Imaging in ankylosing spondylitis

W. Maksymowych
{"title":"Imaging in ankylosing spondylitis","authors":"W. Maksymowych","doi":"10.2217/17460816.2.2.115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Clinicians and researchers have turned to imaging to address several major challenges in the clinical evaluation and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). The advent of more effective therapies targeting the pro-inflammatory cytokine tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has provided a more justifiable need to establish a diagnosis early in the disease course, particularly if it can be shown that such therapies have disease-modifying potential. Unfortunately, symptom duration prior to diagnosis of AS remains stubbornly at 8–9 years in most advanced countries [1]. This reflects the low discriminant value of the history in distinguishing between inflammatory and mechanical causes of back pain [2], the lack of physical signs related to spinal and sacroiliac joint inflammation in early disease, and the low sensitivity and specificity of laboratory abnormalities that are confined to acute-phase reactants [3]. The same limitations preclude objective evaluation of disease activity in patients with established disease. The advent of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has proven to be a milestone in the field, through its ability to permit direct visualization of inflammatory lesions in the spine and sacroiliac joints. Scoring systems that permit quantification of the degree of inflammation on MRI scans have also been developed, which now allow the objective analysis of disease severity in longitudinal studies and in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of new antiinflammatory agents. Advances in the use of other imaging modalities have been more limited and primarily confined to the development of a scoring tool to quantify structural damage on plain radiography of the spine. This tool is now being used to assess the disease-modifying potential of standard therapies, such as nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents, as well as anti-TNF-α therapies. Although it is now undeniable that advances in imaging have enhanced their value to both the clinician and the researcher, there has been insufficient awareness of the pitfalls inherent to the use of these imaging modalities in the setting of AS. The primary advantage of MRI is its ability to visualize lesions within soft tissues and bone in 3D. T1-weighted sequences primarily detect the signal from fat, and the contrast with bone, which is dark, enhances anatomical delineation of joint structures. T2-weighted sequences suppress the signal from fat that is present in bone marrow, allowing visualization of an underlying water signal that may be related to inflammation, cyst, tumor and other pathologies associated with increased vascular permeability. The two images should be analyzed simultaneously as they provide complementary information. For example, loss of the fat signal in subchondral bone marrow on the T1 image of the sacroiliac joint, accompanied by a corresponding water signal on the T2 image, typically denotes inflammation.","PeriodicalId":88490,"journal":{"name":"Future rheumatology","volume":"21 1","pages":"115-119"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2217/17460816.2.2.115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

Abstract

Clinicians and researchers have turned to imaging to address several major challenges in the clinical evaluation and treatment of ankylosing spondylitis (AS). The advent of more effective therapies targeting the pro-inflammatory cytokine tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α has provided a more justifiable need to establish a diagnosis early in the disease course, particularly if it can be shown that such therapies have disease-modifying potential. Unfortunately, symptom duration prior to diagnosis of AS remains stubbornly at 8–9 years in most advanced countries [1]. This reflects the low discriminant value of the history in distinguishing between inflammatory and mechanical causes of back pain [2], the lack of physical signs related to spinal and sacroiliac joint inflammation in early disease, and the low sensitivity and specificity of laboratory abnormalities that are confined to acute-phase reactants [3]. The same limitations preclude objective evaluation of disease activity in patients with established disease. The advent of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has proven to be a milestone in the field, through its ability to permit direct visualization of inflammatory lesions in the spine and sacroiliac joints. Scoring systems that permit quantification of the degree of inflammation on MRI scans have also been developed, which now allow the objective analysis of disease severity in longitudinal studies and in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of new antiinflammatory agents. Advances in the use of other imaging modalities have been more limited and primarily confined to the development of a scoring tool to quantify structural damage on plain radiography of the spine. This tool is now being used to assess the disease-modifying potential of standard therapies, such as nonsteroidal antiinflammatory agents, as well as anti-TNF-α therapies. Although it is now undeniable that advances in imaging have enhanced their value to both the clinician and the researcher, there has been insufficient awareness of the pitfalls inherent to the use of these imaging modalities in the setting of AS. The primary advantage of MRI is its ability to visualize lesions within soft tissues and bone in 3D. T1-weighted sequences primarily detect the signal from fat, and the contrast with bone, which is dark, enhances anatomical delineation of joint structures. T2-weighted sequences suppress the signal from fat that is present in bone marrow, allowing visualization of an underlying water signal that may be related to inflammation, cyst, tumor and other pathologies associated with increased vascular permeability. The two images should be analyzed simultaneously as they provide complementary information. For example, loss of the fat signal in subchondral bone marrow on the T1 image of the sacroiliac joint, accompanied by a corresponding water signal on the T2 image, typically denotes inflammation.
强直性脊柱炎的影像学表现
临床医生和研究人员已经转向影像学来解决强直性脊柱炎(AS)的临床评估和治疗中的几个主要挑战。针对促炎细胞因子肿瘤坏死因子(TNF)-α的更有效治疗方法的出现,为在病程早期建立诊断提供了更合理的需求,特别是如果可以证明这种治疗方法具有改善疾病的潜力。不幸的是,在大多数发达国家,AS诊断前的症状持续时间顽固地保持在8-9年[1]。这反映了病史在区分炎症性和机械性背痛病因方面的鉴别价值较低[2],疾病早期缺乏与脊柱和骶髂关节炎症相关的体征,以及仅限于急性期反应物的实验室异常的低敏感性和特异性[3]。同样的局限性也妨碍了对已确诊疾病患者的疾病活动性进行客观评价。磁共振成像(MRI)的出现已被证明是该领域的一个里程碑,因为它能够直接显示脊柱和骶髂关节的炎性病变。还开发了评分系统,可以对MRI扫描的炎症程度进行量化,现在可以在纵向研究和评估新型抗炎药疗效的临床试验中对疾病严重程度进行客观分析。在使用其他成像方式方面的进展更为有限,主要局限于一种评分工具的开发,用于量化脊柱平片上的结构损伤。这个工具现在被用来评估标准疗法的疾病改善潜力,如非甾体抗炎药,以及抗tnf -α疗法。虽然现在不可否认的是,影像学的进步已经提高了它们对临床医生和研究人员的价值,但人们对在AS背景下使用这些影像学方式所固有的缺陷认识不足。MRI的主要优点是它能够在软组织和骨骼中以3D方式可视化病变。t1加权序列主要检测来自脂肪的信号,与骨骼的对比(深色)增强了关节结构的解剖描绘。t2加权序列抑制骨髓中存在的脂肪信号,使潜在的水信号可视化,可能与炎症、囊肿、肿瘤和其他与血管通透性增加相关的病理有关。这两幅图像应该同时进行分析,因为它们提供了互补的信息。例如,骶髂关节T1图像上软骨下骨髓脂肪信号缺失,T2图像上伴随相应的水信号,通常提示炎症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信