Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology
Volume 22, Issue 6 , Pages 1109-1126 , December 2008

Imaging as a follow-up tool in clinical trials and clinical practice

  • Henning Bliddal, MD, DMSc (Professor)

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. The Parker Institute, Frederiksberg Hospital, DK-2000 Copenhagen F, Denmark. Tel.: +45 3816 4151; Fax: +45 3816 4159.

References 

  1. Wolfe F, Smythe HA, Yunus MB, et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia. Report of the Multicenter Criteria Committee. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1990;33:160–172
  2. Hochberg MC, Chang RW, Dwosh I, et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1991 revised criteria for the classification of global functional status in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1992;35:498–502
  3. Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1986;29:1039–1049
  4. van der Linden S, Valkenburg HA, Cats A. Evaluation of diagnostic criteria for ankylosing spondylitis. A proposal for modification of the New York criteria. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1984;27:361–368
  5. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, et al. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. The Journal of Rheumatology. 1988;15:1833–1840
  6. Braun J, Davis J, Dougados M, et al. ASAS working group. First update of the international ASAS consensus statement for the use of anti-TNF agents in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2006;65:316–320
  7. Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, et al. American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1995;38:727–735
  8. Leeb BF, Andel I, Sautner J, et al. The DAS28 in rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia patients. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004;43:1504–1507
  9. Terslev L, von der Recke P, Torp-Pedersen S, et al. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of Doppler ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology. 2008;35:49–53
  10. Vignon E, Piperno M, Le Graverand MP, et al. Measurement of radiographic joint space width in the tibiofemoral compartment of the osteoarthritic knee: comparison of standing anteroposterior and Lyon Schuss views. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2003;48:378–384
  11. Bagge E, Bjelle A, Eden S, Svanborg A. Osteoarthritis in the elderly: clinical and radiological findings in 79 and 85 year olds. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 1991;50:535–539
  12. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 1957;16:494–502
  13. Wolfe F, Lane NE. The longterm outcome of osteoarthritis: rates and predictors of joint space narrowing in symptomatic patients with knee osteoarthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology. 2002;29:139–146
  14. Gunther KP, Sun Y. Reliability of radiographic assessment in hip and knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1999;7:239–246
  15. Schiphof D, Boers M, Bierma-Zeinstra SM. Differences in descriptions of Kellgren and Lawrence grades of knee osteoarthritis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2008 Jul;67(7):1034–1036
  16. Altman RD, Gold GE. Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis, revised. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007;15(Suppl. A):A1–A56
  17. Qvistgaard E, Torp-Pedersen S, Christensen R, Bliddal H. Reproducibility and inter-reader agreement of a scoring system for ultrasound evaluation of hip osteoarthritis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2006;65:1613–1619
  18. D'Agostino MA, Conaghan P, Le Bars M, et al. EULAR report on the use of ultrasonography in painful knee osteoarthritis part 1: prevalence of inflammation in osteoarthritis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2005;64:1703–1709
  19. Kristoffersen H, Torp-Pedersen S, Terslev L, et al. Indications of inflammation visualized by ultrasound in osteoarthritis of the knee. Acta Radiologica. 2006;47:281–286
  20. Conaghan P, D'Agostino MA, Ravaud P, et al. EULAR report on the use of ultrasonography in painful knee osteoarthritis part 2: exploring decision rules for clinical utility. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2005;64:1710–1714
  21. Eckstein F, Cicuttini F, Raynauld JP, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of articular cartilage in knee osteoarthritis (OA): morphological assessment. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14(Suppl. A):A46–A75
  22. vies-Tuck ML, Wluka AE, Wang Y, et al. The natural history of cartilage defects in people with knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2008;16:337–342
  23. Wang Y, Ding C, Wluka AE, et al. Factors affecting progression of knee cartilage defects in normal subjects over 2 years. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:79–84
  24. Sarzi-Puttini P, Cimmino MA, Scarpa R, et al. Osteoarthritis: an overview of the disease and its treatment strategies. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2005;35(Suppl. 1):1–10
  25. Kornaat PR, Ceulemans RY, Kroon HM, et al. MRI assessment of knee osteoarthritis: Knee Osteoarthritis Scoring System (KOSS) – inter-observer and intra-observer reproducibility of a compartment-based scoring system. Skeletal Radiology. 2005;34:95–102
  26. Hunter DJ, Lo GH, Gale D, et al. The reliability of a new scoring system for knee osteoarthritis MRI and the validity of bone marrow lesion assessment: BLOKS (Boston Leeds Osteoarthritis Knee Score). Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2008;67:206–211
  27. Eckstein F, Ateshian G, Burgkart R, et al. Proposal for a nomenclature for magnetic resonance imaging based measures of articular cartilage in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2006;14:974–983
  28. Eckstein F, Burstein D, Link TM. Quantitative MRI of cartilage and bone: degenerative changes in osteoarthritis. NMR in Biomedicine. 2006;19:822–854
  29. Felfoul O, Mathieu JB, Beaudoin G, Martel S. In vivo MR-tracking based on magnetic signature selective excitation. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2008;27:28–35
  30. Eggers H, Knopp T, Potts D. Field inhomogeneity correction based on gridding reconstruction for magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging. 2007;26:374–384
  31. Recht MP, Goodwin DW, Winalski CS, White LM. MRI of articular cartilage: revisiting current status and future directions. AJR American Journal of Roentgenology. 2005;185:899–914
  32. Bashir A, Gray ML, Boutin RD, Burstein D. Glycosaminoglycan in articular cartilage: in vivo assessment with delayed Gd(DTPA)(2-)-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 1997;205:551–558
  33. Boesen M, Jensen KE, Qvistgaard E, et al. Delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (dGEMRIC) of hip joint cartilage: better cartilage delineation after intra-articular than intravenous gadolinium injection. Acta Radiologica. 2006;47:391–396
  34. Van Der HD, Dankert T, Nieman F, et al. Reliability and sensitivity to change of a simplification of the Sharp/van der Heijde radiological assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 1999;38:941–947
  35. Ostergaard M, Hansen M, Stoltenberg M, et al. New radiographic bone erosions in the wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis are detectable with magnetic resonance imaging a median of two years earlier. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2003;48:2128–2131
  36. Sharp JT, Young DY, Bluhm GB, et al. How many joints in the hands and wrists should be included in a score of radiologic abnormalities used to assess rheumatoid arthritis?. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1985;28:1326–1335
  37. Bruynesteyn K, van der Heijde D, Boers M, et al. The Sharp/van der Heijde method out-performed the Larsen/Scott method on the individual patient level in assessing radiographs in early rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2004;57:502–512
  38. Swinkels HL, Laan RF, van't Hof MA, et al. Modified Sharp method: factors influencing reproducibility and variability. Seminars in Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2001;31:176–190
  39. Langs G, Peloschek P, Bischof H, Kainberger F. Model-based erosion spotting and visualization in rheumatoid arthritis. Academic Radiology. 2007;14:1179–1188
  40. Peloschek P, Langs G, Weber M, et al. An automatic model-based system for joint space measurements on hand radiographs: initial experience. Radiology. 2007;245:855–862
  41. Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG, et al. The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2000;43:2762–2770
  42. Bajaj S, Lopez-Ben R, Oster R, Alarcon GS. Ultrasound detects rapid progression of erosive disease in early rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective longitudinal study. Skeletal Radiology. 2007;36:123–128
  43. Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Sandrock D, et al. Prospective two year follow up study comparing novel and conventional imaging procedures in patients with arthritic finger joints. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2002;61:895–904
  44. Grassi W, Filippucci E, Farina A, et al. Ultrasonography in the evaluation of bone erosions. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2001;60:98–103
  45. Terslev L, Torp-Pedersen S, Savnik A, et al. Doppler ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging of synovial inflammation of the hand in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparative study. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2003;48:2434–2441
  46. Scheel AK, Hermann KG, Kahler E, et al. A novel ultrasonographic synovitis scoring system suitable for analyzing finger joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2005;52:681–686
  47. Ellegaard K, Torp-Pedersen S, Holm CC, et al. Ultrasound in finger joints: findings in normal subjects and pitfalls in the diagnosis of synovial disease. Ultraschall in der Medizin. 2007;28:401–408
  48. Strunk J, Strube K, Rumbaur C, et al. Interobserver agreement in two- and three-dimensional power Doppler sonographic assessment of synovial vascularity during anti-inflammatory treatment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ultraschall in der Medizin. 2007;28:409–415
  49. Torp-Pedersen ST, Terslev L. Settings and artefacts relevant in colour/power Doppler ultrasound in rheumatology. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2008;67:143–149
  50. Qvistgaard E, Rogind H, Torp-Pedersen S, et al. Quantitative ultrasonography in rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation of inflammation by Doppler technique. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2001;60:690–693
  51. Stone M, Bergin D, Whelan B, et al. Power Doppler ultrasound assessment of rheumatoid hand synovitis. The Journal of Rheumatology. 2001;28:1979–1982
  52. Szkudlarek M, Court- Payen, Jacobsen S, et al. Interobserver agreement in ultrasonography of the finger and toe joints in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 2003;48:955–962
  53. De ZT, Mlekusch SP, Feuchtner GM, et al. Value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in rheumatoid arthritis. European Journal of Radiology. 2007;64:222–230
  54. Albrecht K, Muller-Ladner U, Strunk J. Quantification of the synovial perfusion in rheumatoid arthritis using Doppler ultrasonography. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology. 2007;25:630–638
  55. Rees JD, Pilcher J, Heron C, Kiely PD. A comparison of clinical vs ultrasound determined synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis utilizing gray-scale, power Doppler and the intravenous microbubble contrast agent ‘Sono-Vue’. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2007;46:454–459
  56. Joshua F, Edmonds J, Lassere M. Power Doppler ultrasound in musculoskeletal disease: a systematic review. Seminars in Arthritis Rheum. 2006;36:99–108
  57. Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Gerber T, et al. Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2001;60:641–649
  58. Dohn UM, Ejbjerg BJ, Hasselquist M, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis bone erosion volumes on CT and MRI: reliability and correlations with erosion scores on CT, MRI and radiography. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2007;66:1388–1392
  59. Conaghan PG, McQueen FM, Peterfy CG, et al. The evidence for magnetic resonance imaging as an outcome measure in proof-of-concept rheumatoid arthritis studies. The Journal of Rheumatology. 2005;32:2465–2469
  60. Bird P, Conaghan P, Ejbjerg B, et al. The development of the EULAR-OMERACT rheumatoid arthritis MRI reference image atlas. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2005;64(Suppl. 1):i8–i10
  61. Ejbjerg B, McQueen F, Lassere M, et al. The EULAR-OMERACT rheumatoid arthritis MRI reference image atlas: the wrist joint. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2005;64(Suppl. 1):i23–i47
  62. Conaghan P, Bird P, Ejbjerg B, et al. The EULAR-OMERACT rheumatoid arthritis MRI reference image atlas: the metacarpophalangeal joints. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2005;64(Suppl. 1):i11–i21
  63. Hodgson RJ, O'Connor P, Moots R. MRI of rheumatoid arthritis image quantitation for the assessment of disease activity, progression and response to therapy. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2008;47:13–21
  64. McQueen F, Ostergaard M, Peterfy C, et al. Pitfalls in scoring MR images of rheumatoid arthritis wrist and metacarpophalangeal joints. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2005;64(Suppl. 1):i48–i55
  65. Palosaari K, Vuotila J, Takalo R, et al. Bone oedema predicts erosive progression on wrist MRI in early RA – a 2-yr observational MRI and NC scintigraphy study. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:1542–1548
  66. Ostergaard M, Hansen M, Stoltenberg M, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging-determined synovial membrane volume as a marker of disease activity and a predictor of progressive joint destruction in the wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis and Rheumatism. 1999;42:918–929
  67. Savnik A, Bliddal H, Nyengaard JR, Thomsen HS. MRI of the arthritic finger joints: synovial membrane volume determination, a manual vs a stereologic method. European Radiology. 2002;12:94–98
  68. Bird P, Ejbjerg B, Lassere M, et al. A multireader reliability study comparing conventional high-field magnetic resonance imaging with extremity low-field MRI in rheumatoid arthritis. The Journal of Rheumatology. 2007;34:854–856
  69. Kubassova O, Boesen M, Boyle RD, et al. Fast and robust analysis of dynamic contrast enhanced MRI datasets. Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention. 2007;10:261–269
  70. Kubassova OA, Boyle RD, Radjenovic A. Quantitative analysis of dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI datasets of the metacarpophalangeal joints. Academic Radiology. 2007;14:1189–1200
  71. Periaswamy S, Farid H. Medical image registration with partial data. Medical Image Analysis. 2006;10:452–464
  72. Boini S, Guillemin F. Radiographic scoring methods as outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis: properties and advantages. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. 2001;60:817–827
  73. Sugimoto H, Takeda A, Hyodoh K. Early-stage rheumatoid arthritis: prospective study of the effectiveness of MR imaging for diagnosis. Radiology. 2000;216:569–575
  74. Kimelman T, Vu A, Storey P, et al. Three-dimensional T1 mapping for dGEMRIC at 3.0 T using the Look Locker method. Investigative Radiology. 2006;41:198–203
  75. Ejbjerg BJ, Vestergaard A, Jacobsen S, et al. 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. Arthritis Research & Therapy. 2006;8:R59

PII: S1521-6942(08)00113-7

doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2008.09.017

Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology
Volume 22, Issue 6 , Pages 1109-1126 , December 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution