PURPOSE
To compare joint inflammation assessment using subjective grading of power Doppler ultrasonography (PDUS) and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) versus computer-aided objective CEUS quantification.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
37 joints of 28 patients with arthritis of different etiologies underwent B-mode ultrasonography, PDUS, and CEUS using a second-generation contrast agent. Synovial thickness, extent of vascularized pannus and intensity of vascularization were included in a 4-point PDUS and CEUS grading system. Subjective CEUS and PDUS scores were compared to computer-aided objective CEUS quantification using Qontrast® software for the calculation of the signal intensity (SI) and the ratio of SI for contrast enhancement.
RESULTS
The interobserver agreement for subjective scoring was good to excellent (κ = 0.8 - 1.0; P < 0.0001). Computer-aided objective CEUS quantification correlated statistically significantly with subjective CEUS (P < 0.001) and PDUS grading (P < 0.05). The Qontrast® SI ratio correlated with subjective CEUS (P < 0.02) and PDUS grading (P < 0.03). Clinical activity did not correlate with vascularity or synovial thickening (P = N. S.) and no correlation between synovial thickening and vascularity extent could be found, neither using PDUS nor CEUS (P = N. S.).
CONCLUSION
Both subjective CEUS grading and objective CEUS quantification are valuable for assessing joint vascularity in arthritis and computer-aided CEUS quantification may be a suitable objective tool for therapy follow-up in arthritis.