The use of a reference population resulted in a substantial reduction of false-positive results, without influencing the sensitivity. Although common for other tests in medicine, this phenomenon is novel for MRI in the early detection of RA.
ObjectiveBecause of its association with joint destruction, anti–citrullinated protein antibody (ACPA)–positive rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is considered to be more severe than ACPA‐negative RA. Clinically relevant joint destruction is now infrequent thanks to adequate disease suppression. According to patients, important outcomes are pain, fatigue, and independence. We evaluated whether ACPA‐positive RA patients diagnosed during or after 2000 have more severe self‐reported limitations and impairments, including restrictions at work, than ACPA‐negative RA patients.MethodsA total of 492 ACPA‐positive and 450 ACPA‐negative RA patients who fulfilled the 2010 criteria and were included in the Leiden Early Arthritis Clinic cohort during or after 2000 were compared for self‐reported pain, fatigue, disease activity, general well‐being (measured by numerical rating scales), physical function (measured by the Health Assessment Questionnaire), and work restrictions, including absenteeism at baseline and during the 4‐year followup. Linear mixed models were used.ResultsAt disease presentation, ACPA‐negative patients had more severe pain, fatigue, self‐reported disease activity scores, and functional disability (P < 0.05), although absolute differences were small. During followup, ACPA‐negative patients remained somewhat more fatigued (P = 0.002), whereas other patient‐reported impairments and limitations were similar. Thirty‐eight percent of ACPA‐negative and 48% of ACPA‐positive patients reported absenteeism (P = 0.30), with median 4 days missed in both groups in the last 3 months. Also, restrictions at work among employed patients and restrictions with household work were not statistically different at baseline and during followup.ConclusionIn current rheumatology practice, ACPA‐positive RA is not more severe than ACPA‐negative RA in terms of patients’ relevant outcomes, including physical functioning and restrictions at work. This implies that efforts to further improve the disease course should be proportional to both disease subsets.
Objective
Ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are recommended in the diagnostic process of rheumatoid arthritis. Research on its comparability in early disease phases is scarce. Therefore, we compared synovitis and tenosynovitis detected by US and MRI on joint/tendon level.
Methods
Eight hundred forty joints and 700 tendons of 70 consecutive patients, presenting with inflammatory arthritis or clinically suspect arthralgia, underwent US and MRI of MCP (2–5), wrist and MTP (1–5) joints at the same day. Greyscale (GS) and power Doppler (PD) synovitis were scored according to the modified Szkudlarek method (combining synovial effusion and hypertrophy) and the recently published EULAR-OMERACT method (synovial hypertrophy regardless of the presence of effusion) on static images. US-detected tenosynovitis was scored according to the OMERACT. MRI scans were scored according to the RAMRIS. Test characteristics were calculated on joint/tendon level with MRI as reference. Cut-off for US scores were ≥ 1 and ≥ 2 and for MRI ≥ 1.
Results
Compared to MRI, GS synovitis according to EULAR-OMERACT (cut-off ≥ 1) had a sensitivity ranging from 29 to 75% for the different joint locations; specificity ranged from 80 to 98%. For the modified Szkudlarek method, the sensitivity was 68–91% and specificity 52–71%. PD synovitis had a sensitivity of 30–54% and specificity 97–99% compared to MRI. The sensitivity to detect GS tenosynovitis was 50–78% and the specificity 80–94%. For PD tenosynovitis, the sensitivity was 19–58% and specificity 98–100%.
Conclusion
Current data showed that US is less sensitive than MRI in the early detection of synovitis and tenosynovitis, but resulted in only few non-specific findings. The higher sensitivity of MRI is at the expense of less accessibility and higher costs.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (10.1186/s13075-019-1824-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
ObjectiveBased on a unique cohort of clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA) patients, we analysed which combinations of MRI features at onset were predictive for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) development. This was done to increase our comprehension of locations of RA onset and improve the predictive accuracy of MRI in CSA.MethodsIn the discovery cohort, 225 CSA patients were followed on clinical arthritis development. Contrast-enhanced 1.5 T MRIs were made of unilateral metacarpophalangeal (MCP) (2–5), wrist, and metatarsophalangeal (1–5) joints at baseline and scored for synovitis, tenosynovitis, and bone marrow edema. Severity, number, and combinations of locations (joint/tendon/bone) with subclinical inflammation were determined, with symptom-free controls of similar age category as reference. Cox regression was used for predictor selection. Predictive values were determined at 1 year follow-up. Results were validated in 209 CSA patients.ResultsIn both cohorts, 15% developed arthritis < 1 year. The multivariable Cox model selected presence of MCP-extensor peritendinitis (HR 4.38 (2.07–9.25)) and the number of locations with subclinical inflammation (1–2 locations HR 2.54 (1.11–5.82); ≥ 3 locations HR 3.75 (1.49–9.48)) as predictors. Severity and combinations of inflammatory lesions were not selected. Based on these variables, five risk categories were defined: no subclinical inflammation, 1–2 locations, or ≥ 3 locations, with or without MCP-extensor peritendinitis. Positive predictive values (PPVs) ranged 5% (lowest category; NPV 95%) to 67% (highest category). Similar findings were obtained in the validation cohort; PPVs ranged 4% (lowest category; NPV 96%) to 63% (highest category).ConclusionTenosynovitis, particularly MCP-extensor peritendinitis, is among the first tissues affected by RA. Incorporating this feature and number of locations with subclinical inflammation improved prediction making with PPVs up to 63–67%.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.