MRI overestimates articular cartilage thickness and volume compared to synchrotron radiation phase-contrast imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate evaluation of morphological changes in articular cartilage are necessary for early detection of osteoarthritis (OA). 3T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has highly sensitive contrast resolution and is widely used clinically to detect OA. However, synchrotron radiation phase-contrast imaging computed tomography (SR-PCI) can also provide contrast to tissue interfaces that do not have sufficient absorption differences, with the added benefit of very high spatial resolution. Here, MRI was compared with SR-PCI for quantitative evaluation of human articular cartilage. Medial tibial condyles were harvested from non-OA donors and from OA patients receiving knee replacement surgery. Both imaging methods revealed that average cartilage thickness and cartilage volume were significantly reduced in the OA group, compared to the non-OA group. When comparing modalities, the superior resolution of SR-PCI enabled more precise mapping of the cartilage surface relative to MRI. As a result, MRI showed significantly higher average cartilage thickness and cartilage volume, compared to SR-PCI. These data highlight the potential for high-resolution imaging of articular cartilage using SR-PCI as a solution for early OA diagnosis. Recognizing current limitations of using a synchrotron for clinical imaging, we discuss its nascent utility for preclinical models, particularly longitudinal studies of live animal models of OA.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".