4.2 Article

Prevalence of pathologic findings in asymptomatic knees of marathon runners before and after a competition in comparison with physically active subjects - a 3.0 T magnetic resonance imaging study

期刊

SKELETAL RADIOLOGY
卷 37, 期 7, 页码 627-638

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00256-008-0491-y

关键词

magnetic resonance imaging; cartilage imaging; knee cartilage lesions; marathon runners; recreational athletes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To determine the prevalence of pathologic findings in asymptomatic knees of marathon runners before and after a competition in comparison with physically active subjects. To compare the diagnostic performance of cartilage-dedicated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences at 3.0 T. Materials and methods Ten marathon runners underwent 3.0 T MRI 2-3 days before and after competition. Twelve physically active asymptomatic subjects not performing long-distance running were examined as controls. Pathologic condition was assessed with the whole-organ magnetic resonance imaging score (WORMS). Cartilage abnormalities and bone marrow edema pattern (BMEP) were quantified. Visualization of cartilage pathology was assessed with intermediate-weighted fast spin-echo (IM-w FSE), fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition (FIESTA) and T1-weighted three-dimensional (3D) high-spatial-resolution volumetric fat-suppressed spoiled gradient-echo (SPGR) MRI sequences. Results Eight of ten marathon runners and 7/12 controls showed knee abnormality. Slightly more and larger cartilage abnormalities, and BMEP, in marathon runners yielded higher but not significantly different WORMS (P>0.05) than in controls. Running a single marathon did not alter MR findings substantially. Cartilage abnormalities were best visualized with IM-w FSE images (P < 0.05). Conclusion A high prevalence of knee abnormalities was found in marathon runners and also in active subjects participating in other recreational sports. IM-w FSE sequences delineated more cartilage MR imaging abnormalities than did FIESTA and SPGR sequences.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据