Assessment of rheumatoid arthritis using a modified scoring method on digitized and original radiographs.

OBJECTIVE The results of different readers' interpretations of laser-digitized hand radiographs versus original radiographs were compared to determine the reproducibility of scoring of erosions (ERO), joint space narrowing (JSN), and their combination (ERO + JSN) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS Standardized radiographs of both hands were obtained at 2 visits (baseline and 6-24-month followup) from 30 patients with established RA. Conventional and laser-digitized (pixel sizes 50 microm and 100 microm) radiographs were scored independently by 3 experienced and trained radiologists who were blinded to the order of the visits. Scoring of radiographs was based on the validated Genant grading system. RESULTS Intertechnique (intrareader) correlation coefficients at baseline were 0.90-0.93 for scoring of ERO, 0.90-0.94 for scoring of JSN, and 0.92-0.95 for ERO + JSN; for scoring of progression between baseline and followup, these values were 0.93-0.97, 0.87-0.95, and 0.93-0.97, respectively. Interreader (intratechnique) correlation coefficients at baseline were 0.82-0.96 for scoring of ERO, 0.69-0.91 for scoring of JSN, and 0.80-0.95 for ERO + JSN; for scoring of progression between baseline and followup, these values were 0.90-0.97, 0.80-0.92, and 0.90-0.95, respectively. Intrareader (intratechnique) correlation coefficients were 0.90-0.97 for scoring of the original radiographs and 0.90-0.98 for scoring of the digitized images at 100 microm. CONCLUSION Using this modified grading system, scoring of RA progression directly from paired, high-resolution monitors of laser-digitized images of the hands provided highly reproducible results, comparable to those obtained from the original radiographs. Thus, this method may have useful applications in clinical trials involving RA.

[1]  M. A. van 't Hof,et al.  Biannual radiographic assessments of hands and feet in a three-year prospective followup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. , 1992, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[2]  T. Pincus,et al.  Quantitative analysis of hand radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis: time course of radiographic changes, relation to joint examination measures, and comparison of different scoring methods. , 1995, The Journal of rheumatology.

[3]  G. Panayi,et al.  HLA DR antigens and disease expression in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1984, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[4]  T. Pincus,et al.  Observer variation in quantitative assessment of rheumatoid arthritis. Part I. Scoring erosions and joint space narrowing. , 1985, Investigative radiology.

[5]  J. Thoen,et al.  Hand radiography of 200 patients with rheumatoid arthritis repeated after an interval of one year. , 1987, Scandinavian journal of rheumatology.

[6]  D. Scott,et al.  Long term progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1986, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[7]  T. Möttönen,et al.  Prediction of erosiveness and rate of development of new erosions in early rheumatoid arthritis. , 1988, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[8]  M D Murphey,et al.  Digital skeletal radiography: spatial resolution requirements for detection of subperiosteal resorption. , 1989, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[9]  M. Murphey,et al.  Comparison of digital and conventional musculoskeletal radiography: observer performance study. , 1990, Radiology.

[10]  A. Silman,et al.  HLA and rheumatoid arthritis: a combined analysis of 440 British patients. , 1986, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[11]  H. Genant,et al.  The efficacy of fine-detail radiography in the evaluation of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. , 1974, Radiology.

[12]  Á. Jónsson,et al.  Film-Screen Vs. Digital Radiography in Rheumatoid Arthritis of the Hand , 1994 .

[13]  M. Corbett,et al.  Association of HLA-DR4/Dw4 and DR2/Dw2 with radiologic changes in a prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Preferential relationship with HLA-Dw rather than HLA-DR specificities. , 1984, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[14]  A. Larsen.  The value of individual joints for radiologic assessment of rheumatoid arthritis. , 1976, Scandinavian journal of rheumatology.

[15]  H. Genant,et al.  Assessment of radiologic progression in rheumatoid arthritis. A randomized, controlled trial. , 1986, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[16]  D W Piraino,et al.  Diagnostic efficacy of digitized images vs plain films: a study of the joints of the fingers. , 1992, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[17]  P. Bacon,et al.  Progression of radiological changes in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1984, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[18]  P. Geusens,et al.  Long-term effect of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in active rheumatoid arthritis. A 12-month, double-blind, controlled study. , 1994, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[19]  Sharp Jt.  Radiologic assessment as an outcome measure in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1989 .

[20]  D. Heijde,et al.  Radiographic progression on radiographs of hands and feet during the first 3 years of rheumatoid arthritis measured according to Sharp's method (van der Heijde modification) , 1995 .

[21]  M. Weinblatt,et al.  The effects of drug therapy on radiographic progression of rheumatoid arthritis. Results of a 36-week randomized trial comparing methotrexate and auranofin. , 1993, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[22]  H. Genant.  Methods of assessing radiographic change in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1983, The American journal of medicine.

[23]  W. Buchanan,et al.  Observer differences in detecting erosions in radiographs of rheumatoid arthritis. A comparison of posteroanterior, Nørgaard and Brewerton views. , 1983, Journal of Rheumatology.

[24]  J. Sharp,et al.  Clinical responses during gold therapy for rheumatoid arthritis. Changes in synovitis, radiologically detectable erosive lesions, serum proteins, and serologic abnormalities. , 1982, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[25]  D W Piraino,et al.  Comparison of digital and conventional musculoskeletal radiography: an observer performance study. , 1990, Radiology.

[26]  T. Pincus,et al.  Evidence of significant radiographic damage in rheumatoid arthritis within the first 2 years of disease. , 1989, The Journal of rheumatology.

[27]  H K Genant,et al.  Reproducibility of multiple-observer scoring of radiologic abnormalities in the hands and wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. , 1985, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[28]  U. Neitzel,et al.  Optimized Image Processing for Routine Digital Radiography , 1991 .

[29]  H K Genant,et al.  How many joints in the hands and wrists should be included in a score of radiologic abnormalities used to assess rheumatoid arthritis? , 1985, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[30]  B. McConkey,et al.  Rheumatoid arthritis: relation of serum C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rates to radiographic changes. , 1977, British medical journal.

[31]  J. Moreland,et al.  Methods of scoring the progression of radiologic changes in rheumatoid arthritis. Correlation of radiologic, clinical and laboratory abnormalities. , 1971, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[32]  R A Dickson,et al.  The distribution of radiological joint damage in the rheumatoid hand. , 1979, Rheumatology and rehabilitation.

[33]  E. Braunstein,et al.  Digital skeletal radiography. , 1992, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[34]  A. Young,et al.  The clinical assessment of joint inflammatory activity in rheumatoid arthritis related to radiological progression. , 1980, Rheumatology and rehabilitation.

[35]  H K Genant,et al.  Optical versus radiographic magnification for fine-detail skeletal radiography. , 1975, Investigative radiology.