RSS-Feed abonnieren
DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-858194
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
Vergleich von kontrastmittelunterstützter Low-Mechanical-Index(Low-MI)-Sonographie und nativer B-Mode-Sonographie bei der Differenzierung von Synovitis und Gelenkerguss bei Patienten mit rheumatoider Arthritis
Comparison of Contrast-enhanced Low Mechanical Index (Low MI) Sonography and Unenhanced B-Mode Sonography for the Differentiation Between Synovitis and Joint Effusion in Patients with Rheumatoid ArthritisPublikationsverlauf
Publikationsdatum:
19. Mai 2005 (online)
Zusammenfassung
Ziel: Zu prüfen, ob mit der kontrastmittelunterstützten Low-Mechanical-Index(Low-MI)-Sonographie besser zwischen Synovitis und Gelenkerguss unterschieden werden kann als mit der nativen B-Mode-Sonographie. Material und Methoden: In die retrospektive Studie wurden 22 Patienten mit gesicherter rheumatoider Arthritis eingeschlossen, bei denen 25 klinisch symptomatische Gelenke der oberen und unteren Extremitäten mit der nativen B-Mode-Sonographie und der kontrastmittelunterstützten Low-MI-Sonographie untersucht worden waren. Für die Low-MI-Sonographie wurden 5 ml Sonovue® (Bracco Altana Pharma GmbH, Konstanz) als Bolus intravenös injiziert, gefolgt von 10 ml NaCl-Lösung 0,9 %. Bei 3 Gelenken war zusätzlich eine Magnetresonanztomographie (MRT) durchgeführt worden. Mit der nativen Sonographie diagnostizierten wir eine Synovitis bei einer echogenen, einen Gelenkerguss bei einer echofreien intraartikulären Raumforderung. Mit der kontrastmittelunterstützten Sonographie diagnostizierten wir eine Synovitis bei pathologischer, einen Gelenkerguss bei fehlender Kontrastmittelanreicherung der intraartikulären Raumforderung. Ergebnisse: Bei 13 Gelenken konnten Synovitis und Gelenkerguss sowohl mit der nativen als auch mit der kontrastmittelunterstützten Sonographie unterschieden werden. Bei 12 Gelenken gelang diese Trennung nur mit der kontrastmittelunterstützten Sonographie. Bei 3 Patienten mit sonographisch diagnostizierter Synovitis wurde der Befund MR-tomographisch bestätigt. Schlussfolgerungen: Die kontrastmittelunterstützte Low-MI-Sonographie ist zur Unterscheidung von Synovitis und Gelenkerguss besser geeignet als die native B-Mode-Sonographie.
Abstract
Purpose: To test whether contrast-enhanced low mechanical index (low MI) sonography is superior to non enhanced B-Mode sonography in differentiating synovitis and joint effusion. Material and Methods: In a retrospective study, 22 patients with proven rheumatoid arthritis underwent B-Mode sonography and low-MI sonography of 25 symptomatic joints of the upper and lower limbs. For low-MI sonography, 5 ml Sonovue® (Bracco Altana Pharma GmbH, Konstanz) were injected as an intravenous bolus followed by 10 ml of 0.9 % saline solution. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was obtained additionally in 3 joints. With non-enhanced sonography, we diagnosed a synovitis in case of an echogenic and a joint effusion in case of an anechoic mass. With contrast-enhanced sonography, we diagnosed a synovitis in case of enhancement and a joint effusion in the absence of enhancement of the intraarticular mass. Results: In 13 joints, synovitis and joint effusion were differentiated by both non-enhanced and enhanced sonography. In 12 joints, this differentiation was only possible with contrast-enhanced sonography. In 3 patients diagnosed by sonography as having a synovitis, this diagnosis was proven by MRI. Conclusion: Contrast-enhanced low-MI sonography is superior to non-enhanced B-Mode sonography in differentiating synovitis and joint effusion.
Key words
Ultrasound - contrast medium - rheumatoid arthritis - synovitis
Literatur
- 1 FitzGerald O, Bresnihan B. Synovial membrane cellularity and vascularity. Ann Rheum Dis. 1995; 54 511-515
- 2 Firestein G. Starving the synovium: angiogenesis and inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. J Clin Invest. 1999; 103 3-4
- 3 Brown A, Quinn M, Karim Z. et al . Neither the ACR remission criteria nor the Disease Activity Score accurately define true remission in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2002; 46 (Suppl) 243
- 4 Ostergaard M, Hansen M, Stoltenberg M. et al . Magnetic resonance imaging - determined synovial membrane volume as a marker of disease activity and a predictor of progressive joint destruction in the wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1999; 42 918-929
- 5 Hau M, Kneitz C, Tony H P. et al . High resolution ultrasound detects a decrease in pannus vascularisation of small finger joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving treatment with soluble tumor necrosis factor a receptor (etanercept). Ann Rheum Dis. 2002; 61 55-58
- 6 Terslev L, Torp-Pedersen S, Qvistgaard E. et al . Effects of treatment with etanercept (Enbrel, TNRF:Fc) on rheumatoid arthritis evaluated by Doppler ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003; 62 178-181
- 7 Gaffney K, Cookson J, Blades S. et al . Quantitative assessment of the rheumatoid synovial microvascular bed by gadolinium-DTPA enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998; 57 152-157
- 8 Ostergaard M, Stoltenberg M, Lovgreen-Nielsen P. et al . Quantification of synovitis by MRI: correlation between dynamic and static gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and microscopic and macroscopic signs of synovial inflammation. Magn Reson Imaging. 1998; 7 743-754
- 9 Lund P, Heikal A, Maricic M. et al . UItrasonographic imaging of the hand and wrist in rheumatoid arthritis. Skeletal Radiol. 1995; 24 591-596
- 10 Ostergaard M, Court-Payen M, Gideon P. et al . Ultrasonography in arthritis of the knee. A comparison with MR imaging. Acta Radiol. 1995; 36 19-26
- 11 Alasaarela E, Suramo I, Tervonen O. et al . Evaluation of humeral head erosions in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of ultrasonography, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography and plain radiography. British J Rheuma. 1998; 37 1152-1156
- 12 Backhaus M, Kamradt T, Sandrock D. et al . Arthritis of the finger joints. A comprehensive approach comparing conventional radiography, scintigraphy, ultrasound, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 1999; 42 1232-1245
- 13 Wamser G, Bohndorf K, Vollert K. et al . Power Doppler sonography with and without echo-enhancing contrast agent and contrast-enhanced MRI for the evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis: differentiation between synovitis and joint effusion. Skeletal Radiol. 2003; 32 351-359
- 14 Conaghan P G, O’Connor P, McGonagle D. 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. Arthritis Rheum. 2003; 48 64-71
- 15 Karim Z, Wakefield R, Quinn M. et al . Validation and reproducibility of ultrasonography in the detection of synovitis in the knee: a comparison with arthroscopy and clinical examination. Arthritis Rheum. 2004; 50 387-394
- 16 Cardinal E, Lafortune M, Burns P. Power Doppler US in synovitis: reality or artifact?. Radiology. 1996; 200 868-869
- 17 Hoving J, Buchbinder R, Hall S. et al . A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging, sonography, and radiography of the hand in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2004; 31 663-675
- 18 Magarelli N, Guglielmi G, Di Matteo L. et al . Diagnostic utility of an echo-contrast agent in patients with synovitis using power Doppler ultrasound: a preliminary study with comparison to contrast-enhanced MRI. Eur Radiol. 2001; 11 1039-1046
- 19 Weidekamm C, Köller M, Weber M. et al . Diagnostic value of high-resolution B-Mode and Doppler sonography for imaging of hand and finger joints in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2003; 48 325-333
- 20 Gibbon W, Wakefield R. Ultrasound in inflammatory disease. Radiol Clin North Am. 1999; 37 633-651
- 21 Conaghan P, Edmonds J, Emery P. et al . Magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatoid arthritis: summary of OMERACT activities, current status, and plans. J Rheumatol. 2001; 28 1158-1162
- 22 Qvistgaard E, Rogind H, Torp-Pedersen S. et al . Quantitative ultrasonography in rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation of inflammation by Doppler technique. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001; 60 690-693
- 23 Carotti M, Salaffi F, Manganelli P. et al . Power Doppler sonography in the assessment of synovial tissue of the knee joint in rheumatoid arthritis: a preliminary experience. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002; 61 877-882
- 24 Walther M, Harms H, Krenn V. et al . Correlation of power Doppler sonography with vascularity of the synovial tissue of the knee joint in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2001; 44 331-338
- 25 Klauser A, Frauscher F, Schirmer M. et al . The value of contrast-enhanced color doppler ultrasound in the detection of vascularization of finger joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2002; 46 647-653
- 26 Stone M, Bergin D, Whelan B. et al . Power Doppler ultrasound assessment of rheumatoid hand synovitis. J Rheumatol. 2001; 28 1979-1982
- 27 Szkudlarek M, Court-Payen M, Strandberg C. et al . Contrast-enhanced power Doppler ultrasonography of the metacarpophalangeal joint in rheumatoid arthritis. Eur Radiol. 2003; 13 163-168
- 28 Fiocco U, Ferro F, Cozzi L. et al . Contrast medium in power Doppler ultrasound for assessment of synovial vascularity: comparison with arthroscopy. J Rheumatol. 2003; 30 2170-2176
- 29 Harvey C J, Blomley M KJ, Eckersley R J. et al . Developments in ultrasound contrast media. Eur Radiol. 2001; 11 675-689
- 30 Szkudlarek M, Court-Payen M, Strandberg C. et al . Power Doppler ultrasonography for assessment of synovitis in the metacarpophalangeal joints of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2001; 44 2018-2023
PD Dr. Klaus Kirchhof
Klinik für Diagnostische Radiologie und Neuroradiologie, Klinikum Augsburg
Stenglinstraße 2
86156 Augsburg
Telefon: ++ 49/8 21/4 00-24 53
Fax: ++ 49/8 21/4 00-33 12
eMail: klaus.kirchhof@radiologie.zk.augsburg-med.de