European Radiology

, Volume 29, Issue 2, pp 609–619 | Cite as

CAIPIRINHA-accelerated 10-min 3D TSE MRI of the ankle for the diagnosis of painful ankle conditions: Performance evaluation in 70 patients

  • Benjamin Fritz
  • Susanne Bensler
  • Gaurav K. Thawait
  • Esther Raithel
  • Steven E. Stern
  • Jan Fritz



To test the hypothesis that MRI of the ankle with a 10-min 3D CAIPIRINHA SPACE TSE protocol is at least equivalent for the detection of painful conditions when compared to a 20-min 2D TSE standard of reference protocol.


Following institutional review board approval and informed consent, 70 symptomatic subjects underwent 3T MRI of the ankle. Six axial, sagittal and coronal intermediate-weighted (IW) and fat-saturated T2-weighted (T2FS) 2D TSE (total acquisition time, 20 min), and two sagittal isotropic IW and T2FS 3D CAIPIRINHA TSE (10 min) pulse sequence prototypes were obtained. Following randomization and anonymization, two musculoskeletal radiologists evaluated the 2D and 3D datasets independently. Descriptive statistics, inter-reader reliability, inter-method concordance, diagnostic definitiveness tests were applied. P-values < 0.05 were considered significant.


Raters diagnosed 116 cartilage defects with 2D and 109 with 3D MRI, 35 ligament tears with 2D and 65 with 3D MRI, 18 tendon tears with 2D and 20 with 3D MRI, and 137 osseous abnormalities with 2D and 149 with 3D MRI. The inter-reader agreement was high for 2D (Kendall W, 0.925) and 3D MRI (W, 0.936) (p < 0.05), as was the inter-method concordance (W, 0.919). The diagnostic definitiveness of readers was higher for 3D MRI than 2D MRI in 10-27% of the time, while the reverse was true in 7-11% of the time (p < 0.01).


The performance of 10-min 3D CAIPIRINHA SPACE MRI for the detection of painful ankle conditions is similar to that of a 20-min 2D TSE MRI reference standard.

Key Points

• CAIPIRINHA Acceleration facilitates isotropic 3D MRI of the Ankle in 10 min.

• 10-min 3D CAIPIRINHA MRI and 20-min 2D TSE MRI have similar performance.

• 3D CAIPIRINHA SPACE MRI afforded higher diagnostic definitiveness of readers.


Ankle joint Magnetic resonance imaging Imaging Three-dimensional Acceleration 







Controlled aliasing in parallel imaging results in higher acceleration




Magnetic resonance imaging


Sampling perfection with application optimized contrast using different flip angle Evolution


Fat-suppressed T2-weighted


Turbo spin echo



This study has received funding by Siemens AG.

Compliance with ethical standards


The scientific guarantor of this publication is Jan Fritz.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this paper declare relationships with the following companies: Siemens AG.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.


• prospective

• experimental

• performed at one institution


  1. 1.
    Rosenberg ZS, Beltran J, Bencardino JT (2000) From the RSNA Refresher Courses. Radiological Society of North America. MR imaging of the ankle and foot. Radiographics. 20(Spec No):S153-179Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kreitner KF, Ferber A, Grebe P, Runkel M, Berger S, Thelen M (1999) Injuries of the lateral collateral ligaments of the ankle: assessment with MR imaging. Eur Radiol 9(3):519–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheung Y, Rosenberg ZS (2001) MR imaging of ligamentous abnormalities of the ankle and foot. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 9(3):507–531 xGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Leffler S, Disler DG (2002) MR imaging of tendon, ligament, and osseous abnormalities of the ankle and hindfoot. Radiol Clin North Am 40(5):1147–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mengiardi B, Pfirrmann CW, Vienne P, Hodler J, Zanetti M (2007) Medial collateral ligament complex of the ankle: MR appearance in asymptomatic subjects. Radiology 242(3):817–824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mengiardi B, Zanetti M, Schöttle PB et al (2005) Spring ligament complex: MR imaging-anatomic correlation and findings in asymptomatic subjects. Radiology 237(1):242–249Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duc SR, Mengiardi B, Pfirrmann CW, Hodler J, Zanetti M (2007) Improved visualization of collateral ligaments of the ankle: multiplanar reconstructions based on standard 2D turbo spin-echo MR images. Eur Radiol 17(5):1162–1171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Notohamiprodjo M, Kuschel B, Horng A et al (2012) 3D-MRI of the ankle with optimized 3D-SPACE. Invest Radiol 47(4):231–239Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kim M, Choi YS, Jeong MS et al (2017) Comprehensive assessment of ankle syndesmosis injury using 3D isotropic turbo spin-echo sequences: diagnostic performance compared with that of conventional and oblique 3-T MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208(4):827–833Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hermans JJ, Ginai AZ, Wentink N, Hop WC, Beumer A (2011) The additional value of an oblique image plane for MRI of the anterior and posterior distal tibiofibular syndesmosis. Skeletal Radiol 40(1):75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Notohamiprodjo M, Horng A, Pietschmann MF et al (2009) MRI of the knee at 3T: first clinical results with an isotropic PDfs-weighted 3D-TSE-sequence. Invest Radiol 44(9):585–597Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jung JY, Yoon YC, Kwon JW, Ahn JH, Choe BK (2009) Diagnosis of internal derangement of the knee at 3.0-T MR imaging: 3D isotropic intermediate-weighted versus 2D sequences. Radiology 253(3):780–787CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Stevens KJ, Busse RF, Han E et al (2008) Ankle: isotropic MR imaging with 3D-FSE-cube: initial experience in healthy volunteers. Radiology 249(3):1026–1033Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Park HJ, Lee SY, Choi YJ et al(2017) 3D isotropic T2-weighted fast spin echo (VISTA) versus 2D T2-weighted fast spin echo in evaluation of the calcaneofibular ligament in the oblique coronal plane. Clin Radiol 72(2):176 e1- e7Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fritz J, Fritz B, Thawait GG, Meyer H, Gilson WD, Raithel E (2016) Three-dimensional CAIPIRINHA SPACE TSE for 5-minute high-resolution MRI of the knee. Invest Radiol 51(10):609–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kalia V, Fritz B, Johnson R, Gilson WD, Raithel E, Fritz J (2017) CAIPIRINHA accelerated SPACE enables 10-min isotropic 3D TSE MRI of the ankle for optimized visualization of curved and oblique ligaments and tendons. Eur Radiol 27(9):3652–3661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mosher TJ, Kransdorf MJ, Adler R et al (2015) ACR Appropriateness Criteria acute trauma to the ankle. J Am Coll Radiol 12(3):221–227Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    DeSmet AA, Dalinka MK, Alazraki N et al (2000) Chronic ankle pain. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria. Radiology 215(Suppl):321–332Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bidgood WD Jr, Horii SC (1992) Introduction to the ACR-NEMA DICOM standard. Radiographics 12(2):345–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Obuchowski NA, Subhas N, Schoenhagen P (2014) Testing for interchangeability of imaging tests. Acad Radiol. 21(11):1483–1489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Noyes FR, Stabler CL (1989) A system for grading articular cartilage lesions at arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med 17(4):505–513Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kijowski R, Blankenbaker DG, Davis KW, Shinki K, Kaplan LD, De Smet AA (2009) Comparison of 1.5- and 3.0-T MR imaging for evaluating the articular cartilage of the knee joint. Radiology 250(3):839–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33(1):159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Breuer FA, Blaimer M, Mueller MF et al (2006) Controlled aliasing in volumetric parallel imaging (2D CAIPIRINHA). Magn Reson Med 55(3):549–556Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yutzy SR, Seiberlich N, Duerk JL, Griswold MA (2011) Improvements in multislice parallel imaging using radial CAIPIRINHA. Magn Reson Med 65(6):1630–1637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yi J, Cha JG, Lee YK, Lee BR, Jeon CH (2016) MRI of the anterior talofibular ligament, talar cartilage and os subfibulare: Comparison of isotropic resolution 3D and conventional 2D T2-weighted fast spin-echo sequences at 3.0 T. Skeletal Radiol 45(7):899–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Park HJ, Lee SY, Park NH et al (2016) Three-dimensional isotropic T2-weighted fast spin-echo (VISTA) ankle MRI versus two-dimensional fast spin-echo T2-weighted sequences for the evaluation of anterior talofibular ligament injury. Clin Radiol 71(4):349–355Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schmid MR, Pfirrmann CW, Hodler J, Vienne P, Zanetti M (2003) Cartilage lesions in the ankle joint: comparison of MR arthrography and CT arthrography. Skeletal Radiol 32(5):259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RadiologyBalgrist University HospitalZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  3. 3.Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Section of Musculoskeletal RadiologyJohns Hopkins University School of MedicineBaltimoreUSA
  4. 4.Siemens Healthcare GmbHErlangenGermany
  5. 5.Bond Business SchoolBond UniversityGold CoastAustralia

Personalised recommendations