Objective: To compare the clinical assessment of overall inflammatory activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) with grey scale and power Doppler (PD) ultrasonography (US). Methods: Ninety four consecutive patients with RA were included. Demographic and clinical data, C reactive protein (CRP) level, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were recorded for each patient. The presence of tenderness, swelling, and a subjective swelling score from 1 to 3 were independently assessed by two rheumatologists, who reached a consensus in 60 joints examined in each patient. All patients underwent a US examination by a third blinded rheumatologist, using PD. US joint effusion, synovitis, and PD signal were graded from 1 to 3 in the 60 joints. Joint count and joint index for effusion, synovitis, and PD signal were recorded. A 28 joint count for clinical and US variables was calculated. Interobserver reliability of the US examination was evaluated by a fourth blinded rheumatologist. Results: US showed significantly more joints with effusion (mean 15.2) and synovitis (mean 14.6) than clinical examination (mean 11.5, p,0.05). A significant correlation was found between joint count and joint index for swelling, US effusion, synovitis, and PD signal. The 28 joint count for effusion, synovitis, and PD signal correlated highly with the corresponding 60 joint counts. US findings correlated better with CRP and ESR than clinical measures. Interobserver reliability was better for US findings than for clinical assessment. Conclusion: US is a sensitive method for assessing joint inflammatory activity in RA, complementary to clinical evaluation.

The findings suggest that the ultrasound enthesis score could be a valid tool in the diagnosis of SpA.

Our results suggest that US bilateral assessment of one joint, three articular cartilages and two tendons may be valid for diagnosing gout with acceptable sensitivity and specificity.

Objective: To assess the multiexaminer reproducibility and the accuracy comparing with cadaver anatomic specimens of ultrasound (US) measurement of femoral articular cartilage (FAC) thickness. Methods: In 8 flexed cadaver knees, FAC thickness was blindly, independently and consecutively measured twice by 10 rheumatologists at the lateral condyle (LC), medial condyle (MC) and intercondylar notch (IN) with US. After the US measurements, the knees were dissected. Articular cartilage integrity was evaluated macroscopically in the femoral condyles. FAC thickness was blindly measured in the specimens using a stereoscopic magnifying loupe and a digitised image software. Interexaminer and intraexaminer reliability of US FAC thickness measurement and agreement between US and anatomic measurements were assessed by estimating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Conclusion: US demonstrated a good reproducibility in FAC thickness measurement by multiple examiners. In addition, US FAC thickness measurement was accurate in normal to moderately damaged cartilage.

Psoriatic patients showed a significant prevalence of asymptomatic US synovitis and enthesopathy, which may indicate a subclinical musculoskeletal involvement.

Objective: To assess the interobserver reliability of the main periarticular and intra-articular ultrasonographic pathologies and to establish the principal disagreements on scanning technique and diagnostic criteria between a group of experts in musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Methods: The shoulder, wrist/hand, ankle/foot, or knee of 24 patients with rheumatic diseases were evaluated by 23 musculoskeletal ultrasound experts from different European countries randomly assigned to six groups. The participants did not reach consensus on scanning method or diagnostic criteria before the investigation. They were unaware of the patients' clinical and imaging data. The experts from each group undertook a blinded ultrasound examination of the four anatomical regions. The ultrasound investigation included the presence/absence of joint effusion/synovitis, bony cortex abnormalities, tenosynovitis, tendon lesions, bursitis, and power Doppler signal. Afterwards they compared the ultrasound findings and re-examined the patients together while discussing their results. Results: Overall agreements were 91% for joint effusion/synovitis and tendon lesions, 87% for cortical abnormalities, 84% for tenosynovitis, 83.5% for bursitis, and 83% for power Doppler signal; k values were good for the wrist/hand and knee (0.61 and 0.60) and fair for the shoulder and ankle/foot (0.50 and 0.54). The principal differences in scanning method and diagnostic criteria between experts were related to dynamic examination, definition of tendon lesions, and pathological v physiological fluid within joints, tendon sheaths, and bursae. Conclusions: Musculoskeletal ultrasound has a moderate to good interobserver reliability. Further consensus on standardisation of scanning technique and diagnostic criteria is necessary to improve musculoskeletal ultrasonography reproducibility.

Background: High frequency ultrasonography is an accurate non-invasive imaging technique for evaluating patients with painful shoulder. Objective: To compare the clinical diagnosis established by a physical examination with high frequency ultrasonographic findings in patients with painful shoulder. Methods: Thirty one consecutive patients with a first flare of shoulder pain were prospectively included in the study. All had a physical examination performed by two blinded rheumatologists. Ultrasonographic examination was carried out within one week of the physical examination by a third rheumatologist experienced in this technique who had no knowledge of the clinical findings. Ultrasonography was considered the optimal diagnostic technique. Results: Clinical assessment showed low accuracy in the diagnosis of periarticular shoulder lesions. Conclusion: Ultrasonography should be used wherever possible to improve diagnosis and treatment of painful shoulder.

Objective:To develop education guidelines for the conduct of future European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSUS) courses.Methods:We undertook a consensus-based, iterative process using two consecutive questionnaires sent to 29 senior ultrasonographer rheumatologists who comprised the faculty of the 14th EULAR ultrasound course (June 2007). The first questionnaire encompassed the following issues: type of MSUS educational model; course timing; course curriculum; course duration; number of participants per teacher in practical sessions; time spent on hands-on sessions; and the requirements and/or restrictions for attendance at the courses. The second questionnaire consisted of questions related to areas where consensus had not been achieved in the first questionnaire, and to the topics and pathologies to be assigned to different educational levels.Results:The response rate was 82.7% from the first questionnaire and 87.5% from the second questionnaire. The respondents were from 11 European countries. The group consensus on guidelines and curriculum was for a three-level education model (basic, intermediate and advanced) with timing and location related to the annual EULAR Congresses. The topics and pathologies to be included in each course were agreed. The course duration will be 20 h. There will be a maximum of six participants per teacher and 50–60% of total time will be spent on practical sessions. There was also agreement on prerequisite experience before attending the intermediate and advanced courses.Conclusion:We have developed European agreed guidelines for the content and conduct of EULAR ultrasound courses, which may also be recommended to national and local MSUS training programmes.