Ultrasonografía en artritis reumatoidea
Palabras clave:
ultrasonografía, artritis reumatoidea
Resumen
La ultrasonografía (US) es ampliamente utilizada en la evaluación y el seguimiento de las enfermedades reumáticas, siendo una herramienta válida, reproducible y capaz de demostrar sensibilidad al cambio. La evaluación de los pacientes con Artritis Reumatoidea (AR) combina la escala de grises (EG) con la técnica Doppler de poder (DP). Las imágenes en EG sirven para describir las estructuras anatómicas, y la técnica DP permite visualizar el flujo sanguíneo de pequeños vasos y detectar el aumento anormal de la vascularización debido al compromiso inflamatorio. Su indicación en la práctica habitual incluye la evaluación de estructuras intra y periarticulares, permitiendo visualizar con gran resolución los tejidos blandos y los cambios de la cortical ósea en todas las etapas de la enfermedad. La US es particularmente útil para describir los procesos inflamatorios de la AR (sinovitis, tenosinovitis y bursitis) y los cambios estructurales (erosiones óseas, daño del cartílago y lesiones tendinosas). Por otro lado, la US ha demostrado propiedades diagnósticas similares a la resonancia magnética (RM) en la detección de sinovitis y tenosinovitis, y permite visualizar erosiones óseas en etapas más precoces que la radiología convencional.Citas
I. Toprak H, Kılıç E, Serter A, Kocakoç E, Özgöçmen S. Doppler US in rheumatic diseases with special emphasis on rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2014;20(1):72-77.
II. Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG, et al. The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43(12):2762-2770.
III. Ribbens C, André B, Marcelis S, et al. Rheumatoid hand joint synovitis: gray-scale and power Doppler US quantifications following anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha treatment: pilot study. Radiology. 2003;229(2):562-569.
IV. Rizzo C. Ultrasound in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Med Ultrason. 2013;15(3):199-208.
V. Iagnocco A, Ceccarelli F, Perricone C, Valesini G. The role of ultrasound in rheumatology. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2011;32(2):66-73.
VI. Wakefield RJ, Balint P V, Szkudlarek M, et al. Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Including Definitions for Ultrasonographic Pathology. J Rheumatol.
2005;32(12):2485-2487.
VII. Kang T, Horton L, Emery P, Wakefield RJ. Value of ultrasound in rheumatologic diseases. J Korean Med Sci. 2013;28(4):497-507.
VIII. Colebatch AN, Edwards CJ, Østergaard M, et al. EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging of the joints in the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(6):804-814.
IX. Wakefield RJ, O’Connor PJ, Conaghan PG, et al. Finger tendon disease in untreated early rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(7):1158-1164.
X. Szkudlarek M, Court-Payen M, Strandberg C, Klarlund M, Klausen T, Ostergaard M. 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(9):2018-2023.
XI. Wakefield RJ, D’Agostino M-A, Iagnocco A, et al. The OMERACT Ultrasound Group: status of current activities and research directions. J Rheumatol. 2007;34(4):848-851.
XII. D’Agostino M-A, Conaghan PG, Naredo E, et al. The OMERACT ultrasound task force – Advances and priorities. J Rheumatol. 2009;36(8):1829-1832.
XIII. Alcalde M, D’Agostino MA, Bruyn GAW, et al. A systematic literature review of US definitions, scoring systems and validity according to the OMERACT filter for tendon lesion in RA and other inflammatory joint diseases. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51(7):1246-1260.
XIV. Scheel AK, Hermann K-GA, Kahler E, et al. A novel ultrasonographic synovitis scoring system suitable for analyzing finger joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(3):733-743.
XV. Disler DG, Raymond E, May DA, Wayne JS, McCauley TR. Articular cartilage defects: in vitro evaluation of accuracy and interobserver reliability for detection and grading with US. Radiology. 2000;215(3):846-851.
XVI. Möller B, Bonel H, Rotzetter M, Villiger PM, Ziswiler H-R. Measuring finger joint cartilage by ultrasound as a promising alternative to conventional radiograph imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(4):435-441.
XVII. Jain A, Nanchahal J, Troeberg L, Green P, Brennan F. Production of cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor, matrix metalloproteinases, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 1 by tenosynovium demonstrates its potential for tendon destruction in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;44(8):1754-1760.
XVIII. Grassi W, Filippucci E, Farina A, Cervini C. Sonographic imaging of tendons. Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43(5):969-976.
XIX. Micu MC, Serra S, Fodor D, Crespo M, Naredo E. Inter-observer reliability of ultrasound detection of tendon abnormalities at the wrist and ankle in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(6):1120-1124.
XX. Backhaus M. Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60(7):641-649.
XXI. Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Sandrock D, et al. Prospective two year follow up study comparing novel and conventional imaging procedures in patients with arthritic finger joints. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61(10):895-904.
XXII. 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(6):1232-1245.
XXIII. Grassi W. Clinical evaluation versus ultrasonography: who is the winner? J Rheumatol. 2003;30(5):908-909.
XXIV. Wakefield RJ, Green MJ, Marzo-Ortega H, et al. Should oligoarthritis be reclassified? Ultrasound reveals a high prevalence of subclinical disease.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(4):382-385.
XXV. Karim Z, Wakefield RJ, 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(2):387-394.
XXVI. Conaghan PG, 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(1):64-71.
XXVII. Smolen JS, Aletaha D, Bijlsma JWJ, et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis.
2010;69(4):631-637.
XXVIII. Van der Heijde DM, van ’t Hof M, van Riel PL, van de Putte LB. Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. J Rheumatol. 1993;20(3):579-581.
XXIX. Prevoo ML, van ’t Hof MA, Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL. Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38(1):44-48.
XXX. Prevoo ML, van Gestel AM, van T Hof MA, van Rijswijk MH, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL. Remission in a prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. American Rheumatism Association preliminary remission criteria in relation to the disease activity score. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35(11):1101-1105.
XXXI. Leeb BF, Andel I, Sautner J, et al. Disease activity measurement of rheumatoid arthritis: Comparison of the simplified disease activity index (SDAI) and the disease activity score including 28 joints (DAS28) in daily routine. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;53(1):56-60.
XXXII. Molenaar ETH, Voskuyl AE, Dinant HJ, Bezemer PD, Boers M, Dijkmans BAC. Progression of radiologic damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(1):36-42.
XXXIII. Brown AK, Quinn MA, Karim Z, et al. Presence of significant synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis patients with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-induced clinical remission: evidence from an imaging study may explain structural progression. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(12):3761-3773.
XXXIV. Brown AK, Conaghan PG, Karim Z, et al. An explanation for the apparent dissociation between clinical remission and continued structural
deterioration in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(10):2958-2967.
XXXV. Naredo E, Möller I, Cruz A, Carmona L, Garrido J. Power Doppler ultrasonographic monitoring of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy
in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(8):2248-2256.
XXXVI. Naredo E, Rodríguez M, Campos C, et al. Validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness of a twelvejoint simplified power doppler ultrasonographic
assessment of joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(4):515-522.
XXXVII. Backhaus M, Ohrndorf S, Kellner H, et al. Evaluation of a novel 7-joint ultrasound score in daily rheumatologic practice: a pilot project. Arthritis
Rheum. 2009;61(9):1194-1201.
XXXVIII. Perricone C, Ceccarelli F, Modesti M, et al. The 6-joint ultrasonographic assessment: a valid, sensitive-to-change and feasible method for evaluating joint inflammation in RA. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51(5):866-873.
XXXIX. Backhaus TM, Ohrndorf S, Kellner H, et al. The US7 score is sensitive to change in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis over 12 months of therapy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(7):1163-1169.
XL. Iagnocco A, Naredo E, Wakefield R, et al. Responsiveness in rheumatoid arthritis. a report from the OMERACT 11 ultrasound workshop. J Rheumatol. 2014;41(2):379-382.
XLI. Cazenave T, Wainmann CA, Ruta S, Rosa J, Santiago L, Sandobal C, Benegas M, Citera G, Rosemffet MG. Acuerdo inter e intraobservador de la ultrasonografía utilizando un score articular reducido (REUMA score) en pacientes con artritis reumatoidea. [abstract]. Revista Argentina de Reumatología: Año 2012. Vol 3. n°5.
XLII. Cazenave T, Waimann CA, Citera G, Rosemffet MG. Development of a 6 Joint Simplified Ultrasonographic Score to Assess Disease Activity in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64 Suppl 10 :106.
XLIII. Cazenave T, Waimann CA, Zamora N, Citera G, Rosemffet MG. A rapid 4- join ultrasonographic score to daily monitoring disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: validity and sensitivity to change. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2014;66 Suppl 10:128.
XLIV. Dougados M, Jousse-Joulin S, Mistretta F, d’Agostino MA,Backhaus M, Bentin J, et al. Evaluation of several ultrasonography scoring systems of synovitis and comparison to clinical examination: Results from a prospective multicenter study of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2000;69:828-33.
XLV. Iagnocco A, Filippucci E, Perella C, et al. Clinical and ultrasonographic monitoring of response to adalimumab treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2008;35(1):35-40.
XLVI. Taylor PC, Steuer A, Gruber J, et al. Ultrasonographic and radiographic results from a two-year controlled trial of immediate or one-year-delayed addition of infliximab to ongoing methotrexate therapy in patients with erosive early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(1):47-53.
XLVII. Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Salaffi F, Cerioni A, Valesini G, Grassi W. Power Doppler sonography monitoring of synovial perfusion at the wrist joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(11):1433-1437.
XLVIII. Kawashiri S, Kawakami A, Iwamoto N, et al. The power Doppler ultrasonography score from 24 synovial sites or 6 simplified synovial sites, including the metacarpophalangeal joints, reflects the clinical disease activity and level of serum biomarkers in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(5):962-965.
XLIX. Terslev L, Torp-Pedersen S, Qvistgaard E, Danneskiold-Samsoe B, Bliddal H. Estimation of inflammation by Doppler ultrasound: quantitative changes after intra-articular treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(11):1049-1053.
L. Mandl P, Naredo E, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG, D’Agostino MA. A systematic literature review analysis of ultrasound joint count and scoring systems to assess synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis according to the OMERACT filter. J Rheumatol. 2011;38(9):2055-2062.
LI. D’Agostino MA, Wakefield R, Berner Hammer H, Vittecoq O, Galeazzi M, Balint P, et al. Early response to abatacept plus MTX in MTX-IR RA patients using power Doppler ultrasonography: an open-label study. [abstract].
LII. Freeston JE, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG, Hensor EMA, Stewart SP, Emery P. A diagnostic algorithm for persistence of very early inflammatory arthritis: the utility of power Doppler ultrasound when added to conventional assessment tools. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(2):417-419.
LIII. Filer A, de Pablo P, Allen G, et al. Utility of ultrasound joint counts in the prediction of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with very early synovitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(3):500-507.
LIV. Nakagomi D, Ikeda K, Okubo A, et al. Ultrasound can improve the accuracy of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League against rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis to predict the requirement for methotrexate treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65(4):890-898.
LV. Kume K, Amano K, Yamada S, Hatta K, Kuwaba N, Ohta H. Very early improvements in the wrist and hand assessed by power Doppler sonography predicting later favorable responses in tocilizumab-treated patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(10):1477-1481.
LVI. Reiche BE, Ohrndorf S, Feist E, Messerschmidt J, Burmester GR, Backhaus M. Usefulness of power Doppler ultrasound for prediction of retherapy with rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective study of longstanding rheumatoid arthritis patients. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(2):204-216.
LVII. Ellegaard K, Christensen R, Torp-Pedersen S, et al. Ultrasound Doppler measurements predict success of treatment with anti-TNF-α drug
in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective cohort study. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(3):506-512.
LVIII. Peluso G, Michelutti A, Bosello S, Gremese E, Tolusso B, Ferraccioli G. Clinical and ultrasonographic remission determines different chances of relapse in early and long standing rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(1):172-175.
LIX. Saleem B, Brown AK, Quinn M, et al. Can flare be predicted in DMARD treated RA patients in remission, and is it important? A cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(8):1316-1321.
LX. Scirè CA, Montecucco C, Codullo V, Epis O, Todoerti M, Caporali R. Ultrasonographic evaluation of joint involvement in early rheumatoid
arthritis in clinical remission: power Doppler signal predicts short-term relapse. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009;48(9):1092-1097.
LXI. Iwamoto T, Ikeda K, Hosokawa J, et al. Prediction of relapse after discontinuation of biologic agents by ultrasonographic assessment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission: high predictive values of total gray-scale and power Doppler scores that represent residual synovial. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(10):1576-1581.
LXII. Foltz V, Gandjbakhch F, Etchepare F, et al. Power Doppler ultrasound, but not low-field magnetic resonance imaging, predicts relapse and radiographic disease progression in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low levels of disease activity. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(1):67-76.
LXIII. Macchioni P, Magnani M, Mulè R, et al. Ultrasonographic predictors for the development of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a single
joint prospective study. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 31(1):8-17.
LXIV. Funck-Brentano T, Gandjbakhch F, Etchepare F, et al. Prediction of radiographic damage in early arthritis by sonographic erosions and power Doppler signal: a longitudinal observational study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013;65(6):896-902.
LXV. Naredo E, Collado P, Cruz A, et al. Longitudinal power Doppler ultrasonographic assessment of joint inflammatory activity in early rheumatoid arthritis: predictive value in disease activity and radiologic progression. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(1):116-124.
LXVI. Dougados M, Devauchelle-Pensec V, Ferlet JF, et al. The ability of synovitis to predict structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparative study between clinical examination and ultrasound. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(5):665-671.
LXVII. Yoshimi R, Hama M, Takase K, et al. Ultrasonography is a potent tool for the prediction of progressive joint destruction during clinical remission of rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol. 2013;23(3):456-465.
LXVIII. Fukae J, Isobe M, Kitano A, et al. Radiographic prognosis of finger joint damage predicted by early alteration in synovial vascularity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Potential utility of power doppler sonography in clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(9):1247-1253.
LXIX. Hama M, Uehara T, Takase K, et al. Power Doppler ultrasonography is useful for assessing disease activity and predicting joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving tocilizumab--preliminary data. Rheumatol Int. 2012;32(5):1327-1333.
LXX. Fukae J, Isobe M, Kitano A, et al. Positive synovial vascularity in patients with low disease activity indicates smouldering inflammation leading to joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis: time-integrated joint inflammation estimated by synovial vascularity in each finger joint. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013;52(3):523-528.
LXXI. Fukae J, Kon Y, Henmi M, et al. Change of synovial vascularity in a single finger joint assessed by power doppler sonography correlated with radiographic change in rheumatoid arthritis: comparative study of a novel quantitative score with a semiquantitative score. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62(5):657-663.
LXXII. Nguyen H, Ruyssen-Witrand A, Gandjbakhch F, Constantin A, Foltz V, Cantagrel A. Prevalence of ultrasound-detected residual synovitis and risk of relapse and structural progression in rheumatoid arthritis patients in clinical remission: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(11):2110-2118.
LXXIII. Kawashiri S, Suzuki T, Nakashima Y, et al. Ultrasonographic examination of rheumatoid arthritis patients who are free of physical synovitis:
power Doppler subclinical synovitis is associated with bone erosion. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(3):562-569.
LXXIV. Fukae J, Isobe M, Kitano A, et al. Structural deterioration of finger joints with ultrasonographic synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis patients with clinical low disease activity. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(9):1608-1612.
LXXV. Bøyesen P, Haavardsholm EA, van der Heijde D, et al. Prediction of MRI erosive progression: a comparison of modern imaging modalities in early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(1):176-179.
LXXVI. Lillegraven S, Bøyesen P, Hammer HB, et al. Tenosynovitis of the extensor carpi ulnaris tendón predicts erosive progression in early rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(11):2049-2050.
LXXVII. Wakefield RJ, D’Agostino MA, Naredo E, et al. After treat-to-target: can a targeted ultrasound initiative improve RA outcomes? Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(6):799-803.
LXXVIII. Dale J, Purves D, McConnachie A, McInnes I, Porter D. Tightening up? Impact of musculoskeletal ultrasound disease activity assessment on early rheumatoid arthritis patients treated using a treat to target strategy. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(1):19-26.
II. Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG, et al. The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43(12):2762-2770.
III. Ribbens C, André B, Marcelis S, et al. Rheumatoid hand joint synovitis: gray-scale and power Doppler US quantifications following anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha treatment: pilot study. Radiology. 2003;229(2):562-569.
IV. Rizzo C. Ultrasound in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Med Ultrason. 2013;15(3):199-208.
V. Iagnocco A, Ceccarelli F, Perricone C, Valesini G. The role of ultrasound in rheumatology. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2011;32(2):66-73.
VI. Wakefield RJ, Balint P V, Szkudlarek M, et al. Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Including Definitions for Ultrasonographic Pathology. J Rheumatol.
2005;32(12):2485-2487.
VII. Kang T, Horton L, Emery P, Wakefield RJ. Value of ultrasound in rheumatologic diseases. J Korean Med Sci. 2013;28(4):497-507.
VIII. Colebatch AN, Edwards CJ, Østergaard M, et al. EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging of the joints in the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(6):804-814.
IX. Wakefield RJ, O’Connor PJ, Conaghan PG, et al. Finger tendon disease in untreated early rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(7):1158-1164.
X. Szkudlarek M, Court-Payen M, Strandberg C, Klarlund M, Klausen T, Ostergaard M. 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(9):2018-2023.
XI. Wakefield RJ, D’Agostino M-A, Iagnocco A, et al. The OMERACT Ultrasound Group: status of current activities and research directions. J Rheumatol. 2007;34(4):848-851.
XII. D’Agostino M-A, Conaghan PG, Naredo E, et al. The OMERACT ultrasound task force – Advances and priorities. J Rheumatol. 2009;36(8):1829-1832.
XIII. Alcalde M, D’Agostino MA, Bruyn GAW, et al. A systematic literature review of US definitions, scoring systems and validity according to the OMERACT filter for tendon lesion in RA and other inflammatory joint diseases. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51(7):1246-1260.
XIV. Scheel AK, Hermann K-GA, Kahler E, et al. A novel ultrasonographic synovitis scoring system suitable for analyzing finger joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(3):733-743.
XV. Disler DG, Raymond E, May DA, Wayne JS, McCauley TR. Articular cartilage defects: in vitro evaluation of accuracy and interobserver reliability for detection and grading with US. Radiology. 2000;215(3):846-851.
XVI. Möller B, Bonel H, Rotzetter M, Villiger PM, Ziswiler H-R. Measuring finger joint cartilage by ultrasound as a promising alternative to conventional radiograph imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2009;61(4):435-441.
XVII. Jain A, Nanchahal J, Troeberg L, Green P, Brennan F. Production of cytokines, vascular endothelial growth factor, matrix metalloproteinases, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinases 1 by tenosynovium demonstrates its potential for tendon destruction in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2001;44(8):1754-1760.
XVIII. Grassi W, Filippucci E, Farina A, Cervini C. Sonographic imaging of tendons. Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43(5):969-976.
XIX. Micu MC, Serra S, Fodor D, Crespo M, Naredo E. Inter-observer reliability of ultrasound detection of tendon abnormalities at the wrist and ankle in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(6):1120-1124.
XX. Backhaus M. Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60(7):641-649.
XXI. Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Sandrock D, et al. Prospective two year follow up study comparing novel and conventional imaging procedures in patients with arthritic finger joints. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002;61(10):895-904.
XXII. 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(6):1232-1245.
XXIII. Grassi W. Clinical evaluation versus ultrasonography: who is the winner? J Rheumatol. 2003;30(5):908-909.
XXIV. Wakefield RJ, Green MJ, Marzo-Ortega H, et al. Should oligoarthritis be reclassified? Ultrasound reveals a high prevalence of subclinical disease.
Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(4):382-385.
XXV. Karim Z, Wakefield RJ, 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(2):387-394.
XXVI. Conaghan PG, 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(1):64-71.
XXVII. Smolen JS, Aletaha D, Bijlsma JWJ, et al. Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: recommendations of an international task force. Ann Rheum Dis.
2010;69(4):631-637.
XXVIII. Van der Heijde DM, van ’t Hof M, van Riel PL, van de Putte LB. Development of a disease activity score based on judgment in clinical practice by rheumatologists. J Rheumatol. 1993;20(3):579-581.
XXIX. Prevoo ML, van ’t Hof MA, Kuper HH, van Leeuwen MA, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL. Modified disease activity scores that include twenty-eight-joint counts. Development and validation in a prospective longitudinal study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38(1):44-48.
XXX. Prevoo ML, van Gestel AM, van T Hof MA, van Rijswijk MH, van de Putte LB, van Riel PL. Remission in a prospective study of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. American Rheumatism Association preliminary remission criteria in relation to the disease activity score. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35(11):1101-1105.
XXXI. Leeb BF, Andel I, Sautner J, et al. Disease activity measurement of rheumatoid arthritis: Comparison of the simplified disease activity index (SDAI) and the disease activity score including 28 joints (DAS28) in daily routine. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;53(1):56-60.
XXXII. Molenaar ETH, Voskuyl AE, Dinant HJ, Bezemer PD, Boers M, Dijkmans BAC. Progression of radiologic damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(1):36-42.
XXXIII. Brown AK, Quinn MA, Karim Z, et al. Presence of significant synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis patients with disease-modifying antirheumatic drug-induced clinical remission: evidence from an imaging study may explain structural progression. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(12):3761-3773.
XXXIV. Brown AK, Conaghan PG, Karim Z, et al. An explanation for the apparent dissociation between clinical remission and continued structural
deterioration in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(10):2958-2967.
XXXV. Naredo E, Möller I, Cruz A, Carmona L, Garrido J. Power Doppler ultrasonographic monitoring of response to anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy
in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(8):2248-2256.
XXXVI. Naredo E, Rodríguez M, Campos C, et al. Validity, reproducibility, and responsiveness of a twelvejoint simplified power doppler ultrasonographic
assessment of joint inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(4):515-522.
XXXVII. Backhaus M, Ohrndorf S, Kellner H, et al. Evaluation of a novel 7-joint ultrasound score in daily rheumatologic practice: a pilot project. Arthritis
Rheum. 2009;61(9):1194-1201.
XXXVIII. Perricone C, Ceccarelli F, Modesti M, et al. The 6-joint ultrasonographic assessment: a valid, sensitive-to-change and feasible method for evaluating joint inflammation in RA. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2012;51(5):866-873.
XXXIX. Backhaus TM, Ohrndorf S, Kellner H, et al. The US7 score is sensitive to change in a large cohort of patients with rheumatoid arthritis over 12 months of therapy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(7):1163-1169.
XL. Iagnocco A, Naredo E, Wakefield R, et al. Responsiveness in rheumatoid arthritis. a report from the OMERACT 11 ultrasound workshop. J Rheumatol. 2014;41(2):379-382.
XLI. Cazenave T, Wainmann CA, Ruta S, Rosa J, Santiago L, Sandobal C, Benegas M, Citera G, Rosemffet MG. Acuerdo inter e intraobservador de la ultrasonografía utilizando un score articular reducido (REUMA score) en pacientes con artritis reumatoidea. [abstract]. Revista Argentina de Reumatología: Año 2012. Vol 3. n°5.
XLII. Cazenave T, Waimann CA, Citera G, Rosemffet MG. Development of a 6 Joint Simplified Ultrasonographic Score to Assess Disease Activity in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2012;64 Suppl 10 :106.
XLIII. Cazenave T, Waimann CA, Zamora N, Citera G, Rosemffet MG. A rapid 4- join ultrasonographic score to daily monitoring disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: validity and sensitivity to change. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 2014;66 Suppl 10:128.
XLIV. Dougados M, Jousse-Joulin S, Mistretta F, d’Agostino MA,Backhaus M, Bentin J, et al. Evaluation of several ultrasonography scoring systems of synovitis and comparison to clinical examination: Results from a prospective multicenter study of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2000;69:828-33.
XLV. Iagnocco A, Filippucci E, Perella C, et al. Clinical and ultrasonographic monitoring of response to adalimumab treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2008;35(1):35-40.
XLVI. Taylor PC, Steuer A, Gruber J, et al. Ultrasonographic and radiographic results from a two-year controlled trial of immediate or one-year-delayed addition of infliximab to ongoing methotrexate therapy in patients with erosive early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(1):47-53.
XLVII. Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Salaffi F, Cerioni A, Valesini G, Grassi W. Power Doppler sonography monitoring of synovial perfusion at the wrist joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(11):1433-1437.
XLVIII. Kawashiri S, Kawakami A, Iwamoto N, et al. The power Doppler ultrasonography score from 24 synovial sites or 6 simplified synovial sites, including the metacarpophalangeal joints, reflects the clinical disease activity and level of serum biomarkers in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(5):962-965.
XLIX. Terslev L, Torp-Pedersen S, Qvistgaard E, Danneskiold-Samsoe B, Bliddal H. Estimation of inflammation by Doppler ultrasound: quantitative changes after intra-articular treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(11):1049-1053.
L. Mandl P, Naredo E, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG, D’Agostino MA. A systematic literature review analysis of ultrasound joint count and scoring systems to assess synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis according to the OMERACT filter. J Rheumatol. 2011;38(9):2055-2062.
LI. D’Agostino MA, Wakefield R, Berner Hammer H, Vittecoq O, Galeazzi M, Balint P, et al. Early response to abatacept plus MTX in MTX-IR RA patients using power Doppler ultrasonography: an open-label study. [abstract].
LII. Freeston JE, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG, Hensor EMA, Stewart SP, Emery P. A diagnostic algorithm for persistence of very early inflammatory arthritis: the utility of power Doppler ultrasound when added to conventional assessment tools. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(2):417-419.
LIII. Filer A, de Pablo P, Allen G, et al. Utility of ultrasound joint counts in the prediction of rheumatoid arthritis in patients with very early synovitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(3):500-507.
LIV. Nakagomi D, Ikeda K, Okubo A, et al. Ultrasound can improve the accuracy of the 2010 American College of Rheumatology/European League against rheumatism classification criteria for rheumatoid arthritis to predict the requirement for methotrexate treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65(4):890-898.
LV. Kume K, Amano K, Yamada S, Hatta K, Kuwaba N, Ohta H. Very early improvements in the wrist and hand assessed by power Doppler sonography predicting later favorable responses in tocilizumab-treated patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(10):1477-1481.
LVI. Reiche BE, Ohrndorf S, Feist E, Messerschmidt J, Burmester GR, Backhaus M. Usefulness of power Doppler ultrasound for prediction of retherapy with rituximab in rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective study of longstanding rheumatoid arthritis patients. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(2):204-216.
LVII. Ellegaard K, Christensen R, Torp-Pedersen S, et al. Ultrasound Doppler measurements predict success of treatment with anti-TNF-α drug
in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective cohort study. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50(3):506-512.
LVIII. Peluso G, Michelutti A, Bosello S, Gremese E, Tolusso B, Ferraccioli G. Clinical and ultrasonographic remission determines different chances of relapse in early and long standing rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(1):172-175.
LIX. Saleem B, Brown AK, Quinn M, et al. Can flare be predicted in DMARD treated RA patients in remission, and is it important? A cohort study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(8):1316-1321.
LX. Scirè CA, Montecucco C, Codullo V, Epis O, Todoerti M, Caporali R. Ultrasonographic evaluation of joint involvement in early rheumatoid
arthritis in clinical remission: power Doppler signal predicts short-term relapse. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009;48(9):1092-1097.
LXI. Iwamoto T, Ikeda K, Hosokawa J, et al. Prediction of relapse after discontinuation of biologic agents by ultrasonographic assessment in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission: high predictive values of total gray-scale and power Doppler scores that represent residual synovial. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(10):1576-1581.
LXII. Foltz V, Gandjbakhch F, Etchepare F, et al. Power Doppler ultrasound, but not low-field magnetic resonance imaging, predicts relapse and radiographic disease progression in rheumatoid arthritis patients with low levels of disease activity. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(1):67-76.
LXIII. Macchioni P, Magnani M, Mulè R, et al. Ultrasonographic predictors for the development of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a single
joint prospective study. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 31(1):8-17.
LXIV. Funck-Brentano T, Gandjbakhch F, Etchepare F, et al. Prediction of radiographic damage in early arthritis by sonographic erosions and power Doppler signal: a longitudinal observational study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2013;65(6):896-902.
LXV. Naredo E, Collado P, Cruz A, et al. Longitudinal power Doppler ultrasonographic assessment of joint inflammatory activity in early rheumatoid arthritis: predictive value in disease activity and radiologic progression. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57(1):116-124.
LXVI. Dougados M, Devauchelle-Pensec V, Ferlet JF, et al. The ability of synovitis to predict structural damage in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparative study between clinical examination and ultrasound. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(5):665-671.
LXVII. Yoshimi R, Hama M, Takase K, et al. Ultrasonography is a potent tool for the prediction of progressive joint destruction during clinical remission of rheumatoid arthritis. Mod Rheumatol. 2013;23(3):456-465.
LXVIII. Fukae J, Isobe M, Kitano A, et al. Radiographic prognosis of finger joint damage predicted by early alteration in synovial vascularity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Potential utility of power doppler sonography in clinical practice. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(9):1247-1253.
LXIX. Hama M, Uehara T, Takase K, et al. Power Doppler ultrasonography is useful for assessing disease activity and predicting joint destruction in rheumatoid arthritis patients receiving tocilizumab--preliminary data. Rheumatol Int. 2012;32(5):1327-1333.
LXX. Fukae J, Isobe M, Kitano A, et al. Positive synovial vascularity in patients with low disease activity indicates smouldering inflammation leading to joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis: time-integrated joint inflammation estimated by synovial vascularity in each finger joint. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2013;52(3):523-528.
LXXI. Fukae J, Kon Y, Henmi M, et al. Change of synovial vascularity in a single finger joint assessed by power doppler sonography correlated with radiographic change in rheumatoid arthritis: comparative study of a novel quantitative score with a semiquantitative score. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62(5):657-663.
LXXII. Nguyen H, Ruyssen-Witrand A, Gandjbakhch F, Constantin A, Foltz V, Cantagrel A. Prevalence of ultrasound-detected residual synovitis and risk of relapse and structural progression in rheumatoid arthritis patients in clinical remission: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(11):2110-2118.
LXXIII. Kawashiri S, Suzuki T, Nakashima Y, et al. Ultrasonographic examination of rheumatoid arthritis patients who are free of physical synovitis:
power Doppler subclinical synovitis is associated with bone erosion. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(3):562-569.
LXXIV. Fukae J, Isobe M, Kitano A, et al. Structural deterioration of finger joints with ultrasonographic synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis patients with clinical low disease activity. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2014;53(9):1608-1612.
LXXV. Bøyesen P, Haavardsholm EA, van der Heijde D, et al. Prediction of MRI erosive progression: a comparison of modern imaging modalities in early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(1):176-179.
LXXVI. Lillegraven S, Bøyesen P, Hammer HB, et al. Tenosynovitis of the extensor carpi ulnaris tendón predicts erosive progression in early rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(11):2049-2050.
LXXVII. Wakefield RJ, D’Agostino MA, Naredo E, et al. After treat-to-target: can a targeted ultrasound initiative improve RA outcomes? Ann Rheum Dis. 2012;71(6):799-803.
LXXVIII. Dale J, Purves D, McConnachie A, McInnes I, Porter D. Tightening up? Impact of musculoskeletal ultrasound disease activity assessment on early rheumatoid arthritis patients treated using a treat to target strategy. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2014;66(1):19-26.
Publicado
2015-06-01
Cómo citar
1.
Cazenave T. Ultrasonografía en artritis reumatoidea. Rev. Argent. Reumatol. [Internet]. 1 de junio de 2015 [citado 28 de noviembre de 2024];26(2):36 -44. Disponible en: https://ojs.reumatologia.org.ar/index.php/revistaSAR/article/view/632
Sección
Actualizaciones
Derechos de autor 2015 A nombre de los autores. Derechos de reproducción: Sociedad Argentina de Reumatología
Esta obra está bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObrasDerivadas 4.0.
