- Research article
- Open Access
- Open Peer Review
How reliable is MRI in diagnosing cartilaginous lesions in patients with first and recurrent lateral patellar dislocations?
© von Engelhardt et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010
- Received: 13 April 2010
- Accepted: 5 July 2010
- Published: 5 July 2010
Lateral dislocation of the patella (LPD) leads to cartilaginous injuries, which have been reported to be associated with retropatellar complaints and the development of patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the reliability of MRI for cartilage diagnostics after a first and recurrent LPD.
After an average of 4.7 days following an acute LPD, 40 patients (21 with first LPDs and 19 with recurrent LPDs) underwent standardized 1.5 Tesla MRI (sagittal T1-TSE, coronal STIR-TSE, transversal fat-suppressed PD-TSE, sagittal fat-suppressed PD-TSE). MRI grading was compared to arthroscopic assessment of the cartilage.
Sensitivities and positive predictive values for grade 3 and 4 lesions were markedly higher in the patient group with first LPDs compared to the group with recurrent LPDs. Similarly, intra- and inter-observer agreement yielded higher kappa values in patients with first LPDs compared to those with recurrent LPDs. All grade 4 lesions affecting the subchondral bone (osteochondral defects), such as a fissuring or erosion, were correctly assessed on MRI.
This study demonstrated a comparatively good diagnostic performance for MRI in the evaluation of first and recurrent LPDs, and we therefore recommend MRI for the cartilage assessment after a LPD.
- Subchondral Bone
- Cartilage Defect
- Patellar Dislocation
- Osteochondral Defect
- Trochlear Dysplasia
The consequences of patellar dislocation are cartilage injuries to the retropatellar joint and to the medial patellofemoral soft tissue complex with the prediction of subsequent instability [1–9]. Another factor that predisposes to recurrent LPD is trochlear dysplasia with insufficient trochlear depth, which is present in up to 85% of patients with recurrent patellar dislocation . The incidence of chondral and osteochondral defects after first or recurrent LPD depends on the degree of lesions noted in previous studies. Based on a review of surgical studies, the frequencies of chondral and osteochondral lesions after LPD range between 32% and 96% [1, 5–7]. Similarly, the frequency of cartilage injuries following LPD vary among several MRI studies, ranging from 30% to 75% [2, 3, 8]. Furthermore, a worsening of the articular cartilage was described at second-look arthroscopy approximately 1.5-2 years after the diagnosis of a LPD was made . A 7-year non-operative follow-up study demonstrated high frequencies of full-thickness patellar (45%) and trochlear (31%) cartilaginous lesions, which were presumed to be a sign of developing osteoarthritis . After an average follow-up of 13 years, Mäenpää et al.  diagnosed patellofemoral osteoarthritis in 22% of the patients, the highest frequency occurring in patients who underwent late surgery for patellofemoral pain or recurrent luxation. With respect to these data, accurate identification and appropriate treatment of cartilaginous lesions appears to be of special interest after patella dislocation. Thus, MR imaging, as a non-invasive method for cartilage assessment, could play an important role in the prevention of subsequent knee disability. This study was performed to investigate, whether MRI provides a reliable diagnostic performance for the assessment of the articular cartilage in patients with LPD. Therefore, cartilage diagnostics on standardized pre-operative MR images was compared to arthroscopic findings performed immediately after a first or recurrent LPD. To our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRI for the cartilage assessment exclusively in a representative sample of patients with first and recurrent LPDs.
The average period between MRI and arthroscopy was 16 days (range, 1-135 days). Arthroscopic grading of cartilage disorders was performed by six orthopedic surgeons experienced in knee surgery. At the time of arthroscopy, the MR images were available to the surgeon, whereas the MRI grading of the hyaline cartilage was not available. Surgery was performed using the standard antero-medial and antero-lateral portals. Each knee compartment was inspected thoroughly and palpated using a blunt hook. Arthroscopic findings of the cartilage were classified as grades 0-4, according to the system of Outerbridge . Cartilage damage was treated in the same session with abrasion (16 patients), resection of free chondral or osteochondral fragments (12 patients), refixation of chondral or osteochondral fragments (5 patients), and drilling (3 patients). Furthermore, loose bodies and hemarthroses were removed in the same session. Other injuries, such as meniscal lesions (three patients) and anterior cruciate ligament tears (one patient), were seldom noticed.
In both patient groups, sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values of MRI were calculated for each grade of cartilaginous disease. Diagnostic values were calculated using JavaStat http://statpages.org/ctab2x2.html. The kappa statistic was used to measure inter-observer agreement. The software program, PASW statistics 18 (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), was used for the data transformation. Weighted kappa values for multiple categories and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the web-based kappa Calculator for Clinical Research http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/kappa.html. According to Landis and Koch, a kappa value of < 0.20 indicates poor agreement, 0.21-0.40 indicates fair agreement, 0.41-0.60 indicates moderate agreement, 0.61-0.80 indicates good agreement, and 0.81-1.0 indicates very good agreement .
Distribution of cartilage disorders within the patellofemoral joint during arthroscopic assessment
Cartilage lesions in all patients with acute LPD (1st LPD/recurrent LPD)
Medial trochlear groove
Central trochlear groove
Lateral trochlear groove
Comparison between both readers with respect to MRI grading and arthroscopic grading of the cartilage
MRI grading of both MRI readers (reader 1/reader 2)
Weighted kappa values and 95% confidence intervals for both MRI readers, and inter- and intra-observer agreement in all patients with LPD, in patients with a first LPD, and in patients with a recurrent LPD
Weighted kappa scores†
Reader 1 vs. Reader 2
AC* vs. reader 1
AC* vs. reader 2
Diagnostic values of MRI readings (reader 1/reader 2) for each grade of cartilaginous lesion in patients with first and recurrent LPDs
Positive predictive value [%]
Negative predictive value [%]
During LPD, the medial facet of the patella impacts against the lateral femoral condyle, which can lead to corresponding injuries of the articular surface. Because dislocation is usually transient, the patella recoils back and the corresponding articular surfaces can sustain injury again. This leads to a high incidence and typical locations of cartilaginous defects [1–3, 5, 6, 8]. In agreement with previous studies on LPD, cartilaginous lesions were predominately noted at the medial facet of the patella (55%) and the lateral femoral condyle (25%; Table 1) [1, 5, 6]. According to clinical follow-up studies, as well as experimental studies, chondral lesions may increase the risk of subsequent patellofemoral joint symptoms and osteoarthritis [4, 9, 11, 17]. Therefore, accurate identification and appropriate treatment of cartilaginous lesions following LPD play an important role in minimizing knee disability.
Based on the literature, the MRI sequence best suited for cartilage diagnostics is still under debate [18–21]. Cartilage-specific sequences, such as spoiled gradient-recalled echo and fast low-angle shot sequences, provide a high spatial resolution and have therefore been described as being useful in segmenting techniques for quantitative cartilage studies. The disadvantages of these sequences are a high sensitivity to susceptibility artifacts and a limited visualization of the subchondral bone, menisci, and ligaments [19, 22]. Most experience and good results for the detection of cartilage and subchondral bone disorders were gathered with T2-, intermediate- and PD-weighted fast spin echo sequences [19, 20, 23–25]. In the current study, we used fat-suppressed PD-weighted fast spin-echo sequences with a 3-mm slice thickness in transverse planes and a 4-mm slice thickness in sagittal planes. In previous reports on comparable sequences with and without fat suppression, 1.5 Tesla MRI was described to depict the articular cartilage with an accuracy comparable to that of several cartilage-specific sequence protocols [18, 20, 21, 24]. Similar results were noticed for T2- and intermediate-weighted fast spin echo sequences, which also yielded comparable results to those of other cartilage-specific sequence protocols [23, 26, 27]. However, our study demonstrated relatively good inter- and intra-observer agreement (Table 3) in comparison to previous MRI studies on cartilage grading, in which kappa values ranged from 0.60-0.93 [13, 21, 28, 29].
In patients with first and recurrent LPDs, the diagnostic performance of MRI for cartilaginous lesions was evaluated for each grade of cartilage disease (Table 4). At each grade, the specificities and negative predictive values were relatively high, giving MRI a certain importance for the exclusion of cartilaginous lesions. In agreement with the literature, the sensitivities for the detection of grade 1 and 2 lesions were poor (Tables 2 and 4) [13, 18, 30]. Thus, reliable MRI differentiation of superficial erosions or fibrillations from intact cartilage appears difficult after LPD.
Regarding grade 3 and 4 lesions, patients with first LPD showed markedly higher diagnostic values compared to those with recurrent dislocation. Reader 1's sensitivity and positive predictive value for grade 4 lesions were 89% and 94% in patients with first LPDs, but only 70% and 64% after LPDs, respectively. Likewise, reader 1's diagnostic values for grade 3 lesions were higher in patients with a first LPD compared to those with a recurrent LPD (Table 4). Similar tendencies existed in reader 2's sensitivities and positive predictive values. Regarding the positive predictive values in patients with recurrent LPDs, the probability that the MRI finding of a grade 3 and 4 defect corresponds exactly to the arthroscopic finding was between 57% and 64%. Therefore, the value of MRI for a detailed assessment and grading of the cartilage should not be overestimated, especially after recurrent LPDs. Likewise, the kappa values for the intra- and inter-observer agreements yielded markedly better results in patients with first LPDs compared to those with recurrent LPDs (Table 3). Regarding the kappa values (Table 3) and the diagnostic values for grade 3 and 4 lesions (Table 4), we assume that MRI is more reliable for the diagnosis of cartilaginous defects in patients with first LPDs, whereas the diagnostic performance is limited after recurrent LPDs.
Better diagnostic values in patients with first LPDs could be explained in part by the higher severity of trauma. Thus, as reported by others, severe cartilaginous lesions with ulceration or fissuring of the subchondral bone were more frequent in patients with first LPDs (48%) compared to patients with recurrent LPDs (16%; Table 1) [1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 31]. In this context, it has to be mentioned that arthroscopically-detected osteochondral lesions occurring after LPDs were identified with pre-operative x-ray in 29% and 60% of the cases [31, 32]. Thus, correct identification of osteochondral lesions appears to be limited on standard radiographs. In contrast, all osteochondral defects in our study were correctly assessed at MR imaging as grade 4 cartilage lesions with ulceration (Figure 4) or fissuring (Figure 5) of the subchondral bone. In addition to a role for the detection of osteochondral lesions, MRI could be of practical assistance in planning the surgery. In our patient cohort, visualization of difficulties for a refixation of osteochondral fragments, such as cortical steps (Figure 5) and bone destructions (Figure 4), as well as the visualization of intra-articular loose bodies (Figures 5 and 6), provided additional information before surgery. Therefore, we suggest that MRI is an excellent diagnostic tool for osteochondral lesions in patients with LPD.
A limitation of this study was the use of the Outerbridge classification for cartilage assessment. Recent reports describe quantitative, semi-quantitative, and whole organ approaches for MRI assessment of the cartilage as reliable scoring and research tools, especially in patients with osteoarthritis [22, 29]. Furthermore, the use of arthroscopic grading as a reference standard should be regarded with caution. In the literature, inter-observer agreement at arthroscopy demonstrates sufficient reproducibility , but poor results for cartilage grading . On the other hand, a study by Bachmann et al.  yielded an exact agreement between arthroscopic and histopathologic grading in 287 of 300 cases. Thus, the arthroscopic method is a valuable tool in clinical research to score chondropathies, even if inspection and palpation with the hook probe cannot detect all changes of the cartilage as a histomorphologic evaluation.
In comparison to studies of other knee disorders, MRI yielded a relatively good performance in patients with LPD. For the diagnosis of grade 3 and 4 cartilaginous defects, diagnostic values were limited in patients with recurrent LPDs, whereas markedly better results were assessed after first LPDs. For osteochondral defects, MRI was a reliable diagnostic tool, and of practical assistance when performing surgery. Therefore, we recommend MRI for the diagnosis of chondral and osteochondral defects after LPD. Accurate MRI diagnosis of cartilage defects could help minimize knee disability in the future when followed by appropriate treatment.
This paper is the author's own work. No other persons or institutions were involved in data collection or preparation of the manuscript.
- Ahmad CS, Brown GD, Stein BS: The docking technique for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction: surgical technique and clinical outcome. Am J Sports Med. 2009, 37: 2021-2027. 10.1177/0363546509336261.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Elias DA, White LM, Fithian DC: Acute lateral patellar dislocation at MR imaging: injury patterns of medial patellar soft-tissue restraints and osteochondral injuries of the inferomedial patella. Radiology. 2002, 225: 736-743. 10.1148/radiol.2253011578.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Guerrero P, Li X, Patel K, Brown M, Busconi B: Medial patellofemoral ligament injury patterns and associated pathology in lateral patella dislocation: an MRI study. Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol. 2009, 1: 17-10.1186/1758-2555-1-17.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Mäenpää H, Lehto MU: Patellofemoral osteoarthritis after patellar dislocation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997, 339: 156-162. 10.1097/00003086-199706000-00021.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nomura E, Inoue M: Cartilage lesions of the patella in recurrent patellar dislocation. Am J Sports Med. 2004, 32: 498-502. 10.1177/0095399703258677.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nomura E, Inoue M, Kurimura M: Chondral and osteochondral injuries associated with acute patellar dislocation. Arthroscopy. 2003, 19: 717-721. 10.1016/S0749-8063(03)00401-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Rillmann P, Fischer A, Berbig R, Holzach P: Arthroscopic repair of the medial retinaculum after first time dislocation of the patella. Unfallchirurg. 1999, 102: 167-172. 10.1007/s001130050389.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sanders TG, Paruchuri NB, Zlatkin MB: MRI of osteochondral defects of the lateral femoral condyle: incidence and pattern of injury after transient lateral dislocation of the patella. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006, 187: 1332-1337. 10.2214/AJR.05.1471.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sillanpää PJ, Peltola E, Mattila VM, Kiuru M, Visuri T, Pihlajamäki H: Femoral avulsion of the medial patellofemoral ligament after primary traumatic patellar dislocation predicts subsequent instability in men: a mean 7-year nonoperative follow-up study. Am J Sports Med. 2009, 37: 1513-1521. 10.1177/0363546509333010.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dejour H, Walch G, Nove-Josserand L, Guier C: Factors of patellar instability: An anatomic radiographic study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1994, 2: 19-26. 10.1007/BF01552649.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Nomura E, Inoue M: Second-look arthroscopy of cartilage changes of the patellofemoral joint, especially the patella, following acute and recurrent patellar dislocation. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005, 13: 1029-1036. 10.1016/j.joca.2005.07.004.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Outerbridge RE: The etiology of chondromalacia patellae. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1961, 43: 752-757.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Potter HG, Linklater JM, Allen AA, Hannafin JA, Haas SB: 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: 1276-1284.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Suh JS, Lee SH, Jeong EK, Kim DJ: Magnetic resonance imaging of articular cartilage. Eur Radiol. 2001, 11: 2015-2025. 10.1007/s003300100911.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Uhl M, Allmann KH, Ihling C, Hauer MP, Conca W, Langer M: Cartilage destruction in small joints by rheumatoid arthritis: assessment of fat-suppressed three-dimensional gradient-echo MR pulse sequences in vitro. Skeletal Radiol. 1998, 27: 677-682. 10.1007/s002560050458.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977, 33: 159-174. 10.2307/2529310.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lefkoe TP, Trafton PG, Ehrlich MG, Walsh WR, Dennehy DT, Barrach HJ, Akelman E: An experimental model of femoral condylar defect leading to osteoarthrosis. J Orthop Trauma. 1993, 7: 458-467. 10.1097/00005131-199310000-00009.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Friemert B, Oberlander Y, Schwarz W, Haberle HJ, Bahren W, Gerngross H, Danz B: Diagnosis of chondral lesions of the knee joint: can MRI replace arthroscopy? A prospective study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2004, 12: 58-64. 10.1007/s00167-003-0393-4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Link TM: MR imaging in osteoarthritis: hardware, coils, and sequences. Radiol Clin North Am. 2009, 47: 617-632. 10.1016/j.rcl.2009.04.002.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Schaefer FK, Kurz B, Schaefer PJ, Fuerst M, Hedderich J, Graessner J, Schuenke M, Heller H: Accuracy and precision in the detection of articular cartilage lesions using magnetic resonance imaging at 1.5 Tesla in an in vitro study with orthopedic and histopathologic correlation. Acta Radiol. 2007, 48: 1131-1137. 10.1080/02841850701549583.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sonin AH, Pensy RA, Mulligan ME, Hatem S: Grading articular cartilage of the knee using fast spin-echo proton density-weighted MR imaging without fat suppression. Am J Roentgenol. 2002, 179: 1159-1166.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Roemer FW, Eckstein F, Guermazi A: Magnetic resonance imaging-based semiquantitative and quantitative assessment in osteoarthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2009, 35: 521-555. 10.1016/j.rdc.2009.08.006.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kijowski R, Blankenbaker DG, Woods MA, Shinki K, De Smet AA, Reeder SB: 3.0-T evaluation of knee cartilage by using three-dimensional IDEAL GRASS imaging: comparison with fast spin-echo imaging. Radiology. 2010, 255: 117-127. 10.1148/radiol.09091011.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mohr A: 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: 396-402. 10.1007/s00256-003-0635-z.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Saadat E, Jobke B, Chu B, Lu Y, Cheng J, Li X, Ries MD, Majumdar S, Link TM: Diagnostic performance of in vivo 3-T MRI for articular cartilage abnormalities in human osteoarthritic knees using histology as standard of reference. Eur Radiol. 2008, 18: 2292-2302. 10.1007/s00330-008-0989-7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Masi JN, Sell CA, Phan C, Han E, Newitt D, Steinbach L, Majumdar S, Link TM: Cartilage MR imaging at 3.0 versus that at 1.5 T: preliminary results in a porcine model. Radiology. 2005, 236: 140-150. 10.1148/radiol.2361040747.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Yoshioka H, Stevens K, Hargreaves BA, Steines D, Genovese M, Dillingham MF, Winalski CS, Lang P: 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: 857-864. 10.1002/jmri.20193.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Duc SR, Koch P, Schmid MR, Horger W, Hodler J, Pfirrmann CW: Diagnosis of articular cartilage abnormalities of the knee: prospective clinical evaluation of a 3D water-excitation true FISP sequence. Radiology. 2007, 243: 475-482. 10.1148/radiol.2432060274.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kornaat PR, Ceulemans RY, Kroon HM, Riyazi N, Kloppenburg M, Carter WO, Woodworth TG, Bloem JL: MRI assessment of knee osteoarthritis: Knee Osteoarthritis Scoring System (KOSS)--inter-observer and intra-observer reproducibility of a compartment-based scoring system. Skeletal Radiol. 2005, 34: 95-102. 10.1007/s00256-004-0828-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- von Engelhardt LV, Kraft CN, Pennekamp PH, Schild HH, Schmitz A, von Falkenhausen M: The evaluation of articular cartilage lesions of the knee with a 3-Tesla magnet. Arthroscopy. 2007, 23: 496-502. 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.12.027.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Stanitski CL, Paletta GA: Articular cartilage injury with acute patellar dislocation in adolescents. Arthroscopic and radiographic correlation. Am J Sports Med. 1998, 26: 52-55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dainer RD, Barrack RL, Buckley SL, Alexander AH: Arthroscopic treatment of acute patellar dislocations. Arthroscopy. 1988, 4: 267-271. 10.1016/S0749-8063(88)80042-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Marx RG, Connor J, Lyman S, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Kaeding C, McCarty EC, Parker RD, Wright RW, Spindler KP: Multirater agreement of arthroscopic grading of knee articular cartilage. Am J Sports Med. 2005, 33: 1654-1657. 10.1177/0363546505275129.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Brismar BH, Wredmark T, Movin T, Leandersson J, Svensson O: Observer reliability in the arthroscopic classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002, 84: 42-47. 10.1302/0301-620X.84B1.11660.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bachmann G, Heinrichs C, Jürgensen I, Rominger M, Scheiter A, Rau WS: 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: 429-436.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/11/149/prepub
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.