Advertisement

Hand Function pp 315-330 | Cite as

Hand Function and Imaging Outcomes

  • Atulya A. DeodharEmail author
  • Özge Keniş Coşkun
Chapter

Abstract

Imaging is an essential part in evaluating hands, because it can be used for diagnosis and monitoring disease activity. It also has a predictive value in hand function. Conventional radiography has been the gold standard even though it is unable to detect changes in the soft tissues and can be insensitive for the early stages of bone damage. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry and digital X-ray radiogrammetry are two techniques that assess changes in hand bone density, but they are also unable to detect any soft tissue changes. Ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging allow direct visualization of soft tissue and bone in the hand with a much better sensitivity and are superior in that field. All these imaging techniques can be used separately or in combination to optimize prediction of hand function and patient care.

Keywords

Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry Digital X-ray radiogrammetry Function Hand Magnetic resonance imaging Ultrasound 

References

  1. 1.
    Brower AC. Use of the radiograph to measure the course of rheumatoid arthritis. The gold standard versus fool’s gold. Arthritis Rheum. 1990;33(3):316–24.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deodhar AA, Woolf AD. Bone mass measurement and bone metabolism in rheumatoid arthritis: a review. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35(4):309–22.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    van der Heijde DM. Plain X-rays in rheumatoid arthritis: overview of scoring methods, their reliability and applicability. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1996;10(3):435–53.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McQueen FM, Stewart N, Crabbe J, Robinson E, Yeoman S, Tan PL, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist in early rheumatoid arthritis reveals progression of erosions despite clinical improvement. Ann Rheum Dis. 1999;58(3):156–63.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Sandrock D, Loreck D, Hess D, Scholz A, 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.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Genant HK. Methods of assessing radiographic change in rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Med. 1983;75(6a):35–47.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sharp JT, Young DY, Bluhm GB, Brook A, Brower AC, Corbett M, et al. How many joints in the hands and wrists should be included in a score of radiologic abnormalities used to assess rheumatoid arthritis? Arthritis Rheum. 1985;28(12):1326–35.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Larsen A, Dale K, Eek M. Radiographic evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis and related conditions by standard reference films. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1977;18(4):481–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van der Heijde D, Dankert T, Nieman F, Rau R, Boers M. Reliability and sensitivity to change of a simplification of the Sharp/van der Heijde radiological assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 1999;38(10):941–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Genant HK, Jiang Y, Peterfy C, Lu Y, Redei J, Countryman PJ. Assessment of rheumatoid arthritis using a modified scoring method on digitized and original radiographs. Arthritis Rheum. 1998;41(9):1583–90.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dias EM, Lukas C, Landewe R, Fatenejad S, van der Heijde D. Reliability and sensitivity to change of the simple Erosion narrowing score compared with the Sharp-van der Heijde method for scoring radiographs in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(3):375–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scott DL, Pugner K, Kaarela K, Doyle DV, Woolf A, Holmes J, et al. The links between joint damage and disability in rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000;39(2):122–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaarela K. Prognostic factors and diagnostic criteria in early rheumatoid arthritis. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl. 1985;57:1–54.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Odegard S, Landewe R, van der Heijde D, Kvien TK, Mowinckel P, Uhlig T. Association of early radiographic damage with impaired physical function in rheumatoid arthritis: a ten-year, longitudinal observational study in 238 patients. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(1):68–75.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Visser H, le Cessie S, Vos K, Breedveld FC, Hazes JM. How to diagnose rheumatoid arthritis early: a prediction model for persistent (erosive) arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46(2):357–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    van der Heijde DM, van Leeuwen MA, van Riel PL, Koster AM, van’t Hof MA, van Rijswijk MH, et al. Biannual radiographic assessments of hands and feet in a three-year prospective followup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1992;35(1):26–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paulus HE, Oh M, Sharp JT, Gold RH, Wong WK, Park GS, et al. Correlation of single time-point damage scores with observed progression of radiographic damage during the first 6 years of rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2003;30(4):705–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosholm A, Hyldstrup L, Backsgaard L, Grunkin M, Thodberg HH. Estimation of bone mineral density by digital X-ray radiogrammetry: theoretical background and clinical testing. Osteoporos Int. 2001;12(11):961–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fouque-Aubert A, Chapurlat R, Miossec P, Delmas PD. A comparative review of the different techniques to assess hand bone damage in rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine. 2010;77(3):212–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bottcher J, Malich A, Pfeil A, Petrovitch A, Lehmann G, Heyne JP, et al. 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. 2004;14(4):631–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hoff M, Haugeberg G, Kvien TK. Hand bone loss as an outcome measure in established rheumatoid arthritis: 2-year observational study comparing cortical and total bone loss. Arthritis Res Ther. 2007;9(4):R81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sharp JT, Tsuji W, Ory P, Harper-Barek C, Wang H, Newmark R. Denosumab prevents metacarpal shaft cortical bone loss in patients with erosive rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2010;62(4):537–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bottcher J, Pfeil A, Rosholm A, Malich A, Petrovitch A, Heinrich B, et al. Influence of image-capturing parameters on digital X-ray radiogrammetry. J Clin Densitom. 2005;8(1):87–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pfeil A, Thodberg HH, Renz DM, Reinhardt L, Oelzner P, Wolf G, et al. Metacarpal bone loss in patients with rheumatoid arthritis estimated by a new digital X-ray Radiogrammetry method – initial results. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mangnus L, van Steenbergen HW, Reijnierse M, Kalvesten J, van der Helm-Van Mil A. Bone mineral density loss in clinically suspect arthralgia is associated with subclinical inflammation and progression to clinical arthritis. Scand J Rheumatol. 2017;46(5):364–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Szentpetery A, Heffernan E, Haroon M, Kilbane M, Gallagher P, McKenna MJ, et al. Striking difference of periarticular bone density change in early psoriatic arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis following anti-rheumatic treatment as measured by digital X-ray radiogrammetry. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2016;55(5):891–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hoff M, Haugeberg G, Odegard S, Syversen S, Landewe R, van der Heijde D, et al. Cortical hand bone loss after 1 year in early rheumatoid arthritis predicts radiographic hand joint damage at 5-year and 10-year follow-up. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68(3):324–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jawaid WB, Crosbie D, Shotton J, Reid DM, Stewart A. Use of digital x ray radiogrammetry in the assessment of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(4):459–64.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jorgensen JT, Andersen PB, Rosholm A, Bjarnason NH. Digital X-ray radiogrammetry: a new appendicular bone densitometric method with high precision. Clin Physiol. 2000;20(5):330–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pfeil A, Haugeberg G, Hansch A, Renz DM, Lehmann G, Malich A, et al. Value of digital X-ray radiogrammetry in the assessment of inflammatory bone loss in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(5):666–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stewart A, Mackenzie LM, Black AJ, Reid DM. Predicting erosive disease in rheumatoid arthritis. A longitudinal study of changes in bone density using digital X-ray radiogrammetry: a pilot study. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004;43(12):1561–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Myasoedova E, Davis JM 3rd, Crowson CS, Gabriel SE. Epidemiology of rheumatoid arthritis: rheumatoid arthritis and mortality. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2010;12(5):379–85.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Book C, Algulin J, Nilsson JA, Saxne T, Jacobsson L. Bone mineral density in the hand as a predictor for mortality in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009;48(9):1088–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Rezaei H, Saevarsdottir S, Geborek P, Petersson IF, van Vollenhoven RF, Forslind K. Evaluation of hand bone loss by digital X-ray radiogrammetry as a complement to clinical and radiographic assessment in early rheumatoid arthritis: results from the SWEFOT trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ornbjerg LM, Ostergaard M, Jensen T, Hyldstrup L, Bach-Mortensen P, Boyesen P, et al. Establishment of age- and sex-adjusted reference data for hand bone mass and investigation of hand bone loss in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated in clinical practice: an observational study from the DANBIO registry and the Copenhagen osteoarthritis study. Arthritis Res Ther. 2016;18:53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ornbjerg LM, Ostergaard M, Jensen T, Horslev-Petersen K, Stengaard-Pedersen K, Junker P, et al. Hand bone loss in early rheumatoid arthritis during a methotrexate-based treat-to-target strategy with or without adalimumab-a substudy of the optimized treatment algorithm in early RA (OPERA) trial. Clin Rheumatol. 2017;36(4):781–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sarzi-Puttini P, Fiorini T, Panni B, Turiel M, Cazzola M, Atzeni F. Correlation of the score for subjective pain with physical disability, clinical and radiographic scores in recent onset rheumatoid arthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2002;3:18.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    van der Heijde D. How to read radiographs according to the Sharp/van der Heijde method. J Rheumatol. 2000;27(1):261–3.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Deodhar AA, Brabyn J, Jones PW, Davis MJ, Woolf AD. Measurement of hand bone mineral content by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry: development of the method, and its application in normal volunteers and in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1994;53(10):685–90.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Peel NF, Spittlehouse AJ, Bax DE, Eastell R. Bone mineral density of the hand in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1994;37(7):983–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Devlin J, Lilley J, Gough A, Huissoon A, Holder R, Reece R, et al. Clinical associations of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurement of hand bone mass in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35(12):1256–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Deodhar AA, Brabyn J, Jones PW, Davis MJ, Woolf AD. Longitudinal study of hand bone densitometry in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38(9):1204–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Deodhar AA, Brabyn J, Pande I, Scott DL, Woolf AD. Hand bone densitometry in rheumatoid arthritis, a five year longitudinal study: an outcome measure and a prognostic marker. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(8):767–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Duruoz MT, Poiraudeau S, Fermanian J, Menkes CJ, Amor B, Dougados M, et al. Development and validation of a rheumatoid hand functional disability scale that assesses functional handicap. J Rheumatol. 1996;23(7):1167–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gough AK, Lilley J, Eyre S, Holder RL, Emery P. Generalised bone loss in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Lancet. 1994;344(8914):23–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Dogu B, Kuran B, Yilmaz F, Usen A, Sirzai H. Is hand bone mineral density a marker for hand function in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis? The correlation among bone mineral density of the hand, radiological findings and hand function. Clin Rheumatol. 2013;32(8):1177–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Verhoeven AC, Boers M, Tugwell P. Combination therapy in rheumatoid arthritis: updated systematic review. Br J Rheumatol. 1998;37(6):612–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Young A, van der Heijde DM. Can we predict aggressive disease? Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1997;11(1):27–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Green MJ, Deodhar AA. Bone changes in early rheumatoid arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2001;15(1):105–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Szkudlarek M, Narvestad E, Klarlund M, Court-Payen M, Thomsen HS, Ostergaard M. Ultrasonography of the metatarsophalangeal joints in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging, conventional radiography, and clinical examination. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(7):2103–12.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG, O’Connor P, McGonagle D, Pease C, 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):2762–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Backhaus M, Kamradt T, Sandrock D, Loreck D, Fritz J, Wolf KJ, 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):1232–45.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Grassi W, Tittarelli E, Blasetti P, Pirani O, Cervini C. Finger tendon involvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Evaluation with high-frequency sonography. Arthritis Rheum. 1995;38(6):786–94.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Grassi W, Filippucci E, Farina A, Cervini C. Sonographic imaging of tendons. Arthritis Rheum. 2000;43(5):969–76.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Hoving JL, Buchbinder R, Hall S, Lawler G, Coombs P, McNealy 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(4):663–75.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Dohn UM, Ejbjerg BJ, Court-Payen M, Hasselquist M, Narvestad E, Szkudlarek M, et al. Are bone erosions detected by magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography true erosions? A comparison with computed tomography in rheumatoid arthritis metacarpophalangeal joints. Arthritis Res Ther. 2006;8(4):R110.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    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):1049–53.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Schueller-Weidekamm C, Krestan C, Schueller G, Kapral T, Aletaha D, Kainberger F. Power Doppler sonography and pulse-inversion harmonic imaging in evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis synovitis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188(2):504–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Terslev L, Torp-Pedersen S, Qvistgaard E, Kristoffersen H, Rogind H, Danneskiold-Samsoe B, et al. Effects of treatment with etanercept (Enbrel, TNRF:fc) on rheumatoid arthritis evaluated by Doppler ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(2):178–81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ribbens C, Andre B, Marcelis S, Kaye O, Mathy L, Bonnet V, 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):562–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Ostergaard M, Szkudlarek M. Ultrasonography: a valid method for assessing rheumatoid arthritis? Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(3):681–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Strunk J, Strube K, Muller-Ladner U, Lange U. Three dimensional Power Doppler ultrasonography confirms early reduction of synovial perfusion after intra-articular steroid injection. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(3):411–2.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Boesen M, Boesen L, Jensen KE, Cimmino MA, Torp-Pedersen S, Terslev L, et al. Clinical outcome and imaging changes after intraarticular (IA) application of etanercept or methylprednisolone in rheumatoid arthritis: magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasound-Doppler show no effect of IA injections in the wrist after 4 weeks. J Rheumatol. 2008;35(4):584–91.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Iagnocco A, Filippucci E, Perella C, Ceccarelli F, Cassara E, Alessandri C, et al. Clinical and ultrasonographic monitoring of response to adalimumab treatment in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2008;35(1):35–40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Iagnocco A, Perella C, Naredo E, Meenagh G, Ceccarelli F, Tripodo E, et al. Etanercept in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: clinical follow-up over one year by ultrasonography. Clin Rheumatol. 2008;27(4):491–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Scheel AK, Hermann KG, Ohrndorf S, Werner C, Schirmer C, Detert J, et al. Prospective 7 year follow up imaging study comparing radiography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatoid arthritis finger joints. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(5):595–600.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Bajaj S, Lopez-Ben R, Oster R, Alarcon GS. Ultrasound detects rapid progression of erosive disease in early rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective longitudinal study. Skeletal Radiol. 2007;36(2):123–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Taylor PC, Steuer A, Gruber J, Cosgrove DO, Blomley MJ, Marsters PA, et al. Comparison of ultrasonographic assessment of synovitis and joint vascularity with radiographic evaluation in a randomized, placebo-controlled study of infliximab therapy in early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(4):1107–16.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Naredo E, Collado P, Cruz A, Palop MJ, Cabero F, Richi P, 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):116–24.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Brown AK, Quinn MA, Karim Z, Conaghan PG, Peterfy CG, Hensor E, 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):3761–73.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Gartner M, Mandl P, Radner H, Supp G, Machold KP, Aletaha D, et al. Sonographic joint assessment in rheumatoid arthritis: associations with clinical joint assessment during a state of remission. Arthritis Rheum. 2013;65(8):2005–14.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Forslind K, Larsson EM, Johansson A, Svensson B. Detection of joint pathology by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1997;36(6):683–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Foley-Nolan D, Stack JP, Ryan M, Redmond U, Barry C, Ennis J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of rheumatoid arthritis – a comparison with plain film radiographs. Br J Rheumatol. 1991;30(2):101–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    McQueen FM, Benton N, Crabbe J, Robinson E, Yeoman S, McLean L, et al. What is the fate of erosions in early rheumatoid arthritis? Tracking individual lesions using x rays and magnetic resonance imaging over the first two years of disease. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60(9):859–68.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Ostergaard M, Hansen M, Stoltenberg M, Jensen KE, Szkudlarek M, Pedersen-Zbinden B, et al. New radiographic bone erosions in the wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis are detectable with magnetic resonance imaging a median of two years earlier. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48(8):2128–31.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Conaghan PG, O’Connor P, McGonagle D, Astin P, Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, 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.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Symmons D, Tricker K, Harrison M, Roberts C, Davis M, Dawes P, et al. Patients with stable long-standing rheumatoid arthritis continue to deteriorate despite intensified treatment with traditional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs – results of the British rheumatoid outcome study group randomized controlled clinical trial. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45(5):558–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Ostergaard M, Hansen M, Stoltenberg M, Gideon P, Klarlund M, Jensen KE, 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(5):918–29.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Tan AL, Grainger AJ, Tanner SF, Shelley DM, Pease C, Emery P, et al. High-resolution magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of hand osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(8):2355–65.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ramonda R, Favero M, Vio S, Lacognata C, Frallonardo P, Belluzzi E, et al. A recently developed MRI scoring system for hand osteoarthritis: its application in a clinical setting. Clin Rheumatol. 2016;35(8):2079–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Ostergaard M, Edmonds J, McQueen F, Peterfy C, Lassere M, Ejbjerg B, et al. An introduction to the EULAR-OMERACT rheumatoid arthritis MRI reference image atlas. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(Suppl 1):i3–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Ejbjerg BJ, Vestergaard A, Jacobsen S, Thomsen HS, Ostergaard M. The smallest detectable difference and sensitivity to change of magnetic resonance imaging and radiographic scoring of structural joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis finger, wrist, and toe joints: a comparison of the OMERACT rheumatoid arthritis magnetic resonance imaging score applied to different joint combinations and the Sharp/van der Heijde radiographic score. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(8):2300–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Reece RJ, Kraan MC, Radjenovic A, Veale DJ, O’Connor PJ, Ridgway JP, et al. Comparative assessment of leflunomide and methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, by dynamic enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum. 2002;46(2):366–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Vincken PW, ter Braak BP, van Erkell AR, de Rooy TP, Mallens WM, Post W, et al. Effectiveness of MR imaging in selection of patients for arthroscopy of the knee. Radiology. 2002;223(3):739–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Quinn MA, Conaghan PG, O’Connor PJ, Karim Z, Greenstein A, Brown A, et al. Very early treatment with infliximab in addition to methotrexate in early, poor-prognosis rheumatoid arthritis reduces magnetic resonance imaging evidence of synovitis and damage, with sustained benefit after infliximab withdrawal: results from a twelve-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52(1):27–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Benton N, Stewart N, Crabbe J, Robinson E, Yeoman S, McQueen FM. MRI of the wrist in early rheumatoid arthritis can be used to predict functional outcome at 6 years. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(5):555–61.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Cohen SB, Potter H, Deodhar A, Emery P, Conaghan P, Ostergaard M. Extremity magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatoid arthritis: updated literature review. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(5):660–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Arthritis & Rheumatic Diseases (OP09)Oregon Health & Science UniversityPortlandUSA
  2. 2.Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation DepartmentMarmara University Medical SchoolIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations