Cited by 101Knee injuries and reconstruction techniquesAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms

Vastly Undersampled Isotropic Projection Steady-State Free Precession Imaging of the Knee: Diagnostic Performance Compared with Conventional MR

Kijowski, Richard, Blankenbaker, Donna G., Klaers, Jessica L., Shinki, Kazuhiko, De Smet, Arthur A., Block, Walter F.·2009·Radiology

Abstract

Purpose To compare a vastly undersampled isotropic projection steady-state free precession (VIPR-SSFP) sequence and routine magnetic resonance (MR) imaging for evaluating the cartilage, ligaments, menisci, and osseous structures of the knee in symptomatic patients. Materials and methods All subjects signed written informed consent prior to participation in this prospective, HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study. VIPR-SSFP was added to the routine 1.5-T MR imaging performed on 95 symptomatic patients (52 men, 43 women; average age, 41.6 years) who subsequently underwent arthroscopic knee surgery. All MR examinations were independently reviewed twice by two musculoskeletal radiologists to detect cartilage lesions, anterior and posterior cruciate ligament tears, meniscal tears, and bone marrow edema lesions, first by using routine MR and second by using VIPR-SSFP. By using arthroscopy as the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of both MR protocols were calculated. The z test was used to compare sensitivity and specificity values. Results VIPR-SSFP had significantly higher specificity (P .99) between VIPR-SSFP and routine MR in the remaining sensitivity and specificity values. VIPR-SSFP helped detect 69.3% of bone marrow edema lesions identified at routine MR. Conclusion VIPR-SSFP can provide important clinical information regarding the cartilage, ligaments, menisci, and osseous structures of the knee, but is less sensitive than conventional M…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2511081133

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Reproducibility of T2 mapping depends on standardizing acquisition parameters, fitting algorithms, and magnetic field strength.

    “reproducibility depends on standardizing acquisition parameters, fitting algorithms, and magnetic field strength [63,64,65].”
  • Correlations between imaging and biochemical markers such as CTX-II, COMP, and IL-1β confirm the potential of a multimodal assessment paradigm.

    “While correlations with biochemical markers (e.g., CTX-II, COMP, IL-1β) confirm the potential of a multimodal assessment paradigm”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 36 · Cited by 101

Authors
Kijowski, R., Blankenbaker, D. G., Klaers, J. L., Shinki, K., De Smet, A. A., & Block, W. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of Wisconsin System (US)
Venue
Radiology
Published
2009-04
Volume
251
Issue
1
Pages
185-194
ISSN
  • 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-1315
OpenAlex
W2097781234
Cited by
101
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
FWCI
13.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Keywords
knee MRI, cartilage damage, meniscal tears, cruciate ligament tears, bone marrow edema, diagnostic accuracy, lateral meniscus
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Algorithms, Female, Humans, Image Enhancement, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Joint Diseases, Knee Injuries, Knee Joint, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Reproducibility of Results, Sample Size, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review