Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services

User menu

  • My Cart
  • Log In

Search

  • Advanced search
The Journal of Rheumatology
  • JRheum Supplements
  • Services
  • My Cart
  • Log In
The Journal of Rheumatology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • First Release
    • Current
    • Archives
    • Collections
    • Audiovisual Rheum
    • COVID-19 and Rheumatology
  • Resources
    • Guide for Authors
    • Submit Manuscript
    • Payment
    • Reviewers
    • Advertisers
    • Classified Ads
    • Reprints and Translations
    • Permissions
    • Meetings
    • FAQ
    • Policies
  • Subscribers
    • Subscription Information
    • Purchase Subscription
    • Your Account
    • Terms and Conditions
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Letter from the Editor
    • Duncan A. Gordon Award
    • Privacy/GDPR Policy
    • Accessibility
  • Contact Us
  • Follow jrheum on Twitter
  • Visit jrheum on Facebook
  • Follow jrheum on LinkedIn
  • Follow jrheum on YouTube
  • Follow jrheum on Instagram
  • Follow jrheum on RSS
Research ArticleRheumatoid Arthritis

The Relationship Between Synovial Pathobiology and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Abnormalities in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review

Frances Humby, Arti Mahto, Muaaze Ahmed, Andrew Barr, Stephen Kelly, Maya Buch, Costantino Pitzalis and Philip G. Conaghan
The Journal of Rheumatology September 2017, 44 (9) 1311-1324; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.161314
Frances Humby
From the Centre for Experimental Medicine and Rheumatology, William Harvey Research Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary, University of London; Department of Radiology, Barts Health UK National Health Service (NHS) Trust; Department of Rheumatology, Barts Health NHS Trust, London; Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds and UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Centre, Leeds, UK.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: f.humby@qmul.ac.uk
Arti Mahto
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Muaaze Ahmed
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Andrew Barr
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Stephen Kelly
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maya Buch
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Costantino Pitzalis
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Philip G. Conaghan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters
PreviousNext
Loading

Abstract

Objective. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been increasingly recognized as a critical tool for the assessment of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and is able to reliably identify synovitis, bone marrow edema, bone erosion, and joint space narrowing (JSN)/cartilage loss. Understanding the exact relationship between each MRI feature and local synovial pathobiology is critical to dissect disease pathogenesis as well as develop future predictive models.

Methods. A systematic review was performed of the current published literature examining the relationship between MRI abnormalities and synovial pathobiology in patients with RA.

Results. Eighteen studies were identified; most focused on validation of MRI as a tool to detect and quantify synovitis, with a significant relationship demonstrated. Additionally, from the limited data available, a critical role seems likely for synovial pathways, at least in driving joint damage. However, there was a lack of data examining the relationship between synovial pathobiology and bone marrow abnormalities and JSN.

Conclusion. Although understanding the interrelationship of these disease biomarkers offers the potential to enhance the predictive validity of modern imaging with concomitant synovial pathobiological analysis, further studies integrating MRI with synovial tissue analysis in well-controlled cohorts at distinct disease stages before and after therapeutic intervention are required to achieve this.

Key Indexing Terms:
  • MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
  • SYNOVITIS
  • PATHOBIOLOGY
  • RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
  • BONE MARROW EDEMA

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an excellent tool to delineate pathology in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) because it can define bone, cartilage, fluid, and soft tissues. This is possible because MRI can delineate structures with high water content on T2-weighted fat-suppressed or short-tau inversion recovery sequences, and following injection of gadolinium-DTPA (Gd-DTPA), regions of high vascularity. Thus, feasibly MRI can quantify both synovial volume and inflammation and act as a surrogate noninvasive marker of histological inflammation. Specific MRI features of RA synovial joints have been demonstrated to be of particular prognostic value: synovitis, bone marrow edema (BME), bone erosions, and cartilage thinning. MRI has the capacity to detect bone erosions 2 years earlier1 than plain radiographs and sensitivity to detect change even in small cohorts2, an effect that is of critical relevance given the capacity of improved treatment algorithms to halt joint damage3. Consequently, MRI is now well recognized as a robust outcome measure in clinical trials.

Historically, the pathological events leading to joint damage in RA have been suggested to be a sequence of primary synovitis leading to BME, cartilage thinning, and finally erosions. There is increasing data to challenge this model. First, although a significant relationship between BME and synovitis4 and between synovitis and the development of bone erosions has been demonstrated5, debate regarding the exact contribution of synovitis/BME in initiating and/or sustaining bone erosion continues6 with some evidence suggesting that BME per se may be an independent predictor of erosive progression4,7,8,9,10,11,12,13. Further, there is evidence primarily from MRI studies to support a bio-mechanical effect on erosive progression14. Second, MRI studies have noted BME and erosions as early events, with cartilage thinning occurring later15. Third, a number of radiographic studies have reported an incongruent relationship between cartilage thinning and erosions15,16. Finally, recent data have demonstrated an association between MRI-documented BME, synovitis, baseline cartilage damage, and subsequent cartilage loss17. These observations raise a number of fundamental questions regarding mechanisms of joint damage and in particular whether synovial pathobiological pathways initiate and/or sustain a local environment that drives BME, erosions, and/or cartilage thinning.

It was within this context that a systematic literature review was conducted to assess published data investigating the relationship between RA synovial pathobiology and MRI BME, synovitis, erosions, and cartilage thinning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study methodology was conducted in line with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines18 and was registered with PROSPERO (www.crd.york.ac.uk/NIHR_PROSPERO, registration CRD42016033875). Because this was a systematic review, no ethics approval was sought, in accordance with the policy of Barts Health NHS Trust.

Search strategy

Relevant articles, reviews, and abstracts were identified through an initial search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library for articles published up to March 2016. The MEDLINE MeSH keyword search terms (rheumatoid arthritis, rheumatoid and arthritis, RA, rheumatoid, inflammatory arthritis, nuclear magnetic resonance imaging, magnetic AND resonance AND imaging, synovitis, synovi, pathology, histopathology, immunohistochemistry, pathol, histo, immune, joint surgery, arthroscopy, biopsy, joints, surgery) and adopted Boolean operators are presented in Table 1. These were modified to accommodate each search database. EMBASE and Cochrane search terms are presented as Supplementary Tables 1 and 2, respectively, available from the authors on request.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

The MEDLINE MeSH keyword search terms and Boolean operators from 1946 to present.

Eligibility criteria

Studies including patients with RA undergoing an MRI scan of a peripheral synovial joint along with sampling of synovial tissue were eligible. Outcome measures for MRI scanning included BME, joint erosion, synovitis, and cartilage thickness. Outcome measures for synovial tissue included macro/microscopic histological assessment and immunohistochemical and gene expression analysis. To be included within the review, studies had to directly compare 1 MRI RA feature with 1 or more synovial outcome measures. All types of study designs were included and analysis was restricted to humans. Articles not in English, with no translation available, and abstracts with no corresponding full-text article were excluded.

Two reviewers (FH and AM) independently reviewed the titles and abstracts from potentially relevant articles identified through the search strategy. Both reviewers assessed the full texts of all potentially eligible articles.

Data extraction

Data were entered onto a predefined data extraction table. For each study, the following data were recorded regarding study design: type of study, disease stage (e.g., early vs established disease), procedure for synovial sampling, time interval between synovial sampling and MRI scan, whether concomitant disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD) and/or steroid therapy were controlled for, joint imaged, and joint biopsied. The following MRI variables were also recorded: MRI feature scored, acquisition strength, and method of assessment of MRI features. Additionally, the following variables regarding synovial tissue analysis were recorded: number of synovial samples taken, procedure for synovial tissue preparation, macroscopic assessment of synovium, histological assessment of H&E stained samples, immunohistochemical assessment, synovial gene expression analysis, and main conclusions. Data extraction was performed by 1 reviewer (FH) and was verified by a second (AM). Any disagreements regarding data extraction were resolved following discussion among the reviewers.

Quality assessment

The quality of each study was independently assessed by 2 reviewers (FH and AM) using an adapted standardized quality scoring tool (Supplementary Table 3, available from the authors on request)19,20 to assess the following components: (1) study population, (2) MRI assessment and scoring, (3) histological assessment, and (4) study design and analysis and data presentation. A score of “1” or “0” was allocated for each question according to whether the study fulfilled the criteria or not, respectively. A study was considered to be high quality if it exceeded or equaled the mean score (% of total) in its class [cross-sectional vs randomized controlled trial (RCT) vs cohort study].

RESULTS

Search strategy

A summary of the results of the search strategy is presented in the PRISMA flow chart shown in Figure 1. This indicates that a total of 505 articles were identified. Following the exclusion of duplicates (n = 117) and review articles (n = 103), 273 articles were screened. Of these, 237 were excluded (134 because they did not include patients with RA, 91 because they did not include histopathological analysis of synovial tissue, 10 because they were examinations of tissue in vitro or in animal models, and 2 because no MRI scans were included). Of the remaining 36 articles, 18 were then excluded: 2 because no English translation was available, 5 because of no synovial histopathobiological examination (3 had no synovial histology and 2 had synovial explants in vitro only), 1 because there was no comparison of MRI and synovial pathobiology (not relevant to task), 4 because they did not include patients with RA, and 6 because they were abstracts only with no full text (Supplementary Table 5, available from the authors on request). Eighteen articles were then identified that satisfied the eligibility criteria and were therefore included in the review.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

PRISMA flow chart presenting the results of the search strategy. PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses; RA: rheumatoid arthritis; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging.

Characteristics of included studies

A summary of the characteristics of the 18 studies is presented in Table 2 (MRI characteristics) and Table 3 (histopathobiological characteristics)21–30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39. A total of 442 participants were included in the analyses from the 18 studies. Of these, 327 had RA, 19 spondyloarthropathy, 4 psoriatic arthritis, 55 osteoarthritis, 2 healthy controls, and 35 other arthritic conditions. Eleven studies were cross-sectional observational studies21–30,31 and 1 study was a retrospective analysis32. Four studies were prospective open-label clinical trials33,34,35,36, 1 study was a blinded RCT37, and 1 study was a prospective observational clinical study38. Fifteen studies included patients only with established RA (although exact disease duration was not specified in 2 of these studies31,35) and 3 studies specifically included patients with disease duration of < 2 years26,36,38. Fourteen studies sampled synovium from the knee joint and 4 studies included samples from small joints26,31,32,35. Variable methods for synovial sample retrieval were reported: 7 studies using arthroscopy29,31,33,34,36,37,38, 4 arthroplasty21,27,28,32, and 3 using both22,23,30. Two studies used blind needle biopsy24,25 and 2 miniarthroscopy (Table 2)26,35. Acquisition of images was performed on a 1.5T MRI scanner with contrast administration in 13 studies21,22,23,26,27,28,29,30,32,33,34,36,37 and without in 1 study38. Two studies used a 0.5T + contrast administration24,25 and 2 a 3T+ contrast protocol31,35, although the latter study used a 0.2T scanner in a significant proportion of patients (4/10) with claustrophobia (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Summary of studies directly correlating MRI features with synovial pathobiology: MRI characteristics.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Summary of studies directly correlating MRI features with synovial pathobiology: histobiological characteristics.

Quality assessment of studies

A summary of quality scoring of studies is provided in supplementary data (Supplementary Table 4, available from the authors on request). Quality scores were converted to percentages of the maximum score within each class of study. The mean (range) quality score was 56% (25–75) for cross-sectional studies and 68% (46–93) for cohort studies indicating a broad range of scores. The 1 RCT had a quality score of 71%.

Synovitis

MRI synovitis can be assessed by static and dynamic protocols. Subsequent to the acquisition of T1-weighted images (Figure 2A), static protocols assess the volume of enhancing synovitis following the administration of a Gd-based contrast agent (Figure 2B) at a fixed timepoint. Synovitis volume can then be assessed manually or using a semiautomated method by outlining the synovial tissue. Static images can also be assessed using the widely validated semiquantitative Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT)-Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scoring (RAMRIS) synovitis score40. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE)-MRI involves the rapid acquisition of sequential images during and after administration of contrast and assesses rate of enhancement of synovial tissue. Results can be influenced by factors such as synovial perfusion and capillary permeability; thus, dynamic versus static protocols may be able to more sensitively reflect local synovial inflammatory activity41,42.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Assessment of RA joint abnormalities by magnetic resonance imaging. Coronal T1-weighted (A) image of wrist joint demonstrating extensive synovial thickening that enhances following administration of gadolinium (B). (C) T2 fat-suppressed coronal image demonstrating bone marrow edema within the head of the proximal and base of the middle phalanx. (D) Axial T1-weighted image demonstrating erosions of bone cortex within second and third metacarpal heads. (E) Coronal T1-weighted image of MCP joints demonstrating significant joint space narrowing within second MCP joint. RA: rheumatoid arthritis; MCP: metacarpophalangeal.

Does MRI synovitis reflect histopathological inflammation?

Sixteen studies were identified that directly examined the relationship between the degree of MRI synovitis and local synovial pathobiology21,22,23,24,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37. Macroscopic synovitis and MRI synovitis was assessed in 3 studies both semiquantitatively22 and using dynamic MRI protocols34,37 with all 3 suggesting a significant correlation between macroscopic and MRI synovitis. Six studies21,22,23,24,28,31 using dynamic MRI and 3 studies26,27,32 using static MRI protocols also directly examined the relationship between MRI-determined synovitis and synovial inflammation assessed microscopically following routine H&E staining. Eight out of 9 of these studies21,22,23,24,26,27,28,31 concluded that histological inflammation correlated with either semiquantitative or DCE-MRI synovitis. Although immunohistochemical analysis of the synovial cell infiltrate was performed in 7 studies27,29,31,33,35,36,37, only 6 directly reported the relationship between histological markers and synovitis with a significant relationship reported between MRI synovitis and CD4+ T cells37, CD68+ sublining macrophage number27,29,31, cell proliferation (Ki67)27, and neoangiogenesis (CD31)27. Three of the 4 studies also reported a significant relationship between MRI synovitis and degree of histological vascularity through semiquantitative assessment of H&E stained tissues30 expression of the neoangiogenesis marker CD3127, endothelial cell marker QBend3025, and von Willebrand factor expression36. Conversely, Vordenbäumen, et al35 reported no significant relationship between either sublining macrophage number or vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF; an immunhistochemical marker of vascularization) and RAMRIS synovitis.

Does MRI synovitis identify modulation of synovial pathobiology following effective therapeutic intervention?

Longitudinal data examining whether MRI is sensitive enough to detect modulation of histological synovitis following effective therapeutic intervention was evaluated in 4 studies incorporating serial MRI scans and paired synovial biopsies. First, an open-label placebo-controlled study of intraarticular anti-CD437 reported a significant correlation between MRI synovitis and macroscopic synovitis with a trend toward improvement in both histological and MRI synovitis only in patients receiving active treatment. Second, Buch, et al33 in a prospective open-label trial reported on the synovial effect of abatacept in a cohort of 13 patients. Although the study did not report directly on the relationship between modulation of MRI synovitis and synovial histology, it did report on the relationship between synovial gene expression and MRI synovitis, documenting a significant association between downregulation of the T cell cytokine interferon-γ and reduction in MRI synovitis scores in responders to treatment. Third, a prospective open-label trial of 16 patients with RA investigated the effect of tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor therapy on hypoxia, macroscopic and microscopic synovial inflammation, and MRI synovitis34. Patients underwent a baseline needle arthroscopic synovial biopsy and DCE-MRI of the knee, both of which were repeated 3 months after starting anti-TNF therapy. The study demonstrated a significant inverse relationship between hypoxia and clinical response to anti-TNF therapy. The investigators also looked directly and found a significant relationship between macroscopic synovitis/vascularity and MRI synovitis. There were also significant associations demonstrated between falls in CD4+ T cells and CD68+ sublining macrophages and MRI synovitis. Finally, Vordenbäumen, et al35 reported results from 6 patients who underwent sequential metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint biopsy and MRI and found no significant association between change in sublining macrophage number and RAMRIS synovitis score, although given the small sample size the significance of the results is unclear.

The data identified within our review provides an initial basis for the use of MRI as a surrogate measure of histological synovitis. Of particular importance is the relatively consistent demonstration of a significant relationship between CD68+ sublining macrophage number and MRI synovitis, the only current synovial biomarker validated as a measure of disease activity43. However, it is also important to consider a number of limitations when interpreting results from these studies21,22,23,25,26,27,28,29,30,35,37. First, it is now recommended that to overcome significant synovial pathological heterogeneity, 6 synovial samples from different sites should be analyzed for large joint procedures44 and 4 for small joints45. Although 10 studies reported number of synovial samples retrieved per procedure21,22,23,26,28,30,33,35,37,38, only 4 cohorts reported retrieving 6 or more biopsies30,31,33,35. Further, only a selected number of studies specified a biopsy site predetermined by the MRI21,22,23,28,30,37 and so were able to directly compare local synovial pathology. Synovial pathology is also influenced by disease course as well as therapeutic intervention46,47,48 factors that were not routinely controlled for in a number of studies21,22,23,28,30,32 because a wide variability in time from MRI assessment to synovial sampling was reported. In addition, only 2 studies21,29 reported that intraarticular steroid injections were not permitted in this period and only 3 studies29,33,37 controlled doses of steroids and DMARD prior to study inclusion. It should also be noted that the majority of studies identified harvested synovial tissue from arthroplastic knee joint procedures21,22,23,27,28,30,32, which restricts sampling of tissue to endstage joints. Indeed, there were only limited data evaluating pathobiology at distinct disease stages from homogeneous cohorts, with only 1 study29 including patients specifically with disease duration of less than 1 year and only 2 studies26,38 including patients with disease duration of less than 2 years26,38. Importantly, of the 18 studies identified, 13 sampled knee joints, with only 426,31,32,35 examining the relationship in small joints.

Bone marrow edema

MRI is unique among currently available imaging modalities in its ability to detect BME (Figure 2C) and although outside the remit of our systematic review, it is worth noting that BME has been shown to equate to histological osteitis49. Importantly, the occurrence of BME has been tightly correlated with the presence of synovitis50; however, whether BME is driven and/or maintained by synovial pathobiological signals is unknown and very limited data examining this relationship were identified. Takase, et al27 report that in a cohort of 15 patients with RA, no significant relationship between histopathological changes of inflammation (neoangiogenesis, inflammatory cell infiltrates, and lining layer thickness) and MRI BME were found. In a further cohort of 7 patients in clinical remission32, no correlation between MRI BME and histological synovitis was reported; this is likely to be explained by the small number of patients within the study. Finally, in a cohort of 10 patients, Vordenbäumen, et al35 reported that synovial staining for VEGF significantly correlated with RAMRIS BME scores in MCP joints. Certainly, more complex synovial analysis in larger cohorts at different stages of disease will be required to fully interpret whether synovial signals are involved or required in the initiation and/or maintenance of BME.

Bone erosion

MRI has been increasingly recognized as a more sensitive marker of erosions (Figure 2D) than plain radiography51. The validation of the OMERACT-RAMRIS MRI score40 as a robust and sensitive tool to document presence and/or erosive progression in patients with RA suggests that incorporating MRI progression data with synovial pathobiology may reveal important signatures of disease. In 2 cross-sectional cohorts, Andarajah, et al32 reported in 7 patients with established RA no clear association between histological synovitis and erosions32, and Vordenbäumen, et al35 reported a significant relationship between synovial VEGF staining and the RAMRIS erosive score in MCP joints in 10 patients. Interpretation of the significance of these results is complicated by the small numbers, the cross-sectional approach, and the lack of validated MRI erosion score in the former report. However, in a prospective study of 60 patients, Kirkham, et al38 aimed to examine whether synovial pathobiology could explain joint damage progression, as assessed by progression in the OMERACT-RAMRIS score52. Although the authors identified no specific synovial histological features, using multivariate analysis of gene expression they identified interleukin (IL)-1, TNF-α, IL-17, and IL-10 as predictive of joint damage progression. The study had a number of limitations: (1) a wide range of disease durations in patients recruited to the study, (2) lack of control of concomitant disease-modifying therapies, and (3) joint damage progression in the small joints of the hands was related to distant synovial sampling sites in the knee. Notwithstanding this, the report is highly instructive in identifying synovial mediators of joint damage progression and it remains important, therefore, to validate the results in further larger cohorts of therapy-naive patients with early RA.

Cartilage loss

Cartilage loss in RA can be assessed by documenting joint space narrowing (JSN) on plain radiographs as well as MRI (Figure 2E). However, no data were identified within this systematic review to examine the relationship between cartilage loss and synovial pathobiology.

DISCUSSION

MRI has significant advantages over other imaging techniques for patients with RA; it does not expose patients to ionizing radiation, it can sensitively detect synovitis, erosions, and JSN, and is unique in its capacity to detect BME. This differentiates MRI from ultrasound, which, although it is a sensitive measure of histological synovitis53, cannot detect BME and does not have validated outcome measures for cartilage loss or bone erosion. The clinical studies identified in this review indicate a significant relationship between histological and MRI evident synovitis, which is important to validate MRI as a tool to reliably assess synovitis without the need for invasive biopsy. Further, from the limited data available, a critical role for synovial pathways at least in driving joint damage38 seems likely but requires more extensive validation. However, overall the data provide limited information on the specific synovial pathobiological processes driving MRI abnormalities in RA.

Although the past decade has seen tremendous advances in the care of patients with RA, considerable challenges remain. These include (1) specificity/sensitivity of current diagnostic/classification criteria for RA, (2) prediction of prognosis following diagnosis of RA, and (3) limited biomarkers of response/resistance to biologic drugs. What is required is a move toward an era of personalized medicine for patients with RA with targeted treatment pathways from diagnosis, but this is only possible if critical pathways mediating both disease pathogenesis and clinical response to therapy are further elucidated. What our review highlights is the need to validate the relationship between synovial pathobiology and MRI abnormalities at the single joint level both in well-defined early and established RA cohorts and within clinical trial protocols of established and novel biologic drugs. This is particularly important because historical limitations such as the lack of sensitivity of clinical examination and radiographic assessment to detect synovitis and joint damage progression/cartilage loss, respectively, are largely overcome by the advent of a robust validated MRI score capable of assessing synovitis and erosion40 and potentially BME and cartilage loss54. Further, the advent of techniques such as ultrasound-guided synovial biopsy (Figure 3) that provide a technically simple, minimally invasive approach to tissue acquisition from small as well as large joints55, and more recent techniques to rapidly and simultaneously examine the expression of multiple genes, are likely to overcome challenges in sampling tissue from previously inaccessible joints and variability in histological assessment of synovial tissue.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Minimally invasive technique of US-guided synovial biopsy of wrist joint. Inset depicts corresponding greyscale US image of biopsy needle inserted into wrist joint under extensor tendon complex. US: ultrasound.

Overall, the data identified within our systematic review validate MRI as a tool to assess synovitis, but very limited data directly examining the link between synovial pathobiology and joint damage/cartilage loss and BME were identified. Future research should focus on clinical trial protocols integrating synovial sampling with MRI imaging at different stages of disease to dissect critical synovial pathways mediating RA pathogenesis. Although understanding the interrelationship of these disease biomarkers offers the potential to enhance the predictive validity of modern imaging with concomitant synovial pathobiological analysis, further studies integrating MRI with synovial tissue analysis in well-controlled cohorts before and after therapeutic intervention are required to achieve this.

Footnotes

  • AB, MB, and PGC are supported in part by the NIHR Leeds Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Centre.

  • Accepted for publication May 11, 2017.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Østergaard M,
    2. Hansen M,
    3. Stoltenberg M,
    4. Jensen KE,
    5. Szkudlarek M,
    6. Pedersen-Zbinden B,
    7. 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;48:2128–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. van der Helm-van Mil AH
    . Imaging: Use of MRI as an outcome measure in clinical trials in RA. Nat Rev Rheumatol 2012;8:643–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Rahman MU,
    2. Buchanan J,
    3. Doyle MK,
    4. Hsia EC,
    5. Gathany T,
    6. Parasuraman S,
    7. et al.
    Changes in patient characteristics in anti-tumour necrosis factor clinical trials for rheumatoid arthritis: results of an analysis of the literature over the past 16 years. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:1631–40.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Nieuwenhuis WP,
    2. van Steenbergen HW,
    3. Stomp W,
    4. Stijnen T,
    5. Huizinga TW,
    6. Bloem JL,
    7. et al.
    The course of bone marrow edema in early undifferentiated arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: a longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study at bone level. Arthritis Rheum 2016;68:1080–8.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Conaghan PG,
    2. O’Connor P,
    3. McGonagle D,
    4. Astin P,
    5. Wakefield RJ,
    6. Gibbon WW,
    7. 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;48:64–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Schett G,
    2. Firestein GS
    . Mr Outside and Mr Inside: classic and alternative views on the pathogenesis of rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:787–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Hetland ML,
    2. Ejbjerg B,
    3. Hørslev-Petersen K,
    4. Jacobsen S,
    5. Vestergaard A,
    6. Jurik AG,
    7. et al;
    8. CIMESTRA study group
    . MRI bone oedema is the strongest predictor of subsequent radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a 2-year randomised controlled trial (CIMESTRA). Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:384–90.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. American College of Rheumatology Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials Task Force Imaging Group and Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Magnetic Resonance Imaging Inflammatory Arthritis Working Group
    . Review: the utility of magnetic resonance imaging for assessing structural damage in randomized controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2013;65:2513–23.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Mundwiler ML,
    2. Maranian P,
    3. Brown DH,
    4. Silverman JM,
    5. Wallace D,
    6. Khanna D,
    7. et al.
    The utility of MRI in predicting radiographic erosions in the metatarsophalangeal joints of the rheumatoid foot: a prospective longitudinal cohort study. Arthritis Res Ther 2009;11:R94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Palosaari K,
    2. Vuotila J,
    3. Takalo R,
    4. Jartti A,
    5. Niemelä RK,
    6. Karjalainen A,
    7. et al.
    Bone oedema predicts erosive progression on wrist MRI in early RA—a 2-yr observational MRI and NC scintigraphy study. Rheumatology 2006;45:1542–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Bøyesen P,
    2. Haavardsholm EA,
    3. van der Heijde D,
    4. Østergaard M,
    5. Hammer HB,
    6. Sesseng S,
    7. et al.
    Prediction of MRI erosive progression: a comparison of modern imaging modalities in early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:176–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Lisbona MP,
    2. Pàmies A,
    3. Ares J,
    4. Almirall M,
    5. Navallas M,
    6. Solano A,
    7. et al.
    Association of bone edema with the progression of bone erosions quantified by hand magnetic resonance imaging in patients with rheumatoid arthritis in remission. J Rheumatol 2014;41:1623–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. McQueen FM,
    2. Benton N,
    3. Perry D,
    4. Crabbe J,
    5. Robinson E,
    6. Yeoman S,
    7. et al.
    Bone edema scored on magnetic resonance imaging scans of the dominant carpus at presentation predicts radiographic joint damage of the hands and feet six years later in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:1814–27.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Tan AL,
    2. Tanner SF,
    3. Conaghan PG,
    4. Radjenovic A,
    5. O’Connor P,
    6. Brown AK,
    7. et al.
    Role of metacarpophalangeal joint anatomic factors in the distribution of synovitis and bone erosion in early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2003;48:1214–22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. McQueen F,
    2. Clarke A,
    3. McHaffie A,
    4. Reeves Q,
    5. Williams M,
    6. Robinson E,
    7. et al.
    Assessment of cartilage loss at the wrist in rheumatoid arthritis using a new MRI scoring system. Ann Rheum Dis 2010;69:1971–5.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. van der Heijde D
    . Erosions versus joint space narrowing in rheumatoid arthritis: what do we know? Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70 Suppl 1:i116–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. McQueen FM,
    2. McHaffie A,
    3. Clarke A,
    4. Lee AC,
    5. Reeves Q,
    6. Curteis B,
    7. et al.
    MRI osteitis predicts cartilage damage at the wrist in RA: a three-year prospective 3T MRI study examining cartilage damage. Arthritis Res Ther 2014;16:R33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Moher D,
    2. Liberati A,
    3. Tetzlaff J,
    4. Altman DG;
    5. PRISMA Group
    . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Yusuf E,
    2. Kortekaas MC,
    3. Watt I,
    4. Huizinga TW,
    5. Kloppenburg M
    . Do knee abnormalities visualised on MRI explain knee pain in knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:60–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Lievense AM,
    2. Bierma-Zeinstra SM,
    3. Verhagen AP,
    4. van Baar ME,
    5. Verhaar JA,
    6. Koes BW
    . Influence of obesity on the development of osteoarthritis of the hip: a systematic review. Rheumatology 2002;41:1155–62.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Tamai K,
    2. Yamato M,
    3. Yamaguchi T,
    4. Ohno W
    . Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of synovitis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1994;37:1151–7.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Østergaard M,
    2. Stoltenberg M,
    3. Løvgreen-Nielsen P,
    4. Volck B,
    5. Jensen CH,
    6. Lorenzen I
    . Magnetic resonance imaging-determined synovial membrane and joint effusion volumes in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis: comparison with the macroscopic and microscopic appearance of the synovium. Arthritis Rheum 1997;40:1856–67.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Østergaard M,
    2. Stoltenberg M,
    3. Løvgreen-Nielsen P,
    4. Volck B,
    5. Sonne-Holm S,
    6. Lorenzen I
    . Quantification of synovistis by MRI: correlation between dynamic and static gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging and microscopic and macroscopic signs of synovial inflammation. Magn Reson Imaging 1998;16:743–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    1. Gaffney K,
    2. Cookson J,
    3. Blake D,
    4. Coumbe A,
    5. Blades S
    . Quantification of rheumatoid synovitis by magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum 1995;38:1610–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Gaffney K,
    2. Cookson J,
    3. Blades S,
    4. Coumbe A,
    5. Blake D
    . Quantitative assessment of the rheumatoid synovial microvascular bed by gadolinium-DTPA enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Rheum Dis 1998;57:152–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. 26.↵
    1. Ostendorf B,
    2. Peters R,
    3. Dann P,
    4. Becker A,
    5. Scherer A,
    6. Wedekind F,
    7. et al.
    Magnetic resonance imaging and miniarthroscopy of metacarpophalangeal joints: sensitive detection of morphologic changes in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2001;44:2492–502.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Takase K,
    2. Ohno S,
    3. Takeno M,
    4. Hama M,
    5. Kirino Y,
    6. Ihata A,
    7. et al.
    Simultaneous evaluation of long-lasting knee synovitis in patients undergoing arthroplasty by power Doppler ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced MRI in comparison with histopathology. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2012;30:85–92.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Axelsen MB,
    2. Stoltenberg M,
    3. Poggenborg RP,
    4. Kubassova O,
    5. Boesen M,
    6. Bliddal H,
    7. et al.
    Dynamic gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging allows accurate assessment of the synovial inflammatory activity in rheumatoid arthritis knee joints: a comparison with synovial histology. Scand J Rheumatol 2012;41:89–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Paramarta JE,
    2. van der Leij C,
    3. Gofita I,
    4. Yeremenko N,
    5. van de Sande MG,
    6. de Hair MJ,
    7. et al.
    Peripheral joint inflammation in early onset spondyloarthritis is not specifically related to enthesitis. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:735–40.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. König H,
    2. Sieper J,
    3. Wolf KJ
    . Rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation of hypervascular and fibrous pannus with dynamic MR imaging enhanced with Gd-DTPA. Radiology 1990;176:473–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Vordenbäumen S,
    2. Schleich C,
    3. Lögters T,
    4. Sewerin P,
    5. Bleck E,
    6. Pauly T,
    7. et al.
    Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of metacarpophalangeal joints reflects histological signs of synovitis in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2014;16:452.
    OpenUrl
  32. 32.↵
    1. Anandarajah A,
    2. Thiele R,
    3. Giampoli E,
    4. Monu J,
    5. Seo GS,
    6. Feng C,
    7. et al.
    Patients with rheumatoid arthritis in clinical remission manifest persistent joint inflammation on histology and imaging studies. J Rheumatol 2014;41:2153–60.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Buch MH,
    2. Boyle DL,
    3. Rosengren S,
    4. Saleem B,
    5. Reece RJ,
    6. Rhodes LA,
    7. et al.
    Mode of action of abatacept in rheumatoid arthritis patients having failed tumour necrosis factor blockade: a histological, gene expression and dynamic magnetic resonance imaging pilot study. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:1220–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. 34.↵
    1. Kennedy A,
    2. Ng CT,
    3. Chang TC,
    4. Biniecka M,
    5. O’Sullivan JN,
    6. Heffernan E,
    7. et al.
    Tumor necrosis factor blocking therapy alters joint inflammation and hypoxia. Arthritis Rheum 2011;63:923–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Vordenbäumen S,
    2. Sewerin P,
    3. Lögters T,
    4. Miese F,
    5. Schleich C,
    6. Bleck E,
    7. et al.
    Inflammation and vascularisation markers of arthroscopically-guided finger joint synovial biospies reflect global disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2014;32:117–20.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    1. Maijer KI,
    2. van der Leij C,
    3. de Hair MJ,
    4. Tas SW,
    5. Maas M,
    6. Gerlag DM,
    7. et al.
    Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging using pharmacokinetic modeling: initial experience in patients with early arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2016;68:587–96.
    OpenUrl
  37. 37.↵
    1. Veale DJ,
    2. Reece RJ,
    3. Parsons W,
    4. Radjenovic A,
    5. O’Connor PJ,
    6. Orgles CS,
    7. et al.
    Intra-articular primatised anti-CD4: efficacy in resistant rheumatoid knees. A study of combined arthroscopy, magnetic resonance imaging, and histology. Ann Rheum Dis 1999;58:342–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Kirkham BW,
    2. Lassere MN,
    3. Edmonds JP,
    4. Juhasz KM,
    5. Bird PA,
    6. Lee CS,
    7. et al.
    Synovial membrane cytokine expression is predictive of joint damage progression in rheumatoid arthritis: a two-year prospective study (the DAMAGE study cohort). Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:1122–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Krenn V1,
    2. Morawietz L,
    3. Burmester GR,
    4. Kinne RW,
    5. Mueller-Ladner U,
    6. Muller B,
    7. et al.
    Synovitis score: discrimination between chronic low-grade and high-grade synovitis. Histopathology 2006;49:358–64.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Østergaard M,
    2. Peterfy C,
    3. Conaghan P,
    4. McQueen F,
    5. Bird P,
    6. Ejbjerg B,
    7. et al.
    OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies. Core set of MRI acquisitions, joint pathology definitions, and the OMERACT RA-MRI scoring system. J Rheumatol 2003;30:1385–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. 41.↵
    1. Reece RJ,
    2. Kraan MC,
    3. Radjenovic A,
    4. Veale DJ,
    5. O’Connor PJ,
    6. Ridgway JP,
    7. et al.
    Comparative assessment of leflunomide and methotrexate for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, by dynamic enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum 2002;46:366–72.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Rhodes LA,
    2. Tan AL,
    3. Tanner SF,
    4. Radjenovic A,
    5. Hensor EM,
    6. Reece R,
    7. et al.
    Regional variation and differential response to therapy for knee synovitis adjacent to the cartilage-pannus junction and suprapatellar pouch in inflammatory arthritis: implications for pathogenesis and treatment. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50:2428–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Bresnihan B,
    2. Pontifex E,
    3. Thurlings RM,
    4. Vinkenoog M,
    5. El-Gabalawy H,
    6. Fearon U,
    7. et al.
    Synovial tissue sublining CD68 expression is a biomarker of therapeutic response in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials: consistency across centers. J Rheumatol 2009;36:1800–2.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. van de Sande MG,
    2. Gerlag DM,
    3. Lodde BM,
    4. van Baarsen LG,
    5. Alivernini S,
    6. Codullo V,
    7. et al.
    Evaluating antirheumatic treatments using synovial biopsy: a recommendation for standardisation to be used in clinical trials. Ann Rheum Dis 2011;70:423–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  45. 45.↵
    1. Humby F,
    2. Kelly S,
    3. Hands R,
    4. Rocher V,
    5. DiCicco M,
    6. Ng N,
    7. et al.
    Use of ultrasound-guided small joint biopsy to evaluate the histopathologic response to rheumatoid arthritis therapy: recommendations for application to clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum 2015;67:2601–10.
    OpenUrl
  46. 46.↵
    1. Bresnihan B,
    2. Baeten D,
    3. Firestein GS,
    4. Fitzgerald OM,
    5. Gerlag DM,
    6. Haringman JJ,
    7. et al;
    8. OMERACT 7 Special Interest Group
    . Synovial tissue analysis in clinical trials. J Rheumatol 2005;32:2481–4.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    1. Gerlag DM,
    2. Haringman JJ,
    3. Smeets TJ,
    4. Zwinderman AH,
    5. Kraan MC,
    6. Laud PJ,
    7. et al.
    Effects of oral prednisolone on biomarkers in synovial tissue and clinical improvement in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2004;50:3783–91.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. Kraan MC,
    2. Reece RJ,
    3. Barg EC,
    4. Smeets TJ,
    5. Farnell J,
    6. Rosenburg R,
    7. et al.
    Modulation of inflammation and metalloproteinase expression in synovial tissue by leflunomide and methotrexate in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis. Findings in a prospective, randomized, double-blind, parallel-design clinical trial in thirty-nine patients at two centers. Arthritis Rheum 2000;43:1820–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    1. Dalbeth N,
    2. Smith T,
    3. Gray S,
    4. Doyle A,
    5. Antill P,
    6. Lobo M,
    7. et al.
    Cellular characterisation of magnetic resonance imaging bone oedema in rheumatoid arthritis; implications for pathogenesis of erosive disease. Ann Rheum Dis 2009;68:279–82.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.↵
    1. McGonagle D,
    2. Conaghan PG,
    3. O’Connor P,
    4. Gibbon W,
    5. Green M,
    6. Wakefield R,
    7. et al.
    The relationship between synovitis and bone changes in early untreated rheumatoid arthritis: a controlled magnetic resonance imaging study. Arthritis Rheum 1999;42:1706–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    1. McQueen FM,
    2. Stewart N,
    3. Crabbe J,
    4. Robinson E,
    5. Yeoman S,
    6. Tan PL,
    7. et al.
    Magnetic resonance imaging of the wrist in early rheumatoid arthritis reveals a high prevalence of erosions at four months after symptom onset. Ann Rheum Dis 1998;57:350–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  52. 52.↵
    1. Conaghan P,
    2. Edmonds J,
    3. Emery P,
    4. Genant H,
    5. Gibbon W,
    6. Klarlund M,
    7. et al.
    Magnetic resonance imaging in rheumatoid arthritis: summary of OMERACT activities, current status, and plans. J Rheumatol 2001;28:1158–62.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  53. 53.↵
    1. Andersen M,
    2. Ellegaard K,
    3. Hebsgaard JB,
    4. Christensen R,
    5. Torp-Pedersen S,
    6. Kvist PH,
    7. et al.
    Ultrasound colour Doppler is associated with synovial pathology in biopsies from hand joints in rheumatoid arthritis patients: a cross-sectional study. Ann Rheum Dis 2014;73:678–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  54. 54.↵
    1. Østergaard M,
    2. Bøyesen P,
    3. Eshed I,
    4. Gandjbakhch F,
    5. Lillegraven S,
    6. Bird P,
    7. et al.
    Development and preliminary validation of a magnetic resonance imaging joint space narrowing score for use in rheumatoid arthritis: potential adjunct to the OMERACT RA MRI scoring system. J Rheumatol 2011;38:2045–50.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. 55.↵
    1. Kelly S,
    2. Humby F,
    3. Filer A,
    4. Ng N,
    5. Di Cicco M,
    6. Hands RE,
    7. et al.
    Ultrasound-guided synovial biopsy: a safe, well-tolerated and reliable technique for obtaining high-quality synovial tissue from both large and small joints in early arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis 2013;74:611–7.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

The Journal of Rheumatology
Vol. 44, Issue 9
1 Sep 2017
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by Author
  • Editorial Board (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about The Journal of Rheumatology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Relationship Between Synovial Pathobiology and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Abnormalities in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from The Journal of Rheumatology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the The Journal of Rheumatology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The Relationship Between Synovial Pathobiology and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Abnormalities in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review
Frances Humby, Arti Mahto, Muaaze Ahmed, Andrew Barr, Stephen Kelly, Maya Buch, Costantino Pitzalis, Philip G. Conaghan
The Journal of Rheumatology Sep 2017, 44 (9) 1311-1324; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.161314

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

 Request Permissions

Share
The Relationship Between Synovial Pathobiology and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Abnormalities in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review
Frances Humby, Arti Mahto, Muaaze Ahmed, Andrew Barr, Stephen Kelly, Maya Buch, Costantino Pitzalis, Philip G. Conaghan
The Journal of Rheumatology Sep 2017, 44 (9) 1311-1324; DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.161314
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • eLetters

Keywords

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
SYNOVITIS
PATHOBIOLOGY
RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS
BONE MARROW EDEMA

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Whole-Body Macrophage Positron Emission Tomography Imaging for Disease Activity Assessment in Early Rheumatoid Arthritis
  • Presence of Autoantibodies in Males and Females With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis
  • Demographic, Lifestyle, and Serologic Risk Factors for Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA)–associated Bronchiectasis: Role of RA-related Autoantibodies
Show more Rheumatoid Arthritis

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • magnetic resonance imaging
  • synovitis
  • PATHOBIOLOGY
  • rheumatoid arthritis
  • BONE MARROW EDEMA

Content

  • First Release
  • Current
  • Archives
  • Collections
  • Audiovisual Rheum
  • COVID-19 and Rheumatology

Resources

  • Guide for Authors
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Author Payment
  • Reviewers
  • Advertisers
  • Classified Ads
  • Reprints and Translations
  • Permissions
  • Meetings
  • FAQ
  • Policies

Subscribers

  • Subscription Information
  • Purchase Subscription
  • Your Account
  • Terms and Conditions

More

  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • My Alerts
  • My Folders
  • Privacy/GDPR Policy
  • RSS Feeds
The Journal of Rheumatology
The content of this site is intended for health care professionals.
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Rheumatology Publishing Co. Ltd.
Print ISSN: 0315-162X; Online ISSN: 1499-2752
Powered by HighWire