| Literature DB >> 30062435 |
Xiaolong Yu1, Zun Li2, Min Ren3, Jing Xi2, Jiabiao Wu3, Yaxiang Ji2.
Abstract
The utility of superb microvascular imaging (SMI) for evaluating hand joint lesions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in clinical remission is unreported. This study aimed to compare SMI and power Doppler imaging (PDI) for the evaluation of hand joint lesions in these patients. Twenty-six patients with RA in clinical remission were enrolled. A total of 572 joints (52 wrist, 260 proximal interphalangeal, and 260 metacarpophalangeal joints) were detected by SMI and PDI. A semi-quantitative scale of 0-3 was used to compare the detection of synovial blood flow signal by SMI and PDI. Inter-observer agreement for the assessment of SMI and PDI scores was measured with kappa values. In the ten healthy volunteers, SMI and PDI signals were both scored 0. In the 26 RA patients, the remission rate via PDI was 65.4% but was only 42.3% via SMI. SMI also detected microvessel flow signal in seven patients diagnosed with clinical remission via PDI. Moreover, a total of 106 blood flow signals (18.5%) were detected by SMI, while 50 blood flow signals (8.7%) were detected by PDI. Compared with PDI, SMI increased 18.0% of power flow signals from Grade 0-1 and increased 13.7% of power flow signals from Grade 1-2. One joint classified as Grade 1 by PDI was classified as Grade 0 by SMI. Inter-observer agreement for PDI and SMI semi-quantitative scoring was moderate (kappa = 0.463). SMI seems more sensitive than PDI for detecting hand joint lesions in RA in clinical remission PDI, and could aid the achievement of true remission in RA patients.Entities:
Keywords: Power Doppler imaging; Remission; Rheumatoid arthritis; Superb microvascular imaging
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30062435 PMCID: PMC6132695 DOI: 10.1007/s00296-018-4112-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rheumatol Int ISSN: 0172-8172 Impact factor: 2.631
Demographic characteristics of RA and HV in this study
| Clinical data | RA | HV |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 26 | 10 | |
| Age, yearsa | 40.5 ± 9.2 (33–68) | 41.2 ± 10.3 (32–71) | 0.833 |
| Gender (F/M) | 24/2 | 9/1 | 0.347 |
| Disease duration (years)b | 17.2 (3–30) | None | |
| Morning stiff time (min)b | 3 (0–10) | None | |
| RF (IU/ml)b | 10.6 (4.7–13.2) | 7.5 (2.0–9.6) | 0.113 |
| CRP (mg/L)b | 1.85 (0.32–20.5) | 2.12 (0.49–8.9) | 0.224 |
| ESR (mm/h)b | 10.0 (3–29) | 8.9 (4–15) | 0.092 |
| SDAIb | 1.3 (0.1–3.0) | None | |
| Treatment with biological agents (%) | 17 (65.4) | None |
RA rheumatoid arthritis, HV healthy volunteers, CRP C-reactive protein, ESR erythrocyte sedimentation rate, SDAI simplified disease activity index
aMean ± SD (range)
bMedian (range)
Comparison of the remission rate in PDI and SMI
| SMI | PDI | Total |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| + |
| ||||
| + | 8 | 7 | 15 | 5.488 | 0.019 |
|
| 1 | 10 | 11 | ||
| Total | 9 | 17 | 26 | ||
SMI superb microvascular imaging, PDI power Doppler imaging
+ positive result, − negative result
Comparison of the presence of synovial SMI and PDI signals
| cSMI | PD | Total |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| + |
| ||||
| + | 49 | 57 | 106 | 229.1 | < 0.001 |
|
| 1 | 465 | 466 | ||
| Total | 50 | 522 | 572 | ||
SMI superb microvascular imaging, PDI power Doppler imaging
+ positive result, − negative result
Comparison of the grades by SMI and PDI
| PDI | SMI | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| 0 | 402 | 90 | 7 | 0 | 499 |
| 1 | 1 | 62 | 10 | 0 | 73 |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 403 | 152 | 17 | 0 | 572 |
Difference between SMI and PDI is statistically significant (P < 0.01)
SMI superb microvascular imaging, PDI power Doppler imaging
Fig. 1a synovial hyperplasia was clearly seen in the second metacarpophalangeal joint of right hand in a patient within clinical remission after RA treatment (*synovial hyperplasia; MC metacarpal, Pro-pha proximal phalanx). b No blood signal was seen in PDI. c Linear blood flow signal could be seen in the hyperplastic synovial membrane in SMI