BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to detect inflammation in the spine of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). OBJECTIVES: To detect differentially the presence and extent of inflammation in the three spinal segments of patients with AS by MRI. METHODS: In 38 patients with active AS, acute spinal lesions were assessed by T(1) weighted, gadolinium enhanced, spin echo MRI (T(1)/Gd-DTPA) and short tau inversion recovery (STIR) sequences. MRI was quantified by the validated scoring system ASspiMRI-a. Acute spinal lesions were detected in the whole spine and in each spinal segment. One vertebral unit (VU) was defined as the region between two virtual lines drawn through the middle of each vertebral body. RESULTS: A greater number of inflammatory spinal lesions were found by the STIR sequence than by Gd-DTPA: inflammation was present in 30.6% of the VUs as assessed by STIR, compared with 26.8% of the same VUs assessed by T(1)/Gd-DTPA. Inflammation was found more commonly in the thoracic spine (TS) than in the cervical (CS) or the lumbar spine (LS) with both techniques. When STIR was used, spinal inflammation in the CS, the TS, and LS was detected in 10/38 (26%), 28/38 (74%), and 9/38 (24%) patients, respectively. The VU T7/8 was found to be the VU most often affected by both techniques (27.8% by T(1)/Gd-DTPA and 34.5% by STIR). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal inflammation is a common manifestation in patients with AS, and appears more frequently in the TS. The scoring system ASspiMRI-a can be used for evaluation of acute spinal changes in AS.
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to detect inflammation in the spine of patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS). OBJECTIVES: To detect differentially the presence and extent of inflammation in the three spinal segments of patients with AS by MRI. METHODS: In 38 patients with active AS, acute spinal lesions were assessed by T(1) weighted, gadolinium enhanced, spin echo MRI (T(1)/Gd-DTPA) and short tau inversion recovery (STIR) sequences. MRI was quantified by the validated scoring system ASspiMRI-a. Acute spinal lesions were detected in the whole spine and in each spinal segment. One vertebral unit (VU) was defined as the region between two virtual lines drawn through the middle of each vertebral body. RESULTS: A greater number of inflammatory spinal lesions were found by the STIR sequence than by Gd-DTPA: inflammation was present in 30.6% of the VUs as assessed by STIR, compared with 26.8% of the same VUs assessed by T(1)/Gd-DTPA. Inflammation was found more commonly in the thoracic spine (TS) than in the cervical (CS) or the lumbar spine (LS) with both techniques. When STIR was used, spinal inflammation in the CS, the TS, and LS was detected in 10/38 (26%), 28/38 (74%), and 9/38 (24%) patients, respectively. The VU T7/8 was found to be the VU most often affected by both techniques (27.8% by T(1)/Gd-DTPA and 34.5% by STIR). CONCLUSIONS:Spinal inflammation is a common manifestation in patients with AS, and appears more frequently in the TS. The scoring system ASspiMRI-a can be used for evaluation of acute spinal changes in AS.
Authors: J Braun; X Baraliakos; W Golder; K-G Hermann; J Listing; J Brandt; M Rudwaleit; S Zuehlsdorf; M Bollow; J Sieper; D van der Heijde Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2004-04-05 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: J Braun; X Baraliakos; W Golder; J Brandt; M Rudwaleit; J Listing; M Bollow; J Sieper; D Van Der Heijde Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2003-04
Authors: J Braun; J Brandt; J Listing; A Zink; R Alten; W Golder; E Gromnica-Ihle; H Kellner; A Krause; M Schneider; H Sörensen; H Zeidler; W Thriene; J Sieper Journal: Lancet Date: 2002-04-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: J Braun; J Brandt; J Listing; A Zink; R Alten; G Burmester; E Gromnica-Ihle; H Kellner; M Schneider; H Sörensen; H Zeidler; J Sieper Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2004-09-23 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Anneke Spoorenberg; Kurt de Vlam; Sjef van der Linden; Maxime Dougados; Herman Mielants; Hille van de Tempel; Désirée van der Heijde Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Klaus Strobel; Dorothee R Fischer; Giorgio Tamborrini; Diego Kyburz; Katrin D M Stumpe; Rolf G X Hesselmann; A Johayem; Gustav K von Schulthess; Beat A Michel; Adrian Ciurea Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2010-05-27 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: J Zochling; D van der Heijde; R Burgos-Vargas; E Collantes; J C Davis; B Dijkmans; M Dougados; P Géher; R D Inman; M A Khan; T K Kvien; M Leirisalo-Repo; I Olivieri; K Pavelka; J Sieper; G Stucki; R D Sturrock; S van der Linden; D Wendling; H Böhm; B J van Royen; J Braun Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2005-08-26 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Tue Secher Jensen; Jaro Karppinen; Joan S Sorensen; Jaakko Niinimäki; Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2008-09-12 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Marius C Wick; Cecilia Grundtman; Rüdiger J Weiss; Johann Gruber; Martin Kastlunger; Werner Jaschke; Andrea S Klauser Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2012-03-16 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Mirjam K de Vries; Anne S van Drumpt; Barend J van Royen; J Christiaan van Denderen; Radu A Manoliu; Irene E van der Horst-Bruinsma Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2010-05-23 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Yu M Tan; Mikkel Østergaard; Anthony Doyle; Nicola Dalbeth; Maria Lobo; Quentin Reeves; Elizabeth Robinson; William J Taylor; Peter B Jones; Karen Pui; Jamie Lee; Fiona M McQueen Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2009-01-06 Impact factor: 5.156