Faculty Bibliography

The Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) Practice Guidelines and Technical Standards Committee identified musculoskeletal infection as a White Paper topic, and selected a Committee, tasked with developing a consensus on nomenclature for MRI of musculoskeletal infection outside the spine. The objective of the White Paper was to critically assess the literature and propose standardized terminology for imaging findings of infection on MRI, in order to improve both communication with clinical colleagues and patient care.A definition was proposed for each term; debate followed, and the committee reached consensus. Potential controversies were raised, with formulated recommendations. The committee arrived at consensus definitions for cellulitis, soft tissue abscess, and necrotizing infection, while discouraging the nonspecific term phlegmon. For bone infection, the term osteitis is not useful; the panel recommends using terms that describe the likelihood of osteomyelitis in cases where definitive signal changes are lacking. The work was presented virtually to SSR members, who had the opportunity for review and modification prior to submission for publication.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this agreement was to establish evidence-based consensus statements on imaging of scapholunate joint (SLJ) instability by an expert group using the Delphi technique. METHODS:Nineteen hand surgeons developed a preliminary list of questions on SLJ instability. Radiologists created statements based on the literature and the authors' clinical experience. Questions and statements were revised during three iterative Delphi rounds. Delphi panellists consisted of twenty-seven musculoskeletal radiologists. The panellists scored their degree of agreement to each statement on an eleven-item numeric scale. Scores of '0', '5' and '10' reflected complete disagreement, indeterminate agreement and complete agreement, respectively. Group consensus was defined as a score of '8' or higher for 80% or more of the panellists. RESULTS:Ten of fifteen statements achieved group consensus in the second Delphi round. The remaining five statements achieved group consensus in the third Delphi round. It was agreed that dorsopalmar and lateral radiographs should be acquired as routine imaging work-up in patients with suspected SLJ instability. Radiographic stress views and dynamic fluoroscopy allow accurate diagnosis of dynamic SLJ instability. MR arthrography and CT arthrography are accurate for detecting scapholunate interosseous ligament tears and articular cartilage defects. Ultrasonography and MRI can delineate most extrinsic carpal ligaments, although validated scientific evidence on accurate differentiation between partially or completely torn or incompetent ligaments is not available. CONCLUSIONS:Delphi-based agreements suggest that standardized radiographs, radiographic stress views, dynamic fluoroscopy, MR arthrography and CT arthrography are the most useful and accurate imaging techniques for the work-up of SLJ instability. KEY POINTS/CONCLUSIONS:• Dorsopalmar and lateral wrist radiographs remain the basic imaging modality for routine imaging work-up in patients with suspected scapholunate joint instability. • Radiographic stress views and dynamic fluoroscopy of the wrist allow accurate diagnosis of dynamic scapholunate joint instability. • Wrist MR arthrography and CT arthrography are accurate for determination of scapholunate interosseous ligament tears and cartilage defects.

Background Dual-energy CT (DECT) shows promising performance in detecting bone marrow edema (BME) associated with vertebral body fractures. However, the optimal technical and image interpretation parameters are not well described. Purpose To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the diagnostic performance of DECT in detecting BME associated with vertebral fractures (VFs), using different technical and image interpretation parameters, compared with MRI as the reference standard. Materials and Methods A systematic literature search was performed on July 9, 2020, to identify studies evaluating DECT performance for in vivo detection of vertebral BME. A random-effects model was used to derive estimates of the diagnostic accuracy parameters of DECT. The impact of relevant covariates in technical, image interpretation, and study design parameters on the diagnostic performance of DECT was investigated using subgroup analyses. Results Seventeen studies (with 742 of 2468 vertebrae with BME at MRI) met inclusion criteria. Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of DECT for vertebral body BME were 89% (95% CI: 84%, 92%), 96% (95% CI: 92%, 98%), and 96% (95% CI: 94%, 97%), respectively. Single-source consecutive scanning showed poor specificity (78%) compared with the dual-source technique (98%, P < .001). Specificity was higher using bone and soft-tissue kernels (98%) compared with using only soft-tissue kernels (90%, P = .001). Qualitative assessment had a better specificity (97%) versus quantitative assessment (90%) of DECT images (P = .01). Experienced readers showed considerably higher specificity (96%) compared with trainees (79%, P = .01). DECT sensitivity improved using a higher difference between low- and high-energy spectra (90% vs 83%, P = .04). Conclusion Given its high specificity, the detection of vertebral bone marrow edema with dual-energy CT (DECT) associated with vertebral fracture may obviate confirmatory MRI in an emergency setting. Technical parameters, such as the dual-source technique, both bone and soft-tissue kernels, and qualitative assessment by experienced readers, can ensure the high specificity of DECT. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:This single-center study was approved by the institutional review board. Artificial intelligence-based FS MRI scans were created from non-FS images using a deep learning system with a modified convolutional neural network-based U-Net that used a training set of 25,920 images and validation set of 16,416 images. Three musculoskeletal radiologists reviewed 88 knee MR studies in 2 sessions, the original (proton density [PD] + FSPD) and the synthetic (PD + AFSMRI). Readers recorded AFSMRI quality (diagnostic/nondiagnostic) and the presence or absence of meniscal, ligament, and tendon tears; cartilage defects; and bone marrow abnormalities. Contrast-to-noise rate measurements were made among subcutaneous fat, fluid, bone marrow, cartilage, and muscle. The original MRI sequences were used as the reference standard to determine the diagnostic performance of AFSMRI (combined with the original PD sequence). This is a fully balanced study design, where all readers read all images the same number of times, which allowed the determination of the interchangeability of the original and synthetic protocols. Descriptive statistics, intermethod agreement, interobserver concordance, and interchangeability tests were applied. A P value less than 0.01 was considered statistically significant for the likelihood ratio testing, and P value less than 0.05 for all other statistical analyses. RESULTS:Artificial intelligence-based FS MRI quality was rated as diagnostic (98.9% [87/88] to 100% [88/88], all readers). Diagnostic performance (sensitivity/specificity) of the synthetic protocol was high, for tears of the menisci (91% [71/78], 86% [84/98]), cruciate ligaments (92% [12/13], 98% [160/163]), collateral ligaments (80% [16/20], 100% [156/156]), and tendons (90% [9/10], 100% [166/166]). For cartilage defects and bone marrow abnormalities, the synthetic protocol offered an overall sensitivity/specificity of 77% (170/221)/93% (287/307) and 76% (95/125)/90% (443/491), respectively. Intermethod agreement ranged from moderate to substantial for almost all evaluated structures (menisci, cruciate ligaments, collateral ligaments, and bone marrow abnormalities). No significant difference was observed between methods for all structural abnormalities by all readers (P > 0.05), except for cartilage assessment. Interobserver agreement ranged from moderate to substantial for almost all evaluated structures. Original and synthetic protocols were interchangeable for the diagnosis of all evaluated structures. There was no significant difference for the common exact match proportions for all combinations (P > 0.01). The conspicuity of all tissues assessed through contrast-to-noise rate was higher on AFSMRI than on original FSPD images (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Artificial intelligence-based FS MRI (3D AFSMRI) is feasible and offers a method for fast imaging, with similar detection rates for structural abnormalities of the knee, compared with original 3D MR sequences.

Background Rapid knee MRI using combined simultaneous multislice (SMS) technique and parallel imaging (PI) acceleration can add value through reduced acquisition time but requires validation of clinical efficacy. Purpose To evaluate the performance of clinical fourfold SMS-PI-accelerated, 5-minute, five-sequence, multicontrast knee MRI protocols compared with standard twofold PI-accelerated, 10-minute knee MRI protocols. Materials and Methods Adults with painful knee conditions were prospectively enrolled from April 2018 to October 2019. Participants underwent fourfold SMS-PI-accelerated, 5-minute, turbo spin-echo (TSE) knee MRI and standard-of-care twofold PI-accelerated, 10-minute, TSE knee MRI at either 1.5 T or 3.0 T. Three radiologists independently evaluated the knee MRI studies for meniscal, tendinous, ligamentous, and osseocartilaginous injuries. Statistical analyses included k-based intermethod agreements and diagnostic performance testing. P < .05 was considered indicative of a statistically significant difference. Results A total of 252 adults were evaluated (mean age ± standard deviation, 47 years ± 17; 134 men). Among the participants, 104 (mean age, 42 years 5 18; 57 women) were in the 1.5-T arm and 148 (mean age, 46 years 5 17; 87 men) were in the 3.0-T arm. Twenty-nine participants (mean age, 38 years 5 12; 15 men) in the 1.5-T arm and 42 (mean age, 41 years 5 16; 24 men) in the 3.0-T arm underwent arthroscopy a mean of 45 days 5 31 and 45 days 5 22 after MRI, respectively. Intermethod agreements were good at 1.5 T (κ >0.71 [95% CI: 0.56, 0.83]) and very good at 3.0 T (κ >0.85 [95% CI: 0.69, 0.96]). The diagnostic performances of corresponding 5-minute and 10-minute MRI protocols were similar for 1.5 T, with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs) greater than 0.78 (95% CI: 0.71, 0.84) (P > .32), and 3.0 T, with AUCs greater than 0.83 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.88) (P > .32). Conclusion Comparisons of 5-minute five-sequence simultaneous multislice- and parallel imaging (PI)-accelerated and 10-minute five-sequence PI-accelerated turbo spin-echo MRI of the knee suggest similar performances at 1.5 and 3.0 T. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Subhas in this issue.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to provide a practice-focused review of accelerating musculoskeletal MRI with the use of widely accessible techniques and to assess the effects of such acceleration on the value of musculoskeletal MRI. CONCLUSION. Echo-train compaction with fast radiofrequency pulses, high gradient performance modes, and high receiver bandwidth, as well as basic phase undersampling techniques, affords at least twofold acceleration of musculoskeletal MRI examinations while retaining image quality, comprehensiveness, and diagnostic performance. Optimized efficiency is a cornerstone for adding value to musculoskeletal MRI.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to provide a practice-focused review of the clinical application of advanced acceleration techniques for rapid musculoskeletal MRI examinations. CONCLUSION. Parallel imaging, simultaneous multislice acquisition, compressed sensing-based sampling, and synthetic MRI techniques provide unprecedented opportunities for rapid musculoskeletal MRI examinations. For 2D and 3D fast spin-echo and turbo spin-echo pulse sequences, acceleration factors between 3 and 8 can be realized in clinical practice, amounting to a time savings of 66-85% when compared with unaccelerated acquisitions.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To determine the performances of clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI for diagnosing non-displaced and displaced ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tears. METHODS:Based on a literature search of Medline, ISI Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus between January 1990 and December 2019, all published original articles which met the inclusion criteria were included. We determined the pooled sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies of clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI using a meta-analysis based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Diagnostic Test Accuracy (PRISMA-DTA) guidelines. RESULTS:A total of 17 studies with 519 subjects reporting diagnostic performances of clinical examination (8), ultrasonography (12), and MRI (5) met the inclusion criteria. For ruling out UCL tears, the pooled sensitivities were similarly high for clinical examination (97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93-99%)), ultrasonography (96% (95% CI, 94-98%)), and MRI (99% (95% CI, 92-100%)) (p = 0.3). For ruling in UCL tears, the pooled specificities were higher for MRI (100% (95% CI, 87-100%)) when compared to ultrasonography (91% (95% CI, 86-95%)) (p = 0.1) and clinical examination (85% (95% CI, 78-91%)) (p = 0.04). For the diagnosis of displaced UCL tears, MRI had a higher specificity (92% (95% CI, 73-99%)) than ultrasonography (72% (95% CI, 63-80%)) (p = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS:Clinical examination, ultrasonography, and MRI have similarly high sensitivities for ruling out UCL tears in patients presenting with a thumb injury. MRI and ultrasonography have high specificities to confirm the presence of suspected UCL tears. MRI performs best for differentiating non-displaced from displaced UCL tears. KEY POINTS/CONCLUSIONS:• Clinical examination followed by ultrasonography is the most appropriate test for ruling out ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) tears of the thumb. • MRI and ultrasonography both have high specificities to confirm the presence of a suspected UCL tear. • MRI outperforms ultrasonography for differentiating non-displaced from displaced UCL tears.