Advertisement

Calcified Tissue International

, Volume 78, Issue 1, pp 25–34 | Cite as

Peripheral Bone Status in Rheumatoid Arthritis Evaluated by Digital X-Ray Radiogrammetry and Compared with Multisite Quantitative Ultrasound

  • J. BöttcherEmail author
  • A. Pfeil
  • H. Mentzel
  • A. Kramer
  • M.-L. Schäfer
  • G. Lehmann
  • T. Eidner
  • A. Petrovitch
  • A. Malich
  • G. Hein
  • W. A. Kaiser
Article

Abstract

The development of secondary osteoporosis in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has recently become well recognized, characterized by demineralization at axial and in particular periarticular peripheral bone sites. Our aim was to evaluate multisite quantitative ultrasound (QUS) compared to digital X-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) by the quantification of cortical bone loss dependent on the severity of RA. Fifty-three patients with verified RA underwent QUS measurements (Sunlight Omnisense 7000) with estimation of the speed of sound (QUS-SOS) at the distal radius and at the phalanx of the third digit. Also, bone mineral density (DXR-BMD) and metacarpal index (DXR-MCI) were estimated on metacarpals II-IV using DXR technology. Additionally, Larsen score and Steinbroker stage were assessed. Disease activity of RA was estimated by disease activity score 28 (DAS 28). For the group with minor disease activity (3.2 ≤ DAS ≤ 5.1), QUS-SOS (phalanx) showed a significant association to DXR-BMD (R = 0.66) and DXR-MCI (R = 0.52). In the case of accentuated disease activity (DAS > 5.1), QUS-SOS of the radius revealed a significant correlation to DXR-BMD (R = 0.71) and DXR-MCI (R = 0.84), whereas for QUS-SOS (phalanx) no significant association to the DXR parameters was shown. The DXR parameters and, to a lesser extent, the QUS data also demonstrated pronounced declines in the case of accentuated disease activity (DAS > 5.1). Both DXR-BMD (−25.9 %, P < 0.01) and DXR-MCI (−38.6 %, P < 0.01) revealed a notable reduction dependent on the severity of RA. Otherwise, QUS-SOS marginally decreased, with −2.6% (radius) and −3.9% (phalanx). DXR revealed a significant reduction of DXR-BMD as well as DXR-MCI dependent on the severity of RA and surpassed multisite QUS as a promising diagnostic tool.

Keywords

Digital X-ray radiogrammetry Quantitative ultrasound Rheumatoid arthritis Bone mineral density Speed of sound 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Mr. A. Rosholm, PhD (Pronosco/Sectra) and Ms. M. Arens (Arewus) for the use of the X-posure equipment as well as Ms. L. Tsoref and Ms. T. Schwartz (Sunlight Medical) for the allocation of the Sunlight Omnisense 7000. We also thank Mr. D. Felsenberg, MD (Berlin, Germany), Mr. C. C. Gluer, PhD (Kiel, Germany), Mr. R. Rau, MD (Ratingen, Germany), Mr. S. Grampp, MD, and Mr. H. Imhof, MD (Vienna, Austria) for their comments regarding our study.

References

  1. 1.
    Brower AC (1990) Use of the radiograph to measure the course of rheumatoid arthritis. The gold standard versus fool’s gold. Arthritis Rheum 33:316–324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gough AK, Lilley J, Eyre S, Holder RL, Emery P (1994) Generalized bone loss in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet 344:23–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hulsmans HMJ, Jacobs JWG, van der Heijde DMFM, van Albada-Kuipers GA, Schenk Y, Bijlsma JWJ (2000) The course of radiologic damage during the first six years of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 43:1927–1940CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deodhar AA, Brabyn J, Jones BW, Davis MJ, Woolf AD (1995) Longitudinal study of hand bone densitometry in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 37:1204–1210Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peel NF, Spittlehouse AJ, Bax DE, Eastell R (1994) Bone mineral density of the hand in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 37:983–991PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dequeker J, Geusens P (1990) Osteoporosis and arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 49:276–280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dequeker J, Maenaut K, Verwilghen J, Westhovens R (1995) Osteoporosis in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 13:21–26Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sambrook PN (2000) The skeleton in rheumatoid arthritis: common mechanism for bone erosion and osteoporosis? J Rheumatol 27:2541–2542PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alenfeld FE, Diessel E, Brezger M, Sieper J, Felsenberg D, Braun J (2000) Detailed analyses of periarticular osteoporosis in rheumatoid arthritis. Osteoporos Int 11:400–407CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Devlin J, Lilley J, Gough A, Huissoon A, Holder R, Reece R, Perkins P, Emery P (1996) Clinical association of dual energy X-ray absorptiometry measurement of hand bone mass in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 35:1256–1262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Njeh CF, Boivin CM, Gough A, Hans D, Srivastav SK, Bulmer N, Delvin J, Emery P (1999) Evaluation of finger ultrasound in the assessment of bone status with application of rheumatoid arthritis. Osteoporos Int 9:82–90CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sambrook PN, Ansell BM, Foster S, Gumpel JM, Hesp R, Reeve J (1985) Bone turnover in early rheumatoid arthritis. 2. Longitudinal bone density studies. Ann Rheum Dis 44:580–584PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barnett E, Nordin B (1960) The radiological diagnosis of osteoporosis: a new approach. Clin Radiol 11:166−174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Black DM, Palermo L, Sorensen T, Jorgensen JT, Lewis C, Tylavsky F, Wallace R, Harris E, Cummings SR (2001) A normative reference database study for Pronosco X-posure System. J Clin Densitom 4:5–12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Böttcher J, Pfeil A, Rosholm A, Malich A, Petrovitch A, Heinrich B, Lehmann G, Mentzel HJ, Hein G, Linß W, Kaiser WA (2005) Influence of image-capturing parameters on digital X-ray radiogrammetry. J Clin Densitom 8:87–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jorgensen JT, Andersen PB, Rosholm A, Bjarnason NH (2000) Digital X-ray radiogrammetry: a new appendicular bone densitometric method with high precision. Clin Physiol 20:330–335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Malich A, Freesmeyer MG, Mentzel HJ, Sauner D, Böttcher J, Petrovitch A, Behrendt W, Kaiser WA (2003) Normative values of bone parameters of children and adolescents using digital computer-assisted radiogrammetry (DXR). J Clin Densitom 6:103–112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosholm A, Hylsdrup L, Baeksgaard L, Grunkin M, Thodberg HH (2001) Estimation of bone mineral density by digital X-ray radiogrammetry: theoretical background and clinical testing. Osteoporos Int 12:961–969CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shepherd JA, Meta M, Landau J, Sherrer YSR, Goddard DH, Ovalle MI, Rosholm A, Genant HK (2005) Metacarpal index and bone mineral density in healthy African-American women. Osteoporos Int Online first 10th June 2005Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bouxsein ML, Palermo L, Yeung C, Black DM (2002) Digital X-ray radiogrammetry predicts hip, wrist and vertebral fracture in elderly women: a prospective analysis from the study of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 13:358–365CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hyldstrup L, Jorgensen JT, Sorensen TK, Baeksgaard L (2001) Response of cortical bone to antiresorptive treatment. Calcif Tissue Int 68:135–139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Böttcher J, Malich A, Pfeil A, Petrovitch A, Lehmann G, Heyne JP, Hein G, Kaiser WA (2004) Potential clinical relevance of digital radiogrammetry for quantification of periarticular bone demineralization in patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis depending on severity and compared with DXA. Eur Radiol 14:631–637PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jensen T, Klarlund M, Hansen M, Jensen KE, Podenphant J, Hansen TM (2004) Bone loss in unclassified polyarthritis and early rheumatoid arthritis is better detected by digital radiogrammetry than dual X-ray absorptiometry: relationship with disease activity and radiographic outcome. Ann Rheum Dis 63:15–22CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stewart A, Mackenzie LM, Black AJ, Reid DM (2004) Predicting erosive disease in rheumatoid arthritis. A longitudinal study of changes in bone density using digital X-ray radiogrammetry: a pilot study. Rheumatology 43:1561–1564CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wuster C, Hadji P (2001) The use of quantitative ultrasound (QUS) in male osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 69:225–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Röben P, Barkmann R, Ullrich S, Gause A, Heller M, Gluer CC (2001) Assessment of phalangeal bone loss in patients with rheumatoid arthritis by quantitative ultrasound. Ann Rheum Dis 60:670–677PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Njeh CF, Boivin CM, Langton CM (1997) The role of ultrasound in the assessment of osteoporosis: a review. Osteoporos Int 7:7–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Antich P (1993) Ultrasound study of bone in vitro. Calcif Tissue Int 53:157–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Brandenburger G (1993) Clinical determination of bone quality: is ultrasound an answer? Calcif Tissue Int 53:151–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Duquette J, Honeyman T, Hoffman A, Ahmadi S, Baran D (1997) Effect of bovine bone constituents on broadband ultrasound attenuation measurements. Bone 21:289–294CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gluer CC, WU CY, Jergas M, Goldstein SA, Genant HK (1994) Three quantitative ultrasound parameters reflect bone structure. Calcif Tissue Int 55:46–52CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Turner CH, Eich M (1991) Ultrasonic velocity as a predictor of strength in bovine cancellous bone. Calcif Tissue Int 49:116–119PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bauer DC, Gluer CC, Cauley JA, Vogt TM, Ensrud KE, Genant HK, Black DM (1997) Broadband ultrasound attenuation predicts fractures strongly and independently of densitometry in older women. A prospective study. Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. Arch Intern Med 157:629–634CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Daens S, Peretz A, de Maertelaer V, Moris M, Bergmann P (1999) Efficiency of quantitative ultrasound measurements as compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the assessment of corticoid-induced bone impairment. Osteoporos Int 10:278–283CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hans D, Dargent-Molina P, Schott AM, Sebert JL, Cormier C, Kotzki PO, Delmas PD, Pouilles JM, Breart G, Meunier PJ (1996) Ultrasonographic heel measurements to predict hip fractures in elderly women: the EPIDOS prospective study. Lancet 348:511–514CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Haugeberg G, Orstavik RE, Uhlig T, Falch JA, Halse JI, Kvien TK (2003) Comparison of ultrasound and X-ray absorptiometry bone measurements in a case control study of female rheumatoid arthritis patients and randomly subjects in the population. Osteoporos Int 14:312–319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Barkmann R, Kantrovitch E, Singal C, Hans D, Genant HK, Heller M, Gluer CC (2000) A new method for quantitative ultrasound measurements at multiple skeletal sites - first results of precision and fracture discrimination. J Clin Densitom 3:1−7CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Madsen OR, Suetta C, Egsmose C, Lorentzen JS, Sorensen OH (2004) Bone status in rheumatoid arthritis assessed at peripheral sites by three different quantitative ultrasound devices. Clin Rheumatol 23:324–329CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, McShane DJ, Fies FJ, Cooper NS (1988) The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 31:315–324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hettenkofer HJ (2004) Rheumatologie: Diagnostik - klinik - therapic, 5th ed. Thieme, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Van Gestel AM, Haagsma CJ, van Riel PL (1998) Validation of rheumatoid arthritis improvement criteria that include simplified joint counts. Arthritis Rheum 41:1845–1850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Aletaha D, Nell VP, Stamm T, Uffmann M, Pflugbeil S, Machold K, Smolen JS (2005) Acute phase reactants add little to composite disease activity indices for rheumatoid arthritis: validation of a clinical activity score. Arthritis Res Ther 7:R796–R806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Larsen A, Dale K, Eek M (1977) Radiographic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis and related conditions by standard reference films. Acta Radiol Diagn 18:481–491Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Steinbroker O, Traeger CH, Batterman RC (1949) Therapeutic criteria in rheumatoid arthritis. JAMA 140:659–662Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Wuster C, Wenzler M, Kappes J, Rehm C, Gühring T, Arnbjerg C (2000) Digital X-ray radiogrammetry as a clinical method for estimating bone mineral density – a German reference database. J Bone Miner Res 15:298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zadik Z, Price D, Diamond G (2003) Pediatric reference curves for multisite quantitative ultrasound and its modulators. Osteoporos Int 14:857–862CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Heilmann P, Wuster C, Prolingheuer C, Gotz M, Ziegler R (1998) Measurement of forearm bone mineral density: comparison of five different instruments. Calcif Tissue Int 62:383–387CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Steinschneider M, Hagag P, Rapoport MJ, Weiss M (2003) Discordant effect of body mass index on bone mineral density and speed of sound. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 4:15–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Martin JC, Munro R, Campbell MK, Reid DM (1997) Effects of disease and corticosteroids on appendicular bone mass in postmenopausal women with rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with axial measurements. Br J Rheumatol 36:43–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Van der Heide A, Remme CA, Hofman DM, Jacobs JWG, Bijlsma JWJ (1995) Prediction of progression of radiologic damage in newly diagnosed rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 38:1466–1474PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Böttcher J, Pfeil A, Lehmann G, Malich A, Hansch A, Heinrich B, Petrovitch A, Mentzel HJ, Hein G, Kaiser WA (2004) Clinical trial for differentiation between corticoid-induced osteoporosis and periarticular demineralization via digital radiogrammetry in patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis. Z Rheumatol 63:473–482PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Böttcher J, Pfeil A, Heinrich B, Lehmann G, Petrovitch A, Hansch A, Heyne JP, Malich A, Hein G, Kaiser WA (2005) Digital radiogrammetry as a new osteodensitometric technique and diagnostic tool in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int 25:457–464PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kalla AA, Meyers OL, Parkyn ND, Kotze TJ (1989) Osteoporosis screening – radiogrammetry revisited. Br J Rheumatol 28:511–517PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kalla AA, Meyers OL, Chalton D (1991) Increased metacarpal bone mass following 18 months of slow acting antirheumatic drugs for rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 30:91–100PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Jergas M (2003) Conventional radiographs and basic quantitative methods. In: Grampp S (ed), Radiology of osteoporosis. Springer, Berlin, pp 62–64Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Dreher R, Thabe H, Schill S, Schulz A (2003) Die Rheumatoide Arthritis aus osteologischer Sicht. Osteologie 11(suppl 1):52Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Böttcher
    • 1
    Email author
  • A. Pfeil
    • 1
  • H. Mentzel
    • 1
  • A. Kramer
    • 1
  • M.-L. Schäfer
    • 1
  • G. Lehmann
    • 2
  • T. Eidner
    • 2
  • A. Petrovitch
    • 1
  • A. Malich
    • 1
  • G. Hein
    • 2
  • W. A. Kaiser
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyFriedrich-Schiller University JenaGermany
  2. 2.Department of Rheumatology and OsteologyFriedrich-Schiller University JenaGermany

Personalised recommendations