Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Quantification of bone marrow lesion volume and volume change using semi-automated segmentation: data from the osteoarthritis initiative

Jincheng Pang1, Jeffrey B Driban2*, Geoffroy Destenaves2, Eric Miller1, Grace H Lo103, Robert J Ward4, Lori Lyn Price5, John A Lynch6, Charles B Eaton7, Felix Eckstein89 and Timothy E McAlindon2

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Tufts University, 216 Halligan Hall, Medford, MA, 02155, USA

2 Division of Rheumatology, Tufts Medical Center, 800 Washington Street, Box #406, Boston, MA, 02111, USA

3 Medical Care Line and Research Care Line; Houston Health Services Research and Development (HSR&D) Center of Excellence Michael E. DeBakey VAMC, Houston, TX, USA

4 Department of Radiology, Tufts Medical Center, 800 Washington Street, Box #299, Boston, MA, 02111, USA

5 Biostatistics Research Center, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, 800 Washington Street, Box #63, Boston, MA, 02111, USA

6 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California at San Francisco, 185 Berry Street, Lobby 5, Suite 5700, San Francisco, CA, 94107, USA

7 Center for Primary Care and Prevention, Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Pawtucket, RI, USA

8 Institute of Anatomy and Musculoskeletal Research, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria

9 Chondrometrics GmbH, Ainring, Germany

10 Section of Immunology, Allergy, and Rheumatology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2013, 14:3  doi:10.1186/1471-2474-14-3

Published: 2 January 2013

Abstract

Background

To determine the validity of a semi-automated segmentation of bone marrow lesions (BMLs) in the knee.

Methods

Construct validity of the semi-automated BML segmentation method was explored in two studies performed using sagittal intermediate weighted, turbo spine echo, fat-suppressed magnetic resonance imaging sequences obtained from the Osteoarthritis Initiative. The first study (n = 48) evaluated whether tibia BML volume was different across Boston Leeds Osteoarthritis Knee Scores (BLOKS) for tibia BMLs (semiquantitative grades 0 to 3). In the second study (n = 40), we evaluated whether BML volume change was associated with changes in cartilage parameters. The knees in both studies were segmented by one investigator. We performed Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to determine if tibia BML volume was different between adjacent BLOKS BML scores and calculated Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between 2-year BML volume change and 2-year cartilage morphometry change (significance was p ≤ 0.05).

Results

BML volume was significantly greater between BLOKS BML score 0 and 1 (z = 2.85, p = 0.004) and BLOKS BML scores 1 and 2 (z = 3.09, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference between BLOKS BML scores 2 and 3 (z = −0.30, p = 0.77). Increased tibia BML volume was significantly related to increased tibia denuded area (Spearman r = 0.42, p = 0.008), decreased tibia cartilage thickness (Spearman r = −0.46, p = 0.004), increased femur denuded area (Spearman r = 0.35, p = 0.03), and possibly decreased femur cartilage thickness (Spearman r = −0.30, p = 0.07) but this last finding was not statistically significant.

Conclusion

The new, efficient, and reliable semi-automated BML segmentation method provides valid BML volume measurements that increase with greater BLOKS BML scores and confirms previous reports that BML size is associated with longitudinal cartilage loss.

Keywords:
Knee; Magnetic resonance imaging; Osteoarthritis