Magnetic resonance imaging of the fifth metatarsophalangeal joint compared with conventional radiography in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis

Diagnostic issues in difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives

To summarise the evidence on diagnostic issues in difficult-to-treat rheumatoid arthritis (D2T RA) informing the EULAR recommendations for the management of D2T RA.

Methods

A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed regarding the optimal confirmation of a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and of mimicking diseases and the assessment of inflammatory disease activity. PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to December 2019. Relevant papers were selected and appraised.

Results

Eighty-two papers were selected for detailed assessment. The identified evidence had several limitations: (1) no studies were found including D2T RA patients specifically, and only the minority of studies included RA patients in whom there was explicit doubt about the diagnosis of RA or presence of inflammatory activity; (2) mostly only correlations were reported, not directly useful to evaluate the accuracy of detecting inflammatory activity in clinical practice; (3) heterogeneous, and often suboptimal, reference standards were used and (4) (thus) only very few studies had a low risk of bias.

To ascertain a diagnosis of RA or relevant mimicking disease, no diagnostic test with sufficient validity and accuracy was identified. To ascertain inflammatory activity in patients with RA in general and in those with obesity and fibromyalgia, ultrasonography (US) was studied most extensively and was found to be the most promising diagnostic test.

Conclusions

This SLR highlights the scarcity of high-quality studies regarding diagnostic issues in D2T RA. No diagnostic tests with sufficient validity and accuracy were found to confirm nor exclude the diagnosis of RA nor its mimicking diseases in D2T RA patients. Despite the lack of high-quality direct evidence, US may have an additional value to assess the presence of inflammatory activity in D2T RA patients, including those with concomitant obesity or fibromyalgia.

Pseudoerosions of Hands and Feet in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Anatomic Concepts and Redefinition

Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by the development of osseous and cartilaginous damage. The correct differentiation between a true erosion and other entities—then often called “pseudoerosions”—is essential to avoid misdiagnosing rheumatoid arthritis and to correctly interpret the progress of the disease. The aims of this systematic review were as follows: to create a definition and delineation of the term “pseudoerosion”, to point out morphological pitfalls in the interpretation of images, and to report on difficulties arising from choosing different imaging modalities. A systematic review on bone erosions in rheumatoid arthritis was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following search terms were applied in PubMed and Scopus: “rheumatoid arthritis”, “bone erosion”, “ultrasonography”, “radiography”, “computed tomography” and “magnetic resonance imaging”. Appropriate exclusion criteria were defined. The systematic review registration number is 138826. The search resulted ultimately in a final number of 25 papers. All indications for morphological pitfalls and difficulties utilizing imaging modalities were recorded and summarized. A pseudoerosion is more than just a negative definition of an erosion; it can be anatomic (e.g., a normal osseous concavity) or artefact-related (i.e., an artificial interruption of the calcified zones). It can be classified according to their configuration, shape, content, and can be described specifically with an anatomical term. “Calcified zone” is a term to describe the deep components of the subchondral, subligamentous and subtendinous bone, and may be applied for all non-cancellous borders of a bone, thus representing a third type of the bone matrix beside the cortical and the trabecular bone.

Recommendations for the use of ultrasound and magnetic resonance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

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.

Conventional radiography requires a MRI-estimated bone volume loss of 20% to 30% to allow certain detection of bone erosions in rheumatoid arthritis metacarpophalangeal joints

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the ability of conventional radiography to detect bone erosions of different sizes in metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the standard reference. A 0.2 T Esaote dedicated extremity MRI unit was used to obtain axial and coronal T1-weighted gradient echo images of the dominant 2nd to 5th MCP joints of 69 RA patients. MR images were obtained and evaluated for bone erosions according to the OMERACT recommendations. Conventional radiographs of the 2nd to 5th MCP joints were obtained in posterior-anterior projection and evaluated for bone erosions. The MRI and radiography readers were blinded to each other's assessments. Grade 1 MRI erosions (1% to 10% of bone volume eroded) were detected by radiography in 20%, 4%, 7% and 13% in the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th MCP joint, respectively. Corresponding results for grade 2 erosions (11% to 20% of bone volume eroded) were 42%, 10%, 60% and 24%, and for grade 3 erosions (21% to 30% of bone volume eroded) 75%, 67%, 75% and 100%. All grade 4 (and above) erosions were detected on radiographs. Conventional radiography required a MRI-estimated bone erosion volume of 20% to 30% to allow a certain detection, indicating that MRI is a better method for detection and grading of minor erosive changes in RA MCP joints.

Optimised, low cost, low field dedicated extremity MRI is highly specific and sensitive for synovitis and bone erosions in rheumatoid arthritis wrist and finger joints: comparison with conventional high field MRI and radiography

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a low field dedicated extremity MRI unit for detection of bone erosions, synovitis, and bone marrow oedema in wrist and metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints, with a high field MRI unit as the standard reference.

METHODS

In 37 patients with RA and 28 healthy controls MRI of the wrist and 2nd-5th MCP joints was performed on a low field MRI unit (0.2 T Esaote Artoscan) and a high field MRI unit (1.0 T Siemens Impact) on 2 subsequent days. MRI was performed and evaluated according to OMERACT recommendations. Additionally, conventional x ray, clinical, and biochemical examinations were performed. In an initial low field MRI "sequence selection phase", based on a subset of 10 patients and 10 controls, sequences for comparison with high field MRI were selected.

RESULTS

With high field, spin echo MRI considered as the reference method, the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of low field 3D gradient echo MRI for erosions were 94%, 93%, 94%, while the corresponding values for x ray examination were 33%, 98%, and 83%. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of low field MRI for synovitis were 90%, 96%, and 94%, and for bone marrow oedema 39%, 99%, and 95%. Intraclass correlation coefficients between low field and high field scores were 0.936 (p<0.005) for bone erosions and 0.923 (p<0.05) for synovitis.

CONCLUSION

Low field MRI provides high accuracy for detection and grading of erosions and synovitis, with high field MRI as the standard reference. For bone marrow oedema, specificity is high, but sensitivity only moderate. Low cost, patient compliant, low field dedicated extremity MRI provides similar information on bone erosions and synovitis as expensive high field MRI units.

The smallest detectable difference and sensitivity to change of magnetic resonance imaging and radiographic scoring of structural joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis finger, wrist, and toe joints: A comparison of the omeract rheumatoid arthritis magnetic resonance imaging score applied to different joint combinations and the sharp/van der heijde radiographic score

OBJECTIVE

To compare 2 magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) approaches and radiographic evaluation according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method with respect to sensitivity to change in joint destruction in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

METHODS

Thirty-five RA patients and 9 healthy controls underwent MRI and radiography on 2 occasions 1 year apart. Conventional radiographs of the hands, wrists, and forefeet were evaluated according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method. MRIs of unilateral wrist and second through fifth metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints ("few-joints approach") and of bilateral wrist and MCP joints plus unilateral metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joints ("many-joints approach") were assessed for bone erosions according to the scoring system recommended by the OMERACT (Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials) group. The smallest detectable differences (SDDs) of the radiography and MRI scores were computed based on reevaluation of one-third of the study population.

RESULTS

Progressive joint destruction, i.e., an increase in score after the followup period, was observed more frequently with the MRI "many-joints approach" (30 subjects) and "few-joints approach" (25 subjects) than with the Sharp/van der Heijde radiographic method (9 subjects) (P < 0.001 by chi-square analysis). No significant difference between the MRI approaches was observed. When only subjects with a change greater than the SDD were considered, progression was revealed with the MRI "many-joints approach," the MRI "few-joints approach," and radiography in 15, 13, and 5 RA subjects, respectively. With both MRI approaches, significantly more subjects with progression were detected than were detected by radiography (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

MRI, regardless of whether it covers unilateral wrist and MCP joints or bilateral wrist and MCP joints plus unilateral MTP joints, is significantly superior to radiography of the hands, wrists, and forefeet with respect to detection of progressive joint destruction in RA.