Compares bi-component and tri-component models for analyzing Achilles tendon, suggesting implications for quantitative imaging.
Objective To evaluate how data acquisition and post-processing choices influence ultrashort echo time (UTE)–based characterization of the short-T 2 * compositional structure of the Achilles tendon. Methods Ten healthy volunteers (33.3 ± 6.9 years) underwent Achilles tendon MRI using a multi-echo, time-interleaved UTE sequence. T 2 * data were analyzed with and without fat suppression using two models: (i) a bi-component decay with two water pools and (ii) a tri-component decay including two water components and one fat component. The effect of magnitude versus complex fitting on compositional estimates was also assessed. Three Achilles tendon regions were analyzed: insertion (INS), mid-portion (MID), and muscle–tendon junction (MTJ). Results Estimated short vs. long T 2 * components differed significantly depending on the use of fat suppression ( p < 0.001 for all tendon regions) and fitting method (magnitude vs. complex) ( p INS = 0.002, p MID < 0.001, p MTJ < 0.001). T 2 * time constants were comparatively stable, particularly in the MID part ( p > 0.05). The fitting method affected short T 2 * component in the MTJ ( p MTJ = 0.032) and long T 2 * component in the INS and MTJ ( p INS = 0.025, p MTJ < 0.017). Discussion Non-fat-suppressed vs. fat-suppressed (FS) strategy and fitting approach substantially affect bi-component T 2 * quantification of the Achilles tendon, limiting comparability of UTE-based metrics. Tri-component modeling provides a more realistic description of tendon signal and may improve sensitivity to pathological changes. Further studies in patients are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Latta et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: