York Kiat Tan1,2,3, HuiHua Li4, John Carson Allen5, Julian Thumboo6,7,8. 1. Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore, Singapore. tan.york.kiat@singhealth.com.sg. 2. Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Rd, Singapore, Singapore. tan.york.kiat@singhealth.com.sg. 3. Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 10 Medical Dr, Singapore, Singapore. tan.york.kiat@singhealth.com.sg. 4. Health Services Research, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore, Singapore. 5. Centre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Rd, Singapore, Singapore. 6. Department of Rheumatology and Immunology, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore, Singapore. 7. Duke-NUS Medical School, 8 College Rd, Singapore, Singapore. 8. Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 10 Medical Dr, Singapore, Singapore.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine if a novel individualized-ultrasound (IUS) method can detect more joints with erosion(s) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients versus existing methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The IUS method selects up to 7 or 14 ultrasonographically most inflamed joints whereas existing methods pre-fix 7 or 14 joints for ultrasonography. Using ultrasonography, the mean total inflammatory score (TIS), mean number of affected joints and mean number of joints with erosion(s) were compared between novel and existing methods among 30 RA patients using the paired Student t test. RESULTS: Using 7-joint approach, comparing IUS versus existing methods, the mean (95% CI) for TIS, number of affected joints, and number of joints with erosion(s) were: 2.18 (1.88, 2.48) versus 0.95 (0.78, 1.11); 7 (7, 7) versus 4.43 (3.93, 4.94); 3.20 (2.44, 3.96) versus 1.33 (0.94, 1.72), respectively. Using 14-joint approach, comparing IUS versus existing methods, the mean (95% CI) for TIS, number of affected joints, and number of joints with erosion(s) were: 3.17 (2.75, 3.6) versus 1.71 (1.38, 2.04); 13.5 (13.05, 13.95) versus 8.13 (7.24, 9.02); 4.23 (3.13, 5.34) versus 2.77 (2.03, 3.50), respectively. p values all < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: A novel IUS method detects substantially more joints with erosion(s) in RA patients versus existing methods.
PURPOSE: To determine if a novel individualized-ultrasound (IUS) method can detect more joints with erosion(s) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients versus existing methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The IUS method selects up to 7 or 14 ultrasonographically most inflamed joints whereas existing methods pre-fix 7 or 14 joints for ultrasonography. Using ultrasonography, the mean total inflammatory score (TIS), mean number of affected joints and mean number of joints with erosion(s) were compared between novel and existing methods among 30 RApatients using the paired Student t test. RESULTS: Using 7-joint approach, comparing IUS versus existing methods, the mean (95% CI) for TIS, number of affected joints, and number of joints with erosion(s) were: 2.18 (1.88, 2.48) versus 0.95 (0.78, 1.11); 7 (7, 7) versus 4.43 (3.93, 4.94); 3.20 (2.44, 3.96) versus 1.33 (0.94, 1.72), respectively. Using 14-joint approach, comparing IUS versus existing methods, the mean (95% CI) for TIS, number of affected joints, and number of joints with erosion(s) were: 3.17 (2.75, 3.6) versus 1.71 (1.38, 2.04); 13.5 (13.05, 13.95) versus 8.13 (7.24, 9.02); 4.23 (3.13, 5.34) versus 2.77 (2.03, 3.50), respectively. p values all < 0.0001. CONCLUSIONS: A novel IUS method detects substantially more joints with erosion(s) in RApatients versus existing methods.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bone erosions; Joints; Rheumatoid arthritis; Synovitis; Ultrasonography
Authors: Richard J Wakefield; Peter V Balint; Marcin Szkudlarek; Emilio Filippucci; Marina Backhaus; Maria-Antonietta D'Agostino; Esperanza Naredo Sanchez; Annamaria Iagnocco; Wolfgang A Schmidt; George A W Bruyn; George Bruyn; David Kane; Philip J O'Connor; Bernhard Manger; Fred Joshua; Juhani Koski; Walter Grassi; Marissa N D Lassere; Nanno Swen; Franz Kainberger; Andrea Klauser; Mikkel Ostergaard; Andrew K Brown; Klaus P Machold; Philip G Conaghan Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Marcin Szkudlarek; Lene Terslev; Richard J Wakefield; Marina Backhaus; Peter V Balint; George A W Bruyn; Emilio Filippucci; Frederique Gandjbakhch; Annamaria Iagnocco; Peter Mandl; Ingrid Möller; Esperanza Naredo; Wolfgang A Schmidt; Maria Antonietta d'Agostino Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 4.666
Authors: Alexandra N Colebatch; Christopher John Edwards; Mikkel Østergaard; Désirée van der Heijde; Peter V Balint; Maria-Antonietta D'Agostino; Kristina Forslind; Walter Grassi; Espen A Haavardsholm; Glenn Haugeberg; Anne-Grethe Jurik; Robert B M Landewé; Esperanza Naredo; Philip J O'Connor; Ben Ostendorf; Kristina Potocki; Wolfgang A Schmidt; Josef S Smolen; Sekib Sokolovic; Iain Watt; Philip G Conaghan Journal: Ann Rheum Dis Date: 2013-03-21 Impact factor: 19.103
Authors: Philip G Conaghan; Philip O'Connor; Dennis McGonagle; Paul Astin; Richard J Wakefield; Wayne W Gibbon; Mark Quinn; Zunaid Karim; Michael J Green; Susanna Proudman; John Isaacs; Paul Emery Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2003-01
Authors: Uffe Møller Døhn; Bo J Ejbjerg; Michel Court-Payen; Maria Hasselquist; Eva Narvestad; Marcin Szkudlarek; Jakob M Møller; Henrik S Thomsen; Mikkel Østergaard Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2006 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: York Kiat Tan; John C Allen; Weng Kit Lye; Philip G Conaghan; Maria Antonietta D'Agostino; Li-Ching Chew; Julian Thumboo Journal: J Rheumatol Date: 2015-12-01 Impact factor: 4.666