Semi-quantitative analysis of rheumatoid finger joint synovitis using power Doppler ultrasonography: when to perform follow-up study after treatment consisting mainly of antitumor necrosis factor alpha agent

PurposeTo determine the timing for follow-up study of power Doppler ultrasonography (PDUS) by evaluating the response of finger joint synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to treatment including infliximab, an antitumor necrosis factor alpha agent.Methods and materialsBilateral second/third metacarpo-phalangeal (MCP) joints and second proximal inter-phalangeal (PIP) joints (total of six joints) in 21 patients (18 women and three men; median age 53 years) with chronic active RA were assessed by PDUS before and after 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 14 weeks, 30 weeks, 38 weeks, 46 weeks, and 54 weeks of infliximab infusion. Pulse Doppler settings were standardized for each patient and optimized for the detection of synovial blood flow by adjustment of color gain, pulse repetition, and flow optimization. Power Doppler signal was graded for each joint [joint grade for power Doppler (JGPD) signals], and the sum of the grades of six joints was defined as the PDUS index [joint index for power Doppler signals (JIPD)] at each visit. PDUS and clinical parameters [28-joint disease activity score (DAS28), health assessment questionnaire, and C-reactive protein (CRP) level] were independently assessed and compared with baseline values. The American College of Rheumatology (ACR) core set responders and non-responders at week 54 were compared for clinical parameters and PDUS index at each visit.ResultsFourteen patients completed the planned treatment for 1 year, while six patients dropped out for various reasons and one died suddenly. PDUS was performed a total of 146 times on 467 joints. DAS28 was assessed 127 times. Both DAS28 and JIPD had decreased at the follow-up. Comparative analysis between DAS28 and PDUS was available 125 times. The transverse correlation between the PDUS index and DAS28 was not significant throughout the follow-up period. When responders and non-responders were discriminated at week 54, a logistic regression model for the binary endpoint of responder vs non-responder, with PDUS index as explanatory variable at time point 0, and follow-up revealed statistical significance from week 38 and on.ConclusionPDUS reflected infliximab’s effect on pannus vascular signals; this effect was observed as early as 2 weeks after treatment had begun. Also, the responders to treatment at 54 weeks tended to have fewer JIPD than non-responders in the follow-up period. PDUS may be performed at week 38 or later to foresee the response to the treatment at week 54.

[1]  D. Bergin,et al.  Power Doppler ultrasound assessment of rheumatoid hand synovitis. , 2001, The Journal of rheumatology.

[2]  F. Breedveld,et al.  Validity and reliability of the twenty-eight-joint count for the assessment of rheumatoid arthritis activity. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[3]  Hiroki Shirato,et al.  Power Doppler ultrasound of rheumatoid synovitis: quantification of vascular signal and analysis of interobserver variability , 2009, Skeletal Radiology.

[4]  M. Walther,et al.  Correlation of power Doppler sonography with vascularity of the synovial tissue of the knee joint in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. , 2001, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[5]  N. Miyasaka,et al.  Official Japanese guidelines for the use of infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis , 2005 .

[6]  H. Bliddal,et al.  Estimation of inflammation by Doppler ultrasound: quantitative changes after intra-articular treatment in rheumatoid arthritis , 2003, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[7]  F. Salaffi,et al.  Grey scale and power Doppler sonographic changes induced by intra-articular steroid injection treatment , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[8]  M. Østergaard,et al.  Finger joint synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis: quantitative assessment by magnetic resonance imaging. , 1999, Rheumatology.

[9]  M. Malaise,et al.  Rheumatoid hand joint synovitis: gray-scale and power Doppler US quantifications following anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha treatment: pilot study. , 2003, Radiology.

[10]  E. Mcnally,et al.  Power Doppler ultrasound of rheumatoid synovitis: quantification of therapeutic response. , 2003, The British journal of radiology.

[11]  D. Cosgrove,et al.  Comparison of ultrasonographic assessment of synovitis and joint vascularity with radiographic evaluation in a randomized, placebo-controlled study of infliximab therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis. , 2004, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[12]  A. Iagnocco,et al.  Interobserver reliability in musculoskeletal ultrasonography: results from a “Teach the Teachers” rheumatologist course , 2005, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[13]  J J Anderson,et al.  American College of Rheumatology. Preliminary definition of improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[14]  A. Macgregor,et al.  Classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis. , 1995, Bailliere's clinical rheumatology.

[15]  C. Kneitz,et al.  High resolution ultrasound detects a decrease in pannus vascularisation of small finger joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving treatment with soluble tumour necrosis factor α receptor (etanercept) , 2002 .

[16]  J Uson,et al.  Assessment of inflammatory activity in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparative study of clinical evaluation with grey scale and power Doppler ultrasonography , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[17]  W. Martel Radiologic manifestations of rheumatoid arthritis with particular reference to the hand, wrist and foot. , 1968, The Medical clinics of North America.

[18]  R. Adler,et al.  Power Doppler sonography of synovitis: assessment of therapeutic response--preliminary observations. , 1996, Radiology.

[19]  J. Rubin,et al.  Detection of soft-tissue hyperemia: value of power Doppler sonography. , 1994, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  A. Piccoli,et al.  Rheumatoid and psoriatic knee synovitis: clinical, grey scale, and power Doppler ultrasound assessment of the response to etanercept , 2004, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[21]  P. Boendermaker Teach the teachers , 2007 .

[22]  J J Anderson,et al.  The American college of rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials , 1993 .

[23]  R. Simms,et al.  Guidelines for the Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis , 2002 .

[24]  G. Wells,et al.  Should improvement in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials be defined as fifty percent or seventy percent improvement in core set measures, rather than twenty percent? , 1998, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[25]  M. A. van 't Hof,et al.  Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. , 1993, The Journal of rheumatology.

[26]  P. Emery,et al.  Delay in imaging versus clinical response: a rationale for prolonged treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor medication in early rheumatoid arthritis. , 2007, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[27]  C. Kwoh,et al.  Guidelines for the management of rheumatoid arthritis. American College of Rheumatology Ad Hoc Committee on Clinical Guidelines. , 1996, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[28]  H. Holman,et al.  Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. , 1980, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[29]  C. Kneitz,et al.  High resolution ultrasound detects a decrease in pannus vascularisation of small finger joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving treatment with soluble tumour necrosis factor alpha receptor (etanercept). , 2002, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[30]  van der Heijde Dm,et al.  Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. , 1993 .

[31]  Esperanza Naredo,et al.  Longitudinal power Doppler ultrasonographic assessment of joint inflammatory activity in early rheumatoid arthritis: predictive value in disease activity and radiologic progression. , 2007, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[32]  E. Naredo,et al.  Validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness of a twelve-joint simplified power doppler ultrasonographic assessment of joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. , 2008, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[33]  K. Wolf,et al.  [Quantitatively evaluated dynamic magnetic resonance tomography in chronic polyarthritis of the knee joint. A therapeutic follow-up after intra-articular cortisone application]. , 1992, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[34]  H. Bliddal,et al.  Effects of treatment with etanercept (Enbrel, TNRF:Fc) on rheumatoid arthritis evaluated by Doppler ultrasonography , 2003, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[35]  N. Miyasaka,et al.  Proposed [corrected] Japanese guidelines for the use of infliximab for rheumatoid arthritis. , 2005, Modern rheumatology.

[36]  W. Grassi,et al.  [Juvenile chronic arthritis and imaging: comparison of different techniques] , 2011, Reumatismo.

[37]  W. Grassi,et al.  Is power Doppler sonography the new frontier in therapy monitoring? , 2003, Clinical and experimental rheumatology.

[38]  B. Fornage,et al.  Soft-tissue changes in the hand in rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation with US. , 1989, Radiology.

[39]  C. Krestan,et al.  Power Doppler sonography and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging in evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis synovitis. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.