ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2015
High resolution MRI imaging at 9.4 Tesla of the osteochondral unit in a translational model of articular cartilage repair.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Subchondral drilling for articular cartilage repair: a systematic review of translational research.Disease models & mechanisms · 2018Pooled it
- Article
- Recent advances in 3D bioprinting of musculoskeletal tissues.Biofabrication · 2021Review
- Stem Cells for Cartilage Repair: Preclinical Studies and Insights in Translational Animal Models and Outcome Measures.Stem cells international · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-destructive structural evaluation of the osteochondral unit is challenging. Here, the capability of high-field magnetic resonance imaging (μMRI) at 9.4 Tesla (T) was explored to examine osteochondral repair ex vivo in a preclinical large animal model. A specific aim of this study was to detect recently described alterations of the subchondral bone associated with cartilage repair.
methodsOsteochondral samples of medial femoral condyles from adult ewes containing full-thickness articular cartilage defects treated with marrow stimulation were obtained after 6 month in vivo and scanned in a 9.4 T μMRI. Ex vivo imaging of small osteochondral samples (typical volume: 1-2 cm(3)) at μMRI was optimised by variation of repetition time (TR), time echo (TE), flip angle (FA), spatial resolution and number of excitations (NEX) from standard MultiSliceMultiEcho (MSME) and three-dimensional (3D) spoiled GradientEcho (SGE) sequences.
resultsA 3D SGE sequence with the parameters: TR = 10 ms, TE = 3 ms, FA = 10°, voxel size = 120 × 120 × 120 μm(3) and NEX = 10 resulted in the best fitting for sample size, image quality, scanning time and artifacts. An isovolumetric voxel shape allowed for multiplanar reconstructions. Within the osteochondral unit articular cartilage, cartilaginous repair tissue and bone marrow could clearly be distinguished from the subchondral bone plate and subarticular spongiosa. Specific alterations of the osteochondral unit associated with cartilage repair such as persistent drill holes, subchondral bone cysts, sclerosis of the subchondral bone plate and of the subarticular spongiosa and intralesional osteophytes were precisely detected.
conclusionsHigh resolution, non-destructive ex vivo analysis of the entire osteochondral unit in a preclinical large animal model that is sufficient for further analyses is possible using μMRI at 9.4 T. In particular, 9.4 T is capable of accurately depicting alterations of the subchondral bone that are associated with osteochondral repair.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.