Cortical Bone Mechanical Assessment via Free Water Relaxometry at 3T

• Published in: Journal of magnetic resonance imaging Vol. 54; no. 6; pp. 1744 - 1751
• Main Authors: Talebi, Mahsa, Shahrokh Abbasi‐Rad, Malekzadeh, Malakeh, Shahgholi, Mohamad, Ardakani, Ali A, Kimia Foudeh, Rad, Hamidreza S
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Nashville Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.12.2021
• Subjects: Background noise; Bone imaging; Compression; Compression tests; Cortical bone; Field strength; Image segmentation; Magnetic resonance imaging; Mechanical properties; Modulus of elasticity; Moisture content; Noise; Pore water; Samples; Statistical analysis; Statistical methods; Statistical tests; Tensile stress; Tibia; Toughness; Variance analysis; Water content; Yield; Yield strength; Yield stress
• ISSN: 1053-1807; 1522-2586
• DOI: 10.1002/jmri.27765

BackgroundInvestigation of cortical bone using magnetic resonance imaging is a developing field, which uses short/ultrashort echo time (TE) pulse sequences to quantify bone water content and to obtain indirect information about bone microstructure.PurposeTo improve the accuracy of the previously proposed technique of free water T1 quantification and to seek the relationship between cortical bone free water T1 and its mechanical competence.Study TypeProspective.SubjectsTwenty samples of bovine tibia bone.Field Strength/Sequences3.0 T; ultra‐fast two‐dimensional gradient echo, Radio frequency‐spoiled three‐dimensional gradient echo.AssessmentCortical bone free water T1 was quantified via three different methods: inversion recovery (IR), variable flip angle (VFA), and variable repetition time (VTR). Signal‐to‐noise ratio was measured by dividing the signal of each segmented sample to background noise. Segmentation was done manually. The effect of noise on T1 quantification was evaluated. Then, the samples were subjected to mechanical compression test to measure the toughness, yield stress, ultimate stress, and Young modulus.Statistical TestsAll the statistical analysis (Shapiro–Wilk, way analysis of variance, paired t test, Pearson correlation, and Bland–Altman plot) were done using SPSS.ResultsSignificant difference was found between T1 quantification groups (P < 0.05). Average T1 of each quantification method differed significantly after adding noise (P < 0.05). VFA‐T1 values significantly correlated with toughness (r = −0.68, P < 0.05), ultimate stress (r = −0.71, P < 0.05), and yield stress (r = −0.62, P < 0.05). No significant correlation was found between VTR‐T1 values and toughness (P = 0.07), ultimate stress (P = 0.47), yield stress (P = 0.30), and Young modulus (P = 0.39).Data ConclusionPore water T1 value is associated with bone mechanical competence, and VFA method employing short‐TE pulse sequence seems a superior technique to VTR method for this quantification.Level of Evidence2Technical Efficacy1