Ankle Joint MRI—Comparison of Image Quality and Effect of Sports-Related Stress

Objectives: The main aims of the study were the evaluation of stress-related effects (strenuous vs. non-strenuous sport vs. nonathletes) in stimulating or reducing influences on cartilage volume in the ankle joint and the evaluation of the image quality of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) device with a field strength of 3.0 Tesla compared to one of 1.5 Tesla. Methods: A total of 15 subjects (6 male, 9 female) aged 19–33 years participated voluntarily in this prospective study. The subjects were divided into three groups: high-performance athletes of the German Football Association (DFB) (football/soccer = strenuous sport), high-performance athletes of the German Swimming Association (DSV) (swimming = non-strenuous sport), and nonathletes. MRI was performed on both ankle joints of all subjects in the 1.5 T and 3.0 T MRI scanners using survey sequences, proton density sequences in the coronal and sagittal planes, and VIBE sequences. Using the images of both feet produced by VIBE sequences, the cartilages of the talus and tibia were manually circumscribed using a computer mouse in every third layer, and the volume was calculated. For qualitative assessment, blinded images were submitted to three radiologists with defined standards. The images were scored using a scale from 1 to 5. Results: Cartilage volume: The investigation and examination of the individual cartilage volumes by analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed no significant differences among the three groups. The effect intensities, as calculated by Cohen’s d, were right tibia (Ti(ri)) = 2.5, left tibia (Ti(le)) = 2.2, right talus (Ta(ri)) = 1.9, and left talus (Ta(le)) = 1.6 in the strenuous sport versus nonstrenuous sport groups; Ti(ri) = 0.8, Ti(le) = 1.2, Ta(ri) = 0.4, and Ta(le) = 0.5 in the strenuous sport versus nonathlete groups; and Ti(ri) = 0.3, Ti(le) = 0.2, Ta(ri) = 0.7, and Ta(le) = 0.5 in the nonstrenuous sport versus nonathlete groups. Device comparison: In the investigation of each evaluated area on the 1.5 T and 3.0 T MR images by the Wilcoxon matched-pair test, significant differences were found for the cartilage–bone border (KKG = 0.002), cancellous bone (Sp = 0.001), medial ligamentous apparatus (mBa = 0.001), lateral ligamentous apparatus (lBa = 0.001), and adipose tissue (Fg = 0.002). Thus, there were significant differences in the assessment of the 1.5 T MRI and the 3.0 T MRI in all five evaluated areas. Conclusion: The study showed no significant difference in the volume of hyaline articular cartilage in the upper ankle joint among the high-performance strenuous DFB athlete, high-performance non-strenuous DSV athlete, and nonathlete groups. The 3.0 Tesla device offers significant advantages in image quality compared to the 1.5 Tesla device.