parallel imaging using GRAPPA at 3 T. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 189:240-245, 2007. 189/1/240 http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.07.2066
4. Baumert, B; Wortler, K; Steffinger, D, et al.: Assessment of the internal craniocervical ligaments with a new magnetic resonance imaging sequence: three-dimensional turbo spin echo with variable flip-angle distribution (SPACE). Magn Reson Imaging. 27:954-960, 2009. S0730-725X(09)00034-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2009.01.012
5. Buckwalter, JA; Saltzman, CL: Ankle osteoarthritis: distinctive characteristics. Instr Course Lect. 48:233-241, 1999.
6. Chang, KJ; Kamel, IR; Macura, KJ; Bluemke, DA: 3.0-T MR imaging of the abdomen: comparison with 1.5 T. Radiographics. 28:1983-1998, 2008. 28/7/1983 http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.287075154
7. Chhabra, A; Andreisek, G; Soldatos, T, et al.: MR Neurography: Past, present and future. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 197(3):583-91, 2011.
8. Chhabra, A; Soldatos, T; Chalian, M, et al.: 3-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of posterior tibial tendon dysfunction with relevance to clinical staging. J Foot Ankle Surg. 50(3):320-8, 2011.
9. Chhabra, A; Subhawong, TK; Carrino, JA: MR imaging of deltoid ligament pathologic findings and associated impingement syndromes. Radiographics. 30:751-761, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/rg.303095756
10. Chhabra, A; Subhawong, TK; Williams, EBH; et al.: High Resolution MRNeurography evaluation prior to repeat tarsal tunnel surgery. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 50(3):320-8, 2011.
11. Chhabra, A; Williams, EH; Wang, KC; Dellon, AL; Carrino, JA: MR neurography of neuromas related to nerve injury and entrapment with surgical correlation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 31:1363-1368, 2010. ajnr.A2002 http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2002
12. Dardzinski, BJ; Mosher, TJ; Li, S; Van Slyke, MA; Smith, MB: Spatial variation of T2 in human articular cartilage. Radiology. 205:546-550, 1997. (Pubitemid 27467340)
13. Fukatsu, H: 3T MRfor clinical use: update. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2:37-45, 2003.
14. Giesel, FL; Runge, V; Kirchin, M, et al.: Three-dimensional multiphase time-resolved low-dose contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography using TWIST on a 32-channel coil at 3 T: a quantitative and qualitative comparison of a conventional gadolinium chelate with a high-relaxivity agent. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 34:678-683, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/RCT. 0b013e3181e359c200004728-201009000-00007
15. Gyftopoulos, S; Bencardino, JT: Normal variants and pitfalls in MR imaging of the ankle and foot. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 18:691-705, 2010. S1064-9689(10)00046-2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2010.07.007
16. Helms, CA; Major, NM; Anderson, MW; Kaplan, PA; Dussault, R: Marrow. Musculoskeletal MRI. Phladelphia, Saunders Elsevier, 20-49, 2001.
17. Hillier, JC; Peace, K; Hulme, A; Healy, JC: Pictorial review: MRI features of foot and ankle injuries in ballet dancers. Br J Radiol. 77:532-537, 2004.
18. Kato, Y; Higano, S; Tamura, H, et al.: Usefulness of contrast-enhanced T1-weighted sampling perfection with application-optimized contrasts by using different flip angle evolutions in detection of small brain metastasis at 3T MR imaging: comparison with magnetization-prepared rapid acquisition of gradient echo imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 30:923-929, 2009. ajnr.A1506 http://dx.doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1506
19. Kijowski, R; De Smet, A; Mukharjee, R: Magnetic resonance imaging findings in patients with peroneal tendinopathy and peroneal tenosynovitis. Skeletal Radiol, 2011. 36:105-114, 2007. 10.1007/s00256-006-0172-7
20. Korosec, FR; Frayne, R; Grist, TM; Mistretta, CA: Time-resolved contrast-enhanced 3DMR angiography. Magn Reson Med. 36:345-351, 1996.
21. Krautmacher, C; Willinek, WA; Tschampa, HJ, et al.: Brain tumors: full- and half-dose contrast-enhanced MR imaging at 3.0 T compared with 1.5 T-Initial Experience. Radiology. 237:1014-1019, 2005. 2373041672 http://dx.doi.org/10. 1148/radiol.2373041672
22. Langner, I; Frank, M; Kuehn, JP, et al.: Acute inversion injury of the ankle without radiological abnormalities: assessment with high-field MR imaging and correlation of findings with clinical outcome. Skeletal Radiol, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-010-1017-y
23. Marlovits, S; Singer, P; Zeller, P, et al.: Magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) for the evaluation of autologous chondrocyte transplantation: determination of interobserver variability and correlation to clinical outcome after 2 years. Eur J Radiol. 57:16-23, 2006. S0720-048X(05)00288-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.08.007
24. Merkle, EM; Dale, BM: Abdominal MRI at 3.0 T: the basics revisited. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 186:1524-1532, 2006. 186/6/1524 http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR. 05.0932
25. Noyes, FR; Stabler, CL: A system for grading articular cartilage lesions at arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 17:505-513, 1989.
26. Pastore, D; Dirim, B; Wangwinyuvirat, M, et al.: Complex distal insertions of the tibialis posterior tendon: detailed anatomic and MR imaging investigation in cadavers. Skeletal Radiol. 37:849-855, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-008-0499-3
27. Perrich, KD; Goodwin, DW; Hecht, PJ; Cheung, Y: Ankle ligaments on MRI: appearance of normal and injured ligaments. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 193:687-695, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.2286
28. Quirbach, S; Trattnig, S; Marlovits, S, et al.: Initial results of in vivo high-resolution morphological and biochemical cartilage imaging of patients after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT) of the ankle. Skeletal Radiol. 38:751-760, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009- 0682-1
29. Rademaker, J; Rosenberg, ZS; Delfaut, EM; Cheung, YY; Schweitzer, ME: Tear of the peroneus longus tendon: MR imaging features in nine patients. Radiology. 214:700-704, 2000.
30. Ramnath, RR: 3T MR imaging of the musculoskeletal system (Part II): clinical applications. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 14:41-62, 2006. S1064-9689(06)00004-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2006.01.003
31. Reach, JS, Jr.; Amrami, KK; Felmlee, JP, et al.: The compartments of the foot: a 3-tesla magnetic resonance imaging study with clinical correlates for needle pressure testing. Foot Ankle Int. 28:584-594, 2007. 957932 http://dx.doi.org/10.3113/FAI.2007.0584
32. Soher, BJ; Dale, BM; Merkle, EM: A review of MR physics: 3T versus 1.5T. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 15:277-290, 2007. v. S1064-9689(07)00077-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2007.06.002
33. Stoller, DW: The ankle and foot. Magnetic resonance imaging in orhopaedics and sports medicine. Baltimore, Lippincott Williams &Wilkins, 2:733-1050, 2004.
34. Taylor, C; Carballido-Gamio, J; Majumdar, S; Li, X: Comparison of quantitative imaging of cartilage for osteoarthritis: T2, T1rho, dGEMRIC and contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Magn Reson Imaging. 27:779-784, 2009. S0730-725X(09)00008-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2009.01.016
35. Vasanawala, SS; Madhuranthakam, AJ; Venkatesan, R, et al.: Volumetric fat-water separated T2-weighted MRI. Pediatr Radiol. 41:875-883, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00247-010-1963-5
36. Welsch, GH; Mamisch, TC; Marlovits, S, et al.: Quantitative T2mapping during follow-up after matrix-associated autologous chondrocyte transplantation (MACT): full-thickness and zonal evaluation to visualize the maturation of cartilage repair tissue. J Orthop Res. 27:957-963, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1002/jor.20835