Ultrasonography in rheumatology: time to learn from patient views.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this observational, descriptive, cross-sectional, multicentre study was to assess the perceived quality and grade of satisfaction expressed by patients with chronic arthropathies regarding the use of musculoskeletal (MSK) ultrasonography by rheumatologists as an integrated clinical care tool. METHODS: All Spanish rheumatology departments with MSK ultrasonography incorporated in their healthcare services were invited to participate in the study. A Spanish-language survey was offered to fill out anonymously to all consecutive patients with chronic arthropathies under follow-up in the rheumatology outpatient clinics who attended their centre for a period of 3 months. The survey consisted of three sections. The first section contained patients' demographics, disease data, frequency of performing rheumatological ultrasound and information about who performed their ultrasound assessments. The second section consisted of 14 questions about patient's experience and opinion on different aspects of the management, performance and perceived usefulness of performing ultrasound, to be answered on a Likert scale 1-5. The third section of the survey was addressed to the rheumatologist ultrasonographers. RESULTS: Nine hundred and four patients from 16 university hospital rheumatology departments completed the survey. All questions reached an overall favourable response ≥ 80%. Patients who reported usual ultrasound examinations in their rheumatology care and those in which it was their attending rheumatologist who performed the ultrasound assessments responded more favourably. CONCLUSION: Our encouraging patient-centred results may be useful in facilitating the implementation of rheumatological ultrasound in rheumatology care worldwide. Key Points • This is the largest multicentre survey carried out in patients with chronic joint diseases designed to assess their experience and perceived benefits with the use of ultrasonography performed by rheumatologists in daily practice. • Musculoskeletal ultrasound incorporated into rheumatology care was very well accepted and valued by most patients. • The patients perceived that ultrasonography helps not only their rheumatologist but also themselves to better understand their condition. • The patients believed that ultrasonography helps them accept and comply with the proposed treatment.

The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Musculoskeletal Ultrasound - Part I: Extraarticular Pathologies.

The first part of the guidelines and recommendations for musculoskeletal ultrasound, produced under the auspices of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB), provides information about the use of musculoskeletal ultrasound for assessing extraarticular structures (muscles, tendons, entheses, ligaments, bones, bursae, fasciae, nerves, skin, subcutaneous tissues, and nails) and their pathologies. Clinical applications, practical points, limitations, and artifacts are described and discussed for every structure. After an extensive literature review, the recommendations have been developed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine and GRADE criteria and the consensus level was established through a Delphi process. The document is intended to guide clinical users in their daily practice.

Intra-articular therapies: patient preferences and professional practices in European countries.

To assess patient perspective and professional practice of intraarticular therapies (IATs) across Europe, an expert international multidisciplinary panel designed two open web-based surveys: one targeting people who had experienced at least two IATs (44 items); and one targeting health care providers (HCPs) (160 items). Surveys were disseminated via patient and professional associations and social media. A descriptive analysis was performed. The surveys were answered by 200 patients and 186 HCPs from 26 countries, showing that IAT is routinely performed by rheumatologists (97%) and orthopaedic surgeons (89%), with specific training being compulsory in a few countries. The most frequent indications for IAT are arthritis (76%), osteoarthritis (74%), crystal arthritis (71%) and bursitis (70%); the most frequently injected joints are knee (78%) and shoulder (70%); and the most used compounds are glucocorticoids. The majority of HCPs report informing patients about side-effects (73%), benefits (72%), and the nature of the procedure (72%), which coincides with 27% of patients reporting that they had not been informed about benefits or potential complications of IATs; 73% of patients had not been asked whether they wanted an anaesthetic. Few HCPs (10%) obtain written consent (56% get oral consent, being mandatory for 32%), a procedure deemed necessary by 41% of the patients. 50% of patients reported a clear benefit of IAT and 20% experienced complications including pain, impaired mobility, rashes, or swelling. In summary, the practice of IAT is variable across Europe, and although patients perceive it as relatively safe and usually effective procedure, some gaps were identified.

The EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations for Musculoskeletal Ultrasound - Part II: Joint Pathologies, Pediatric Applications, and Guided Procedures.

The second part of the Guidelines and Recommendations for Musculoskeletal Ultrasound (MSUS), produced under the auspices of EFSUMB, following the same methodology as for Part 1, provides information and recommendations on the use of this imaging modality for joint pathology, pediatric applications, and musculoskeletal ultrasound-guided procedures. Clinical application, practical points, limitations, and artifacts are described and discussed for every joint or procedure. The document is intended to guide clinical users in their daily practice.

Efficacy and safety of intra-articular therapies in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: an overview of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the evidence on intra-articular therapies (IAT) to inform the 2020 EULAR recommendations. METHODS: An overview of systematic reviews (SR) including randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of IAT in adults with arthropathies was performed up to July 2020. Pain, function, and frequency of adverse events were the main efficacy and safety outcomes, respectively. Quality was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)-2 tool. RESULTS: Of 184 references identified, 16 met the inclusion criteria, and a search of their reference lists identified 16 additional SRs. After quality assessment, 29 were finally included. Of these, 18 focused on knee osteoarthritis (KOA), 6 on hip osteoarthritis (HOA), 3 on shoulder capsulitis (SC), and 3 on rheumatoid arthritis. Overall, hyaluronic acid showed a small effect on pain and function in KOA but not in HOA or shoulder capsulitis. Intra-articular glucocorticoids showed a small effect in pain and function in KOA and function in HOA and SC. Platelet-rich plasma showed benefit in pain and function in KOA but not in HOA. Mesenchymal stem cells behaved similarly. Most SR results were of moderate quality and RCTs included often presented a high risk of bias, mainly due to inadequate blinding and heterogeneous results. All interventions were well tolerated with no clear safety differences. CONCLUSIONS: This overview underlines that most IAT currently used in KOA, HOA, and SC exert small effects and are well tolerated. However, no firm conclusions can be drawn for inflammatory arthritis due to the limited data found.

EULAR recommendations for intra-articular therapies.

OBJECTIVES: To establish evidence-based recommendations to guide health professionals using intra-articular therapies (IAT) in adult patients with peripheral arthropathies. METHODS: A multidisciplinary international task force established the objectives, users and scope and the need for background information, including systematic literature reviews) and two surveys addressed to healthcare providers and patients throughout Europe. The evidence was discussed in a face-to-face meeting, recommendations were formulated and subsequently voted for anonymously in a three-round Delphi process to obtain the final agreement. The level of evidence was assigned to each recommendation with the Oxford levels of evidence. RESULTS: Recommendations focus on practical aspects to guide health professionals before, during and after IAT in adult patients with peripheral arthropathies. Five overarching principles and 11 recommendations were established, addressing issues related to patient information, procedure and setting, accuracy, routine and special aseptic care, safety issues and precautions to be addressed in special populations, efficacy and safety of repeated joint injections, use of local anaesthetics and aftercare. CONCLUSION: We have developed the first evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations to guide health professionals using IAT. We hope that these recommendations will be included in different educational programmes, used by patient associations and put into practice via scientific societies to help improve uniformity and quality of care when performing IAT in peripheral adult joints.

"There is something you must see": breaking down the remission concept in rheumatoid arthritis from a rheumatologist's perspective.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the remission concept in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the implications of the existing definitions when applied to clinical practice among rheumatologists with different profiles. METHODS: A qualitative study through focus groups was conducted. Three focus groups were organised from February to March 2016. Each group was composed of rheumatologists with extensive clinical experience with different profiles; experts in basic research (RBR), experts in imaging techniques research (RIR), and experts in clinical research (RCR). The data was collected with audio recording. Verbatim transcriptions of the audio files were made, and a subsequent reflexive thematic analysis assisted by ATLAS.ti (GmbH, Berlin, v. 7) software was performed. RESULTS: From the reflexive thematic analysis, three main themes were generated: (1) remission limitations, (2) instruments or measures to assess remission, and (3) a new definition of remission. Rheumatologists mentioned frequently that the following variables should be considered when developing a new remission definition: inflammatory activity, calprotectin, psychological variables, sex, disease stage, and sociocultural factors. Contrary to what could be expected, all groups acknowledged that their research field could contribute with domains for a gold standard remission instrument, but not in a hierarchical arrangement of importance. The dissonance existing in the entire remission evaluation process was outlined: remission in clinical practice versus remission in clinical trials, remission following the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Boolean versus Musculoskeletal Ultrasound (US) remission, and remission from the rheumatologist's point of view versus the patient's point of view. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, rheumatologists would not accept a domain as more important than others in remission. Our suggestion is, not to generate a universal definition of remission - one that could cover all aspects - but rather to develop definitions of remission for the different settings that could be pondered by the patient's perspective.

Ultrasound and Radiographic Abnormalities in a Patient With Chronic Severe Acromegaly / Los hallazgos ecográficos y radiográficos en una paciente con acromegalia crónica severa

No disponible

Recomendaciones para el uso de la ecografía y la resonancia magnética en pacientes con artritis reumatoide / Recommendations for the use of ultrasound and magnetic resonance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objetivo. Establecer recomendaciones, basadas en la evidencia, sobre el uso de la ecografía (US) y la resonancia magnética (RM) en pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR). Métodos. Las recomendaciones se consensuaron mediante metodología basada en grupos nominales. Un grupo de expertos (15 reumatólogos y 3 radiólogos) definió el alcance, usuarios, apartados del documento, posibles recomendaciones, revisiones sistemáticas a realizar (se utilizaron y actualizaron las revisiones de documentos de consenso previos de EULAR), y de la asignación de tareas. Los expertos delimitaron los apartados y redactaron las recomendaciones. El nivel de evidencia y grado de recomendación se realizó utilizando el sistema del Center for Evidence Based Medicine de Oxford. El grado de acuerdo se estableció mediante un Delphi a 2 rondas. Las recomendaciones se votaron según una escala de 1 (total desacuerdo) a 10 (total acuerdo), definiéndose el acuerdo como una puntuación ≥ 7 por al menos el 70% de los participantes. El documento completo fue revisado por los expertos y el proyecto coordinado por un metodólogo experto. Resultados. Se emitieron 20 recomendaciones que cubren: la validez de la US y RM para la detección de actividad y daño estructural, capacidad diagnóstica, predictora (de progresión de daño estructural, de brote de la enfermedad, respuesta al tratamiento, etc.), utilidad en la evaluación y monitorización de estos pacientes que están en tratamiento, y uso de la US como guía (para infiltraciones o biopsias). Conclusiones. Se presentan recomendaciones útiles para el manejo de la US y RM por los clínicos en pacientes con AR (AU)

Objective. To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts, consisting of 15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists, was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of experts voted ≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. Results. A total of 20 recommendations were proposed. They include the validity of US and MRI regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. Conclusions. These recommendations will help clinicians use US and MRI in RA patients (AU)

Recomendaciones para el uso de la ecografía y la resonancia magnética en pacientes con espondiloartritis, incluyendo la artritis psoriásica, y en pacientes con artritis idiopática juvenil / Recommendations for the use of ultrasound and magnetic resonance in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, and patients with juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Objetivo. Establecer recomendaciones, basadas en la evidencia, sobre el uso de la ecografía (US) y la resonancia magnética en pacientes con espondiloartritis, incluyendo la artritis psoriásica, y en la artritis idiopática juvenil. Métodos. Las recomendaciones se consensuaron mediante metodología basada en grupos nominales. Un grupo de expertos (15 reumatólogos y 3 radiólogos) definió el alcance, los usuarios, los apartados, las posibles recomendaciones y las revisiones sistemáticas a realizar (se utilizaron y actualizaron las revisiones de documentos de consenso de EULAR), y se asignaron tareas. Los expertos delimitaron los apartados y redactaron las recomendaciones. El nivel de evidencia y el grado de recomendación se establecieron utilizando el sistema del Centre for Evidence Based Medicine de Oxford, y el grado de acuerdo mediante Delphi a 2 rondas. Las recomendaciones se votaron según una escala de 1 (total desacuerdo) a 10 (total acuerdo), definiéndose el acuerdo como una puntuación≥7 por al menos el 70% de los participantes. El documento fue revisado por los expertos y el proyecto estuvo coordinado por un metodólogo experto. Resultados. Se emitieron 12 recomendaciones sobre la validez de la US y la resonancia magnética para la detección de actividad y daño estructural, capacidad diagnóstica, predictora (de progresión de daño estructural, brote de la enfermedad, respuesta al tratamiento, etc.), utilidad en la evaluación y monitorización del tratamiento, y uso de la US como guía (para infiltraciones, biopsias, etc.) en pacientes con espondiloartritis y artritis idiopática juvenil. Conclusiones. Se presentan unas recomendaciones útiles para el manejo de la US y la resonancia magnética por los clínicos en pacientes con espondiloartritis y artritis idiopática juvenil (AU)

Objective. To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Methods. Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts (15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists) was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of participants voted≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine levels of evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. Results. A total of 12 recommendations were proposed for each disease. They include, along with explanations of the validity of US and magnetic resonance imaging regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. Conclusions. These recommendations will help clinicians use US and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (AU)

Recommendations for the use of ultrasound and magnetic resonance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. / Recomendaciones para el uso de la ecografía y la resonancia magnética en pacientes con artritis reumatoide.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts, consisting of 15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists, was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of experts voted ≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. RESULTS: A total of 20 recommendations were proposed. They include the validity of US and MRI regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will help clinicians use US and MRI in RA patients.

Recommendations for the Use of Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance in Patients With Spondyloarthritis, Including Psoriatic Arthritis, and Patients With Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis. / Recomendaciones para el uso de la ecografía y la resonancia magnética en pacientes con espondiloartritis, incluyendo la artritis psoriásica, y en pacientes con artritis idiopática juvenil.

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. METHODS: Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts (15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists) was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of participants voted≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine levels of evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. RESULTS: A total of 12 recommendations were proposed for each disease. They include, along with explanations of the validity of US and magnetic resonance imaging regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will help clinicians use US and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

Exploring the remission concept in rheumatoid arthritis with patients and rheumatologists: time for a new approach?

OBJECTIVES: To explore the remission concept in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and to compare remission definitions and related concepts between rheumatologists and patients with the purpose of identifying similarities and disparities to comprehend the different perspectives of the disease. METHODS: This was a qualitative study of discourse and content analysis through focus groups, conducted from February to March 2016. Four focus groups were set up, each one with different interests: rheumatologists involved in basic research (BR), rheumatologists with high specialisation in imaging techniques (IR), clinical rheumatologists (CR), and patients (PA). RESULTS: There is no consensus in a remission definition in RA; differences exist between-groups, rheumatologists and patients value remission differently, and there are discrepancies within the group of rheumatologists. Rheumatologists highlight quantifiable objective parameters, in contrast, patients did not consider objective measures as the best instruments, and they prefer subjective measures of remission. The data confirmed the existence of two sources of knowledge of the disease, technical (physicians) and experiential (patients). These sources of knowledge should concur in order to establish new remission criteria well-adjusted to reality. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of consensus between key groups implicated in defining remission and remission criteria suggests a new strategy for its operational definition. Our group proposes that subjects with a balance between experiential and technical knowledge, should be the ones in charge of this assignment.

How does a cadaver model work for testing ultrasound diagnostic capability for rheumatic-like tendon damage?

To establish whether a cadaver model can serve as an effective surrogate for the detection of tendon damage characteristic of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). In addition, we evaluated intraobserver and interobserver agreement in the grading of RA-like tendon tears shown by US, as well as the concordance between the US findings and the surgically induced lesions in the cadaver model. RA-like tendon damage was surgically induced in the tibialis anterior tendon (TAT) and tibialis posterior tendon (TPT) of ten ankle/foot fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens. Of the 20 tendons examined, six were randomly assigned a surgically induced partial tear; six a complete tear; and eight left undamaged. Three rheumatologists, experts in musculoskeletal US, assessed from 1 to 5 the quality of US imaging of the cadaveric models on a Likert scale. Tendons were then categorized as having either no damage, (0); partial tear, (1); or complete tear (2). All 20 tendons were blindly and independently evaluated twice, over two rounds, by each of the three observers. Overall, technical performance was satisfactory for all items in the two rounds (all values over 2.9 in a Likert scale 1-5). Intraobserver and interobserver agreement for US grading of tendon damage was good (mean κ values 0.62 and 0.71, respectively), with greater reliability found in the TAT than the TPT. Concordance between US findings and experimental tendon lesions was acceptable (70-100 %), again greater for the TAT than for the TPT. A cadaver model with surgically created tendon damage can be useful in evaluating US metric properties of RA tendon lesions.

Elbow clinical, ultrasonographic and radiographic study in patients with inflammatory joint diseases.

The main objective of this cross-sectional observational study was to investigate the relationship between clinical, ultrasonographic (US) and radiographic elbow features in patients with inflammatory joint diseases (IJD). The secondary objective was to evaluate the association between regional clinical elbow diagnoses and imaging findings. Consecutive patients with IJD attending follow-up visits were assessed for elbow pain and standardized elbow examination. Seven regional clinical diagnoses were defined. Digital elbow radiographs were read for 9 abnormalities. A standardized elbow grayscale (GS) and power Doppler (PD) scan recorded 13 defined abnormalities. Analysis encompassed 361 clinical, 361 US and 340 radiographic elbow assessments from 181 patients. US and clinical assessments showed an overall higher agreement than radiographic and clinical assessments (68.8 vs 59.1%, p = 0.001). When structural US abnormalities were compared with radiographic findings, agreement was slightly higher than when comparing all US abnormalities with radiographic findings (77.3%, k 0.533 and 73.5%, k 0.492). Enthesophytes, the most common abnormalities, were not associated with clinical findings. Subclinical US-synovitis and US-enthesopathy were found, respectively, in 17.3 and 14.1% of the clinically normal elbows. Clinical elbow arthritis prevalence and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) agreement was good for radiographic fat pad sign, PD-synovitis and GS-synovitis. Clinical elbow enthesopathy PABAK agreement was moderate for GS-enthesopathy and radiographic calcifications. US showed acceptable agreement with clinical and radiographic assessments for detecting elbow inflammatory and structural abnormalities in patients with IJD. Because US detected more abnormalities than radiography and has the capability to detect more subclinical abnormalities, US may be potentially used as a first-line elbow diagnostic tool in this clinical setting.

Artrosis interfalángica sintomática y asintomática: un estudio ecográfico / Symptomatic and asymptomatic interphalageal osteoarthritis: an ultrasonographic study

Objetivo. Pocos estudios han examinado si existen diferencias morfológicas detectables con ecografía entre las articulaciones sintomáticas y las que no lo son en pacientes con artrosis. Este estudio describe y compara los hallazgos clínicos, radiológicos y ecográficos de los pacientes con artrosis interfalángica proximal (IFP) y/o distal (IFD) que tienen articulaciones con y sin dolor. Métodos. Prospectivamente, se incluyó a pacientes con artrosis IFP y/o IFD según los criterios ACR. El reumatólogo clínico eligió hasta un máximo de 3 articulaciones dolorosas y 3 articulaciones no dolorosas de localización simétrica en cada paciente para formar 2 cohortes de artrosis: grupo con dolor (GD) y grupo sin dolor (GSD). La radiografía simple postero-anterior de las manos fue leída por un reumatólogo según las recomendaciones del atlas OARSI, ciego a toda información clínica y ecográfica. El estudio ecográfico fue realizado por un reumatólogo en las articulaciones previamente seleccionadas por el clínico ciego a los datos clínicos y radiológicos. Se registraron como ausente o presente: osteofitos, pinzamiento articular, sinovitis, señal Doppler intraarticular, erosiones y visualización del cartílago. Se realizó un estudio de fiabilidad intralector para la radiología y para la ecografía. Resultados. Se estudió un total de 50 articulaciones en cada cohorte de 20 mujeres diestras de 61,85 años de edad (46-73) con artrosis IFP y IFD diagnosticada hace 6,8 años (1-17 años). El 70% de las articulaciones del GD y GSD se localizaron en la mano derecha e izquierda, respectivamente. El GD tenía significativamente más osteofitos, sinovitis y ausencia de cartílago que el GSD. La fiabilidad interlector radiológico y ecográfico fue excelente. Conclusión. La ecografía detecta más daño estructural y sinovitis en las IFP y/o IFD artrósicas que presentan dolor (AU)

Objective: To date few studies have examined whether ultrasonography can depict morphologic differences in painful and painless osteoarthritis (OA). This study describes and compares the clinical, radiographic and ultrasonographic findings of patients with both painful and painless proximal interphalgeal (PIP) and/or distal interphalgeal (DIP) OA. Methods: Patients with PIP and/or DIP OA (ACR criteria) were prospectively recruited. The clinical rheumatologist chose up to 3 painful joints and up to 3 painless symmetric joints in each patient to define 2 cohorts of OA: symptomatic (SG) and asymptomatic (ASG). A conventional postero-anterior hand x ray was performed and read by one rheumatologist following the OARSI atlas, blinded to clinical and sonographic data. Ultrasound (US) was performed by an experienced rheumatologist, blinded to both clinical and radiographic data in joints previously selected by the clinical rheumatologist. US-pathology was assessed as present or absent as defined in previous reports: osteophytes, joint space narrowing, synovitis, intra-articular power doppler signal, intra-articular bony erosion, and visualization of cartilage. Radiographic and ultrasonographic intrareader reliability test was performed. Results: A total of 50 joints in the SG and ASG were included from 20 right handed women aged 61.85 (46-73) years with PIP and DIP OA diagnosed 6.8 (1-17) years ago. 70% SG joints and ASG were right and left sided respectively. The SG showed significantly more osteophytes, synovitis and non-visualization of joint cartilage. Intrareader radiographic and ultrasonographic agreement was excellent. Conclusion: This study demonstrates that painful PIP and/or DIP OA have more ultrasonographic structural changes and synovitis (AU)

Symptomatic and asymptomatic interphalageal osteoarthritis: An ultrasonographic study.

OBJECTIVE: To date few studies have examined whether ultrasonography can depict morphologic differences in painful and painless osteoarthritis (OA). This study describes and compares the clinical, radiographic and ultrasonographic findings of patients with both painful and painless proximal interphalgeal (PIP) and/or distal interphalgeal (DIP) OA. METHODS: Patients with PIP and/or DIP OA (ACR criteria) were prospectively recruited. The clinical rheumatologist chose up to 3 painful joints and up to 3 painless symmetric joints in each patient to define 2 cohorts of OA: symptomatic (SG) and asymptomatic (ASG). A conventional postero-anterior hand x ray was performed and read by one rheumatologist following the OARSI atlas, blinded to clinical and sonographic data. Ultrasound (US) was performed by an experienced rheumatologist, blinded to both clinical and radiographic data in joints previously selected by the clinical rheumatologist. US-pathology was assessed as present or absent as defined in previous reports: osteophytes, joint space narrowing, synovitis, intra-articular power doppler signal, intra-articular bony erosion, and visualization of cartilage. Radiographic and ultrasonographic intrareader reliability test was performed. RESULTS: A total of 50 joints in the SG and ASG were included from 20 right handed women aged 61.85 (46-73) years with PIP and DIP OA diagnosed 6.8 (1-17) years ago. 70% SG joints and ASG were right and left sided respectively. The SG showed significantly more osteophytes, synovitis and non-visualization of joint cartilage. Intrareader radiographic and ultrasonographic agreement was excellent. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that painful PIP and/or DIP OA have more ultrasonographic structural changes and synovitis.