Background:To date, the European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (EULAR) guidelines recommend X-ray (XR) as first line imaging in axial Spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and magnetic resonance imaging (MR) if the diagnosis cannot be established by XR and clinical features. However, much knowledge has been gained recently strengthening the applicability of MR for the detection of structural lesions and raising the question, whether XR is still necessary. Also, several publications used low-dose computed tomography (CT) as reference standard and imaging test.Objectives:In light of this complex diagnostic situation, the aim of this study was to compare the three major modalities, XR, MR and CT of SIJ, in their diagnostic performance of axSpA and differential diagnosis in a cohort of patients with low back pain using the final judgment of the rheumatologist as standard of reference.Methods:163 patients (89 with axSpA; 74 with degenerative diseases) underwent XR, CT and MR. Three blinded experts categorized the imaging into axSpA, other diseases or normal in 5 separate reading rounds (XR, CT, MR, XR+MR, CT+MR, respectively). The results were compared to the clinical diagnosis. Sensitivity and specificity values for axSpA and interrater reliability were compared.Results:XR showed lower sensitivity and specificity (66.3%/67.6% respectively) compared to MR (82.0%/86.5%) and CT (77.5%/97.3%). Sensitivity and specificity of XR+MR was similar to MR alone (77.5% / 87.8%). However, CT+MR was superior to MR alone (75.6% / 97.3%) (see Figure). CT had the best interrater reliability (kappa = 0.875) followed by MR (0.665) and XR (0.517). CR+MR reliability was similar (0.662) compared to MR alone, while CT+MR reliability (0.732) was superior.Figure 1.Frequency of positive and negative findings in radiography (XR), computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MR) and combinations and resulting diagnostic accuracy values. SE: Sensitivity, SP: Specificity, LR-/+: negative/positive likelihood ratio.Conclusion:In conclusion, XR is inferior to cross-sectional imaging and should be replaced by MR or CT for differential diagnosis. While MR is the most sensitive imaging technique, it lacks specificity when compared to CT. CT alone has high diagnostic accuracy, despite being insensitive to bone marrow lesions such as fatty metaplasia or osteitis. Adding CT to MR leads to an increase in specificity at a minor expense of sensitivity.References:[1]Sieper J, Rudwaleit M, Baraliakos X, et al. The Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society (ASAS) handbook: a guide to assess spondyloarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2009;68 Suppl 2:ii1-44.[2]Mandl P, Navarro-Compán V, Terslev L, et al. EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in the diagnosis and management of spondyloarthritis in clinical practice. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74(7):1327-39.[3]Diekhoff T, Hermann KA, Greese J, et al. Comparison of MRI with radiography for detecting structural lesions of the sacroiliac joint using CT as standard of reference: results from the SIMACT study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017.[4]Diekhoff T, Greese J, Sieper J, Poddubnyy D, Hamm B, Hermann KA. Improved detection of erosions in the sacroiliac joints on MRI with volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE): results from the SIMACT study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2018;77(11):1585-89.[5]Baraliakos X, Hoffmann F, Deng X, Wang YY, Huang F, Braun J. Detection of Erosions in Sacroiliac Joints of Patients with Axial Spondyloarthritis Using the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Volumetric Interpolated Breath-hold Examination. The Journal of rheumatology. 2019;46(11):1445-49.[6]Wu H, Zhang G, Shi L, et al. Axial Spondyloarthritis: Dual-Energy Virtual Noncalcium CT in the Detection of Bone Marrow Edema in the Sacroiliac Joints. Radiology. 2019;290(1):157-64.Disclosure of Interests:Torsten Diekhoff Speakers bureau: Canon MS, Roche, Novartis, MSD, Grant/research support from: Assessment of Spondyloarthritis International Society, Iris Eshed: None declared, Felix Radny: None declared, Katharina Ziegeler: None declared, Fabian Proft: None declared, Juliane Greese: None declared, Dominik Deppe: None declared, Robert Biesen: None declared, Kay-Geert Hermann: None declared, Denis Poddubnyy: None declared
FRI0219 Analysis of the different value of magnetic resonance imaging changes in the sacroiliac joints for a diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis as judged by rheumatologists and radiologists
