Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2007
[Imaging in the early diagnosis of changes in the hand of patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis. Is ultrasound a true alternative for low-field magnetic resonance scanning, 3-phase bone scintigraphy and conventional x-rays?].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Höpfner S, Krolak C, Treitl M, Becker-Gaab C, Kellner H, Tiling R
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Besides the use of conventional x-rays in the diagnostic work-up of initial changes in patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 3-phase bone scintigraphy (3P-Sz) is as well established as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value of ultrasound of the hands with proven methods such as conventional x-rays, low-field MRI and 3P-Sz.
METHODS: A total of 30 patients were studied using a 1 day protocol with ultrasound, 3P-Sz, MRI and x-ray of the hands. Images were visually assessed by two blinded nuclear medicine physicians and radiologists and classified as RA typical and non-RA typical changes. All methods were compared to the summarized findings interpreted by a rheumatologist after 2 years.
RESULTS: Of the 30 patients, 19 presented with clinical symptoms of initial changes due to rheumatoid arthritis. Ultrasound revealed 14/19 patients with the correct diagnosis. Conventional x-rays indicated 11/19 patients, while 3P-Sz (100%) and low-field MRI (95%) showed high sensitivity. It was possible to differentiate between inflammation and inconspicuous findings.
CONCLUSIONS: An experienced examiner can use ultrasound effectively for the initial diagnosis of RA. Based on its low cost, ultrasound is a valid alternative to conventional x-rays.
METHODS: A total of 30 patients were studied using a 1 day protocol with ultrasound, 3P-Sz, MRI and x-ray of the hands. Images were visually assessed by two blinded nuclear medicine physicians and radiologists and classified as RA typical and non-RA typical changes. All methods were compared to the summarized findings interpreted by a rheumatologist after 2 years.
RESULTS: Of the 30 patients, 19 presented with clinical symptoms of initial changes due to rheumatoid arthritis. Ultrasound revealed 14/19 patients with the correct diagnosis. Conventional x-rays indicated 11/19 patients, while 3P-Sz (100%) and low-field MRI (95%) showed high sensitivity. It was possible to differentiate between inflammation and inconspicuous findings.
CONCLUSIONS: An experienced examiner can use ultrasound effectively for the initial diagnosis of RA. Based on its low cost, ultrasound is a valid alternative to conventional x-rays.