In vivo tibiofemoral cartilage strain mapping under static mechanical loading using continuous GRASP-MRI.

BACKGROUND: Quantification of dynamic biomechanical strain in articular cartilage in vivo; in situ using noninvasive MRI techniques is desirable and may potentially be used to assess joint pathology. PURPOSE: To demonstrate the use of static mechanical loading and continuous 3D-MRI acquisition of the human knee joint in vivo to measure the strain in the tibiofemoral articular cartilage. STUDY TYPE: Prospective. SUBJECTS: Five healthy human volunteers (four women, one man; age 25.6 ± 1.7) underwent MRI at rest, under static mechanical loading condition, and during recovery. FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: A field strength of 3T was used. The sequence used was 3D-continuous golden angle radial sparse parallel (GRASP) MRI and compressed sensing (CS) reconstruction. ASSESSMENT: Tibiofemoral cartilage deformation maps under loading and during recovery were calculated using an optical flow algorithm. The corresponding Lagrangian strain was calculated in the articular cartilage. STATISTICAL TESTS: Range of displacement and strain in each subject, and the resulting mean and standard deviation, were calculated. RESULTS: During the loading condition, the cartilage displacement in the direction of loading ranged from a minimum of -673.6 ± 121.9 µm to a maximum of 726.5 ± 169.5 µm. Corresponding strain ranged from a minimum of -7.0 ± 4.2% to a maximum of 5.4 ± 1.6%. During the recovery condition, the cartilage displacement in the same direction reduced to a minimum of -613.0 ± 129.5 µm and a maximum of 555.7 ± 311.4 µm. The corresponding strain range reduced to a minimum of -1.6 ± 7.5% to a maximum of 4.2 ± 2.6%. DATA CONCLUSION: This study shows the feasibility of using static mechanical loading with continuous GRASP-MRI acquisition to measure the strain in the articular cartilage. By measuring strain during the loading and recovery phases, dynamic strain information in the articular cartilage might be able to be investigated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 1 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2020;51:426-434.