A comparison of region-based and pixel-based CEUS kinetics parameters in the assessment of arthritis

Inflammatory rheumatic diseases are leading causes of disability and constitute a frequent medical disorder, leading to inability to work, high comorbidity and increased mortality. The gold-standard for diagnosing and differentiating arthritis is based on patient conditions and radiographic findings, as joint erosions or decalcification. However, early signs of arthritis are joint effusion, hypervascularization and synovial hypertrophy. In particular, vascularization has been shown to correlate with arthritis’ destructive behavior, more than clinical assessment. Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) examination of the small joints is emerging as a sensitive tool for assessing vascularization and disease activity. The evaluation of perfusion pattern rely on subjective semi-quantitative scales, that are able to capture the macroscopic degree of vascularization, but are unable to detect the subtler differences in kinetics perfusion parameters that might lead to a deeper understanding of disease progression and a better management of patients. Quantitative assessment is mostly performed by means of the Qontrast software package, that requires the user to define a region of interest, whose mean intensity curve is fitted with an exponential function. We show that using a more physiologically motivated perfusion curve, and by estimating the kinetics parameters separately pixel per pixel, the quantitative information gathered is able to differentiate more effectively different perfusion patterns. In particular, we will show that a pixel-based analysis is able to provide significant markers differentiating rheumatoid arthritis from simil-rheumatoid psoriatic arthritis, that have non-significant differences in clinical evaluation (DAS28), serological markers, or region-based parameters.

[1]  Vassilis Sboros,et al.  Indicator dilution models for the quantification of microvascular blood flow with bolus administration of ultrasound contrast agents , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[2]  O Epis,et al.  Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. XVII. Role of colour Doppler and power Doppler. , 2008, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[3]  W Jaschke,et al.  Contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for the detection of joint vascularity in arthritis--subjective grading versus computer-aided objective quantification. , 2011, Ultraschall in der Medizin.

[4]  J. Zhang,et al.  P2F-9 A Novel Model for Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Video and Its Applications , 2006, 2006 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium.

[5]  A. Koch,et al.  Angiogenesis as a target in rheumatoid arthritis , 2003, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[6]  P. Taylor,et al.  Serum vascular markers and vascular imaging in assessment of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity and response to therapy. , 2005, Rheumatology.

[7]  Enrico Grisan,et al.  Toward Early Detection and Differentiation of Arthritic diseases: Quantification of Haemodynamics Changes in Small Joints , 2009 .

[8]  Michael J. Green,et al.  Elucidation of the relationship between synovitis and bone damage: a randomized magnetic resonance imaging study of individual joints in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. , 2003, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[9]  Oliver Distler,et al.  Linking angiogenesis to bone destruction in arthritis. , 2005, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[10]  S. Hirohata,et al.  Angioneogenesis as a possible elusive triggering factor in rheumatoid arthritis , 1999, The Lancet.

[11]  C. Helmick,et al.  Projections of US prevalence of arthritis and associated activity limitations. , 2006, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[12]  Klaus Bohndorf,et al.  Contrast enhanced gray-scale sonography in assessment of joint vascularity in rheumatoid arthritis: results from the IACUS study group , 2005, European Radiology.

[13]  F Forsberg,et al.  Assessment of angiogenesis: implications for ultrasound imaging. , 2004, Ultrasonics.

[14]  David Kane,et al.  “All that glistens is not gold”—Separating artefacts from true Doppler signals in rheumatological ultrasound , 2008, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[15]  Bernd Raffeiner,et al.  Evaluation of finger joint synovial vascularity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using contrast‐enhanced ultrasound with water immersion and a stabilized probe , 2012, Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU.

[16]  Claudia Schueller-Weidekamm,et al.  Quantification of synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis: do we really need quantitative measurement of contrast-enhanced ultrasound? , 2009, European journal of radiology.

[17]  G R Burmester,et al.  Knee osteoarthritis. Efficacy of a new method of contrast-enhanced musculoskeletal ultrasonography in detection of synovitis in patients with knee osteoarthritis in comparison with magnetic resonance imaging , 2007, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[18]  F. McQueen,et al.  Imaging in early rheumatoid arthritis. , 2013, Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology.

[19]  B. Rosen,et al.  High resolution measurement of cerebral blood flow using intravascular tracer bolus passages. Part I: Mathematical approach and statistical analysis , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.