Longitudinal in vivo cationic contrast‐enhanced computed tomography classifies equine articular cartilage injury and repair

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Cationic contrast‐enhanced computed tomography (CECT) capitalizes on increased contrast agent affinity to the charged proteoglycans in articular cartilage matrix to provide quantitative assessment of proteoglycan content with enhanced images. While high resolution microCT has demonstrated success, we investigate cationic CECT use in longitudinal in vivo imaging at clinical resolution. We hypothesize that repeated administration of CA4+ will have no adverse side effects or complications, and that sequential in vivo imaging assessments will distinguish articular cartilage repair tissue from early degenerative and healthy cartilage in critically sized chondral defects. In an established equine translational preclinical model, lameness and synovial effusion scores are similar to controls after repeated injections of CA4+ (eight injections over 16 weeks) compared to controls. Synovial fluid total protein, leukocyte concentration, and sGAG and PGE2 concentrations and articular cartilage and synovial membrane scores are also equivalent to controls. Longitudinal in vivo cationic CECT attenuation in repair tissue is significantly lower than peripheral to (adjacent) and distantly from defects (remote sites) by 4 weeks (p < 0.001), and this difference persists until 16 weeks. At the 6‐ and 8‐week time points, the adjacent locations exhibit significantly lower cationic CECT attenuation compared with the remote sites, reflecting peri‐defect degeneration (p < 0.01). Cationic CECT attenuation at clinical resolution significantly correlates with cationic CECT (microCT) (r = 0.69, p < 0.0001), sGAG (r = 0.48, p < 0.0001), and ICRS II histology score (r = 0.63, p < 0.0001). In vivo cationic CECT imaging at clinical resolution distinguishes fibrous repair tissue from degenerative and healthy hyaline cartilage and correlates with molecular tissue properties of articular cartilage.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.