FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Vet Radiol Ultrasound / Validation of ultrasonography for measurement of cartilage t...
Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association2022; 63(4); 478-489; doi: 10.1111/vru.13085

Validation of ultrasonography for measurement of cartilage thickness in the equine carpus.

Abstract: Articular cartilage thinning is an important hallmark of osteoarthritis (OA), and ultrasonography (US) is a clinically accessible tool potentially suitable for repeated evaluation. The aim of the present prospective methods comparison study was to validate US as a tool for measuring cartilage thickness in the carpus of the horse. Eight Standardbred trotters underwent US examination with 9 and 15 MHz linear transducers. Six anatomical locations in the radiocarpal joint (RCJ) and middle carpal joint (MCJ) were examined. The same joints were assessed by ultrahigh field (9.4 Tesla) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and histology. Associations between measurements obtained by the different modalities were assessed by ANOVA, Deming regression, Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman plots. Histologically assessed total cartilage thickness (the noncalcified cartilage (NCC) plus the calcified cartilage zone (CCZ)) overestimated thickness compared to MRI (P < 0.01) and US (P < 0.01). US 15 MHz had substantial agreement with MRI and NCC histology, and repeatability was acceptable (coefficient of variation = 8.6-17.9%) when used for assessment of cartilage thickness in the RCJ. In contrast, 9 MHz US showed poorer agreement with MRI and NCC histology, as it overestimated the thickness of thin cartilage and underestimated the thickness of thicker cartilage in the RCJ and MCJ. Moreover, repeatability was suboptimal (coefficient of variation = 10.4-26.3%). A 15 MHz transducer US is recommended for detecting changes in RCJ cartilage thickness or monitoring development over time, and it has the potential for noninvasive assessment of cartilage health in horses.
© 2022 The Authors. Veterinary Radiology & Ultrasound published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Veterinary Radiology.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2022-03-29 PubMed ID: 35347811PubMed Central: PMC9545370DOI: 10.1111/vru.13085Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research performed a comparison study to validate the use of ultrasonography as a suitable method for measuring cartilage thickness in horse joints, with findings supporting the use of a 15 MHz transducer for accurate and repeatable measurements.

Study Objective and Design

  • The study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of ultrasonography, a non-invasive medical imaging technique, as a tool to measure the thickness of joint cartilage in horses, specifically in the radiocarpal joint (RCJ) and middle carpal joint (MCJ). This is important as thinning of the articular cartilage is a significant indicator of osteoarthritis (OA), a common joint disorder in horses.
  • The research was designed as a prospective methods comparison study, involving eight Standardbred trotters.
  • The horses underwent ultrasound examination using two different types of linear transducers, 9 MHz and 15 MHz. For comparison, the same joints were also evaluated through ultrahigh field (9.4 Tesla) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and histology.

Key Findings

  • The measurements obtained via different methods were assessed using ANOVA, Deming regression, Pearson correlation, and Bland-Altman plots. These statistical methodologies allowed the researchers to compare the different techniques and to identify any systematic differences between them.
  • The study found that histologically measured total cartilage thickness (which includes both noncalcified cartilage (NCC) and calcified cartilage zone (CCZ)) tends to overestimate thickness, when compared to the results obtained by MRI and ultrasonography. This was a crucial finding as histology is commonly used to measure cartilage thickness, and these findings could potentially refine current measurement practices.
  • The agreement between the 15 MHz ultrasonography and the MRI and NCC histology results was found to be substantial, and the repeatability of the 15 MHz ultrasonography was also acceptable (coefficient of variation of 8.6% to 17.9%).
  • In contrast, the 9 MHz ultrasonography showed poorer agreement with both MRI and NCC histology, as it overestimated the thickness of thin cartilage and underestimated the thickness of thicker cartilage.

Conclusions and Recommendations

  • Given the results, a 15 MHz transducer ultrasonography is recommended for detecting changes in cartilage thickness in the radiocarpal joint or for monitoring its development over time.
  • Moreover, due to its capacity for noninvasive assessment and acceptable repeatability, 15 MHz ultrasonography shows potential for monitoring cartilage health in horses, offering a more readily accessible tool compared to more complex imaging technology like MRI.

Cite This Article

APA
Andersen C, Griffin JF, Jacobsen S, Østergaard S, Walters M, Mori Y, Lindegaard C. (2022). Validation of ultrasonography for measurement of cartilage thickness in the equine carpus. Vet Radiol Ultrasound, 63(4), 478-489. https://doi.org/10.1111/vru.13085

Publication

Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association
ISSN: 1740-8261
NlmUniqueID: 9209635
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 63
Issue: 4
Pages: 478-489

Researcher Affiliations

Andersen, Camilla
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Taastrup, Denmark.
Griffin, John F
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.
Jacobsen, Stine
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Taastrup, Denmark.
Østergaard, Stine
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Taastrup, Denmark.
Walters, Marie
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Taastrup, Denmark.
Mori, Yuki
  • Center for Translational Neuromedicine, Faculty of Health & Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
Lindegaard, Casper
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Taastrup, Denmark.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Carpal Joints
  • Cartilage, Articular / diagnostic imaging
  • Cartilage, Articular / pathology
  • Horses
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging / methods
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging / veterinary
  • Prospective Studies
  • Ultrasonography / veterinary

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 37 references
  1. Dyson PK, Jackson BF, Pfeiffer DU, Price JS. Days lost from training by two- and three-year-old Thoroughbred horses: a survey of seven UK training yards.. Equine Vet J 2008 Nov;40(7):650-7.
    pubmed: 19165934doi: 10.2746/042516408x363242google scholar: lookup
  2. Schlueter AE, Orth MW. Equine osteoarthritis: a brief review of the disease and its causes.. Equine Comp Exerc Physiol 2004; 1(4):221‐231.
  3. Murray RC, Dyson SJ. EquineCarpus. 3th ed. Elsevier Inc; 2018;
  4. Ross MW. The Carpus. 2nd ed. Elsevier Inc; 2010;
  5. Goldring SR, Goldring MB. Changes in the osteochondral unit during osteoarthritis: structure, function and cartilage-bone crosstalk.. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2016 Nov;12(11):632-644.
    pubmed: 27652499doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2016.148google scholar: lookup
  6. Houard X, Goldring MB, Berenbaum F. Homeostatic mechanisms in articular cartilage and role of inflammation in osteoarthritis.. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2013 Nov;15(11):375.
    pmc: PMC3989071pubmed: 24072604doi: 10.1007/s11926-013-0375-6google scholar: lookup
  7. Loeser RF, Goldring SR, Scanzello CR, Goldring MB. Osteoarthritis: a disease of the joint as an organ.. Arthritis Rheum 2012 Jun;64(6):1697-707.
    pmc: PMC3366018pubmed: 22392533doi: 10.1002/art.34453google scholar: lookup
  8. Naredo E, Acebes C, Möller I, Canillas F, de Agustín JJ, de Miguel E, Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Moragues C, Tuneu R, Uson J, Garrido J, Delgado-Baeza E, Sáenz-Navarro I. Ultrasound validity in the measurement of knee cartilage thickness.. Ann Rheum Dis 2009 Aug;68(8):1322-7.
    pubmed: 18684742doi: 10.1136/ard.2008.090738google scholar: lookup
  9. Möller I, Bong D, Naredo E, Filippucci E, Carrasco I, Moragues C, Iagnocco A. Ultrasound in the study and monitoring of osteoarthritis.. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008;16 Suppl 3:S4-7.
    pubmed: 18760636doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2008.06.005google scholar: lookup
  10. Fife RS, Brandt KD, Braunstein EM, Katz BP, Shelbourne KD, Kalasinski LA, Ryan S. Relationship between arthroscopic evidence of cartilage damage and radiographic evidence of joint space narrowing in early osteoarthritis of the knee.. Arthritis Rheum 1991 Apr;34(4):377-82.
    pubmed: 2012624doi: 10.1002/art.1780340402google scholar: lookup
  11. Powel S, Murray RC. Chapter 15 The carpal region. In: Murray RC, ed. Equine MRI. Wiley‐Blackwell; 2011;385‐403.
  12. Murray RC, Branch MV, Tranquille C, Woods S. Validation of magnetic resonance imaging for measurement of equine articular cartilage and subchondral bone thickness.. Am J Vet Res 2005 Nov;66(11):1999-2005.
    pubmed: 16334962doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.1999google scholar: lookup
  13. Eckstein F, Guermazi A, Gold G, Duryea J, Hellio Le Graverand MP, Wirth W, Miller CG. Imaging of cartilage and bone: promises and pitfalls in clinical trials of osteoarthritis.. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2014 Oct;22(10):1516-32.
    pmc: PMC4351816pubmed: 25278061doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2014.06.023google scholar: lookup
  14. Wirth W, Hunter DJ, Nevitt MC, Sharma L, Kwoh CK, Ladel C, Eckstein F. Predictive and concurrent validity of cartilage thickness change as a marker of knee osteoarthritis progression: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative.. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2017 Dec;25(12):2063-2071.
    pmc: PMC5688009pubmed: 28838858doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2017.08.005google scholar: lookup
  15. Ng A, Swanevelder J. Resolution in ultrasound imaging. Contin Educ Anesthesia, Crit Care Pain 2011; 11(5):186‐192.
  16. Aleo E, Barbieri F, Sconfienza L, Zampogna G, Garlaschi G, Cimmino MA. Ultrasound versus low-field magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatic diseases: a systematic literature review.. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2014 Jan-Feb;32(1 Suppl 80):S91-8.
    pubmed: 24528870
  17. Schmitz RJ, Wang HM, Polprasert DR, Kraft RA, Pietrosimone BG. Evaluation of knee cartilage thickness: A comparison between ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging methods.. Knee 2017 Mar;24(2):217-223.
    pubmed: 27914723doi: 10.1016/j.knee.2016.10.004google scholar: lookup
  18. Spannow AH, Stenboeg E, Pfeiffer-Jensen M, Fiirgaard B, Haislund M, Ostergaard M, Andersen NT, Herlin T. Ultrasound and MRI measurements of joint cartilage in healthy children: a validation study.. Ultraschall Med 2011 Jan;32 Suppl 1:S110-6.
    pubmed: 20517820doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1245374google scholar: lookup
  19. Graichen H, Jakob J, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Englmeier KH, Reiser M, Eckstein F. Validation of cartilage volume and thickness measurements in the human shoulder with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging.. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2003 Jul;11(7):475-82.
    pubmed: 12814610doi: 10.1016/s1063-4584(03)00077-3google scholar: lookup
  20. Martel G, Forget C, Gilbert G, Richard H, Moser T, Olive J, Laverty S. Validation of the ultrasonographic assessment of the femoral trochlea epiphyseal cartilage in foals at osteochondrosis predilected sites with magnetic resonance imaging and histology.. Equine Vet J 2017 Nov;49(6):821-828.
    pubmed: 28470772doi: 10.1111/evj.12698google scholar: lookup
  21. Barthez PY, Bais RJ, Vernooij JC. Effect of ultrasound beam angle on equine articular cartilage thickness measurement.. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 2007 Sep-Oct;48(5):457-9.
    pubmed: 17899982doi: 10.1111/j.1740-8261.2007.00278.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  22. Engiles JB, Stewart H, Janes J, Kennedy LA. A diagnostic pathologist's guide to carpal disease in racehorses.. J Vet Diagn Invest 2017 Jul;29(4):414-430.
    pubmed: 28580838doi: 10.1177/1040638717710238google scholar: lookup
  23. Steppacher SD, Hanke MS, Zurmühle CA, Haefeli PC, Klenke FM, Tannast M. Ultrasonic cartilage thickness measurement is accurate, reproducible, and reliable-validation study using contrast-enhanced micro-CT.. J Orthop Surg Res 2019 Feb 27;14(1):67.
    pmc: PMC6391750pubmed: 30813958doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1099-8google scholar: lookup
  24. Pritzker KP, Gay S, Jimenez SA, Ostergaard K, Pelletier JP, Revell PA, Salter D, van den Berg WB. Osteoarthritis cartilage histopathology: grading and staging.. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2006 Jan;14(1):13-29.
    pubmed: 16242352doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2005.07.014google scholar: lookup
  25. Jurvelin JS, Lyyra T. Technical thickness note cartilage. Science (80‐) 1995; 28(2):.
  26. Horbert V, Lange M, Reuter T, Hoffmann M, Bischoff S, Borowski J, Schubert H, Driesch D, Mika J, Hurschler C, Kinne RW. Comparison of Near-Infrared Spectroscopy with Needle Indentation and Histology for the Determination of Cartilage Thickness in the Large Animal Model Sheep.. Cartilage 2019 Apr;10(2):173-185.
    pmc: PMC6425542pubmed: 28980486doi: 10.1177/1947603517731851google scholar: lookup
  27. Keshava SN, Gibikote SV, Mohanta A, Poonnoose P, Rayner T, Hilliard P, Lakshmi KM, Moineddin R, Ignas D, Srivastava A, Blanchette V, Doria AS. Ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging of healthy paediatric ankles and knees: a baseline for comparison with haemophilic joints.. Haemophilia 2015 May;21(3):e210-e222.
    pubmed: 25736388doi: 10.1111/hae.12614google scholar: lookup
  28. Denoix JM, Jeffcott LB, McIlwraith CW, van Weeren PR. A review of terminology for equine juvenile osteochondral conditions (JOCC) based on anatomical and functional considerations.. Vet J 2013 Jul;197(1):29-35.
    pubmed: 23683533doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.03.038google scholar: lookup
  29. Lee H, Kirkland WG, Whitmore RN, Theis KM, Young HE, Richardson AJ, Jackson RL, Hanson RR. Comparison of equine articular cartilage thickness in various joints.. Connect Tissue Res 2014 Oct-Dec;55(5-6):339-47.
    pubmed: 25111191doi: 10.3109/03008207.2014.949698google scholar: lookup
  30. Murray RC, Zhu CF, Goodship AE, Lakhani KH, Agrawal CM, Athanasiou KA. Exercise affects the mechanical properties and histological appearance of equine articular cartilage.. J Orthop Res 1999 Sep;17(5):725-31.
    pubmed: 10569483doi: 10.1002/jor.1100170516google scholar: lookup
  31. Zhang Y, Wang F, Tan H, Chen G, Guo L, Yang L. Analysis of the mineral composition of the human calcified cartilage zone.. Int J Med Sci 2012;9(5):353-60.
    pmc: PMC3399215pubmed: 22811609doi: 10.7150/ijms.4276google scholar: lookup
  32. Cohen NP, Foster RJ, Mow VC. Composition and dynamics of articular cartilage: structure, function, and maintaining healthy state.. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998 Oct;28(4):203-15.
    pubmed: 9785256doi: 10.2519/jospt.1998.28.4.203google scholar: lookup
  33. Modest VE, Murphy MC, Mann RW. Optical verification of a technique for in situ ultrasonic measurement of articular cartilage thickness.. J Biomech 1989;22(2):171-6.
    pubmed: 2651447doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(89)90041-9google scholar: lookup
  34. Du J, Carl M, Bae WC, Statum S, Chang EY, Bydder GM, Chung CB. Dual inversion recovery ultrashort echo time (DIR-UTE) imaging and quantification of the zone of calcified cartilage (ZCC).. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2013 Jan;21(1):77-85.
    pmc: PMC4051156pubmed: 23025927doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2012.09.009google scholar: lookup
  35. Cheng Y, Guo C, Wang Y, Bai J, Tamura S. Accuracy limits for the thickness measurement of the hip joint cartilage in 3-D MR images: simulation and validation.. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2013 Feb;60(2):517-33.
    pubmed: 23204268doi: 10.1109/tbme.2012.2230002google scholar: lookup
  36. Eckstein F, Adam C, Sittek H, Becker C, Milz S, Schulte E, Reiser M, Putz R. Non-invasive determination of cartilage thickness throughout joint surfaces using magnetic resonance imaging.. J Biomech 1997 Mar;30(3):285-9.
    pubmed: 9119830doi: 10.1016/s0021-9290(97)81146-3google scholar: lookup
  37. Filippucci E, da Luz KR, Di Geso L, Salaffi F, Tardella M, Carotti M, Natour J, Grassi W. Interobserver reliability of ultrasonography in the assessment of cartilage damage in rheumatoid arthritis.. Ann Rheum Dis 2010 Oct;69(10):1845-8.
    pubmed: 20570837doi: 10.1136/ard.2009.125179google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.