Sovira Tan1, Jianhua Yao1, John A Flynn1, Lawrence Yao1, Michael M Ward2. 1. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda and Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, Radiology and Imaging Sciences, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda and Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD, USA wardm1@mail.nih.gov.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Syndesmophytes in AS typically grow slowly, but it is not known whether growth is uniform among syndesmophytes in the same intervertebral disc space (IDS) or among different IDSs in the same patient or if growth is heterogeneous. We examined the dynamics of syndesmophyte growth over 24 months using CT, with the main aim of determining if syndesmophytes in the same IDS or the same patient grow at similar rates. METHODS: We performed lumbar spine CT scans on 33 patients and measured syndesmophytes in four IDSs using a validated computer algorithm. Scans were done at baseline and 12 and 24 months. We compared absolute and percentage changes in volume from baseline to 12 months and to 24 months among syndesmophytes in the same IDS and among four IDSs of each patient. We also examined whether growth among all IDSs differed between study years. RESULTS: Among 60 IDSs with at least two syndesmophytes at baseline (range 2-6), there was substantial heterogeneity in both absolute (P < 0.0001) and percentage (P = 0.0002) volume increases among syndesmophytes in the same IDS. Several IDSs had both syndesmophytes with no growth and syndesmophytes that increased by >100 mm(3). Similarly there was significant heterogeneity in syndesmophyte growth among IDSs of individual patients. Increases in total syndesmophyte volume for each patient also tended to differ between study years (P = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Syndesmophytes in AS do not all grow continuously. Rates of growth over 24 months commonly differ between syndesmophytes in the same IDS and between different IDSs in the same patient, suggesting that local factors regulate syndesmophyte growth. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology 2014. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.
OBJECTIVE: Syndesmophytes in AS typically grow slowly, but it is not known whether growth is uniform among syndesmophytes in the same intervertebral disc space (IDS) or among different IDSs in the same patient or if growth is heterogeneous. We examined the dynamics of syndesmophyte growth over 24 months using CT, with the main aim of determining if syndesmophytes in the same IDS or the same patient grow at similar rates. METHODS: We performed lumbar spine CT scans on 33 patients and measured syndesmophytes in four IDSs using a validated computer algorithm. Scans were done at baseline and 12 and 24 months. We compared absolute and percentage changes in volume from baseline to 12 months and to 24 months among syndesmophytes in the same IDS and among four IDSs of each patient. We also examined whether growth among all IDSs differed between study years. RESULTS: Among 60 IDSs with at least two syndesmophytes at baseline (range 2-6), there was substantial heterogeneity in both absolute (P < 0.0001) and percentage (P = 0.0002) volume increases among syndesmophytes in the same IDS. Several IDSs had both syndesmophytes with no growth and syndesmophytes that increased by >100 mm(3). Similarly there was significant heterogeneity in syndesmophyte growth among IDSs of individual patients. Increases in total syndesmophyte volume for each patient also tended to differ between study years (P = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Syndesmophytes in AS do not all grow continuously. Rates of growth over 24 months commonly differ between syndesmophytes in the same IDS and between different IDSs in the same patient, suggesting that local factors regulate syndesmophyte growth. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology 2014. This work is written by US Government employees and is in the public domain in the US.
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Mischa Woisetschläger; Nils Dahlström; Sarabjeet Singh; Maria Lindblom; Garry Choy; Petter Quick; Bernhard Schmidt; Martin Sedlmair; Michael A Blake; Anders Persson Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2012 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Astrid van Tubergen; Sofia Ramiro; Désirée van der Heijde; Maxime Dougados; Herman Mielants; Robert Landewé Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2011-10-11 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Denis Poddubnyy; Hildrun Haibel; Joachim Listing; Elisabeth Märker-Hermann; Henning Zeidler; Jürgen Braun; Joachim Sieper; Martin Rudwaleit Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2012-05
Authors: Annelies Boonen; Bert vander Cruyssen; Kurt de Vlam; Serge Steinfeld; Clio Ribbens; Jan Lenaerts; Filip Van den Bosch; Herman Mielants; Lode Dewulf; Nathan Vastesaeger Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2009-05-15 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Jonathan P Sherlock; Barbara Joyce-Shaikh; Scott P Turner; Cheng-Chi Chao; Manjiri Sathe; Jeff Grein; Daniel M Gorman; Edward P Bowman; Terrill K McClanahan; Jennifer H Yearley; Gérard Eberl; Christopher D Buckley; Robert A Kastelein; Robert H Pierce; Drake M Laface; Daniel J Cua Journal: Nat Med Date: 2012-07-01 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Hsu-Wen Tseng; Tibor T Glant; Matthew A Brown; Tony J Kenna; Gethin P Thomas; Allison R Pettit Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2017-05-30 Impact factor: 2.362