Skip to main content
Log in

Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional ultrasonographic assessment of peripheral enthesitis in spondylarthritis

  • Brief Report
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To compare the intra- and interobserver reliability of three-dimensional (3D) volumetric versus conventional two-dimensional (2D) power Doppler ultrasonography (US) in the assessment of peripheral enthesitis in spondylarthritis (SpA). Sixteen patients with SpA according to ASAS criteria were included. Two rheumatologists (one experimented in musculoskeletal US (sonographer 1) and one beginner (sonographer 2)) performed independently a 2D US scoring of the enthesis using the Madrid Sonographic Enthesis Index score followed by a 3D acquisition of the same entheseal sites. The reading of the 3D acquisition was performed a minimum of 1 week apart. Intraobserver reliability was evaluated by a second reading of the same images. The duration of 2D US scanning, 3D US acquisition and reading was recorded. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used for the reliability analysis. Intraobserver reproducibility was good to excellent for 2D US and good for 3D US (ICC (95 %CI) 2D US 0.776 (0.471–0.916) and 0.96 (0.892–0.986) and ICC (95 %CI) 3D US 0.796 (0.498–0.921) and 0.703 (0.325–0.886) for sonographer 1 and 2, respectively). Interobserver reliability was slightly better for 3D US than for 2D US (ICC (95 %CI) 0.776 (0.471–0.916) for 3D US versus 0.641 (0.221–0.859) for 2D US). The mean time (±SD) for 2D US scanning was 23 min (±4) whereas the mean time for 3D US volume acquisition and reading was 16.5 min (±2.6) (p < 0.001). 3D US showed good intra- and interobserver reliability in the assessment of enthesitis in SpA and shortened the needed time for scanning. It can be performed by a nonexperienced examiner without loss of reliability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Spadaro A, Iagnocco A, Perotta FM et al (2011) Clinical and ultrasonography assessment of peripheral enthesitis in ankylosing spondylitis. Rheumatology 50:2080–2086

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gutierrez M, Zeiler M, Filippucci E et al (2011) Sonographic subclinical entheseal involvement in dialysis patients. Clin Rheumatol 30:907–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Queiro R, Alonso S, Alperi M et al (2012) Entheseal ultrasound abnormalities in patients with SAPHO syndrome. Clin Rheumatol 31:913–919

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Koski JM, Saarakkala S, Helle M et al (2006) Power Doppler ultrasonography and synovitis: correlating ultrasound imaging with histopathological findings and evaluating the performance of ultrasound equipments. Ann Rheum Dis 65:1590–1595

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. De Miguel E, Cobo T, Munoz-Fernandez S et al (2009) Validity of enthesis ultrasound assessment in spondyloarthropathy. Ann Rheum Dis 68:169–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. D’agostino MA, Said-Nahal R, Hacquard-Bouder C et al (2003) Assessment of peripheral enthesitis in the spondylarthropathies by ultrasonography combined with Power Doppler: a cross-sectional study. Arthritis Rheum 48:523–533

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Watanabe T, Takemura M, Sato M et al (2012) Quantitative analysis of vascularization in the finger joints in patients with rheumatoid arthritis using three-dimensional volumetric ultrasonography with power Doppler. Clin Rheumatol 31:299–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Strunk J, Klingenberger P, Strube K et al (2006) Three-dimensional Doppler sonographic vascular imaging in regions with increased MR enhancement in inflamed wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine 73:518–522

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Naredo E, Moller I, Acebes C et al (2010) Three-dimensional volumetric ultrasonography, does it improve reliability of musculoskeletal ultrasound. Clin Exp Rheumatol 28:79–82

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Filippucci E, Meenagh G, De Agustin JJ et al (2007) Level of agreement between rheumatologists on US image acquisition using a 3D volumetric probe. Clin Exp Rheumatol 25:116

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Filippucci E, Meenagh G, Delle Sedie A et al (2009) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist XX. Sonographic assessment of hand and wrist joint involvement in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison between two- and three-dimensional ultrasonography. Clin Exp Rheumatol 27:197–200

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. De Miguel E, Falcao S, Castillo C et al (2011) Enthesis erosion in spondyloarthritis is not a persistent structural lesion. Ann Rheum Dis 70:2008–2010

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Iagnocco A, Riente L, Delle Sedie A et al (2009) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. XXII. Achilles tendon involvement in spondyloarthritis. A multi-centre study using high frequency volumetric probe. Clin Exp Rheumatol 27:547–551

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Rudwaleit M, Van Der Heijde D, Landewe R et al (2011) The assessment of Spondylarthritis International Society classification criteria for peripheral spondyloarthritis and for spondyloarthritis in general. Ann Rheum Dis 70:25–31

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Pyun SB, Kang CH, Yoon JS et al (2011) Application of 3-dimensional ultrasonography in assessing carpal tunnel syndrome. J Ultrasound Med 30:3–10

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Van Der Heijde DM (1996) Plain X-rays in rheumatoid arthritis: overview of scoring methods, their reliability and applicability. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol 10:435–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. D’agostino MA, Aegerter P, Jousse-Joulin S et al (2009) How to evaluate and improve the reliability of power Doppler ultrasonography for assessing enthesitis in spondylarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 61:61–69

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Benoit Le Goff.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mérot, O., Guillot, P., Maugars, Y. et al. Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional ultrasonographic assessment of peripheral enthesitis in spondylarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 33, 131–135 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-013-2424-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-013-2424-y

Keywords

Navigation