Article Sidebar

PDF
Date Published: 27/04/2023
Abstract Views: 179
Views PDF: 61
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v525i2.5220
Issue
Vol. 525 No. 2 (2023)
Section
Các bài báo
How to Cite
Hoàng, Đình Âu ., & Vương , T. H. . (2023). VALUE OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF SYNOVIAL JOINT INFECTION IN COMPARISION TO ULTRASOUND – GUIDED SYNOVIAL BIOPSY. Vietnam Medical Journal, 525(2). https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v525i2.5220

VALUE OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF SYNOVIAL JOINT INFECTION IN COMPARISION TO ULTRASOUND – GUIDED SYNOVIAL BIOPSY

Đình Âu Hoàng1,, Thu Hà Vương 1
1 Hanoi medical university hospital

Main Article Content

Abstract

Purposes: To evaluate the value of  magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of synovial joint infection, in comparision to the ultrasound - guided synovial biopsy. Matherial and Method: The cross sectional descriptive study on the patients who underwent the MRI and the ultrasound -guided synovial biopsy. Then, MRI features was compared to the synovial biopsy results to evaluate the sensibility, specificity of this method for the diagnosis of synovial infection. Results: From 09/2020 to 10/2022, forty three patients who underwent the MRI and ultrasound-guided synovial biopsy at Hanoi Medical University Hospital. Among them, eighteen patients were diagnosed synovial joint infection (bacteria and tuberculosis included). MRI features of these patients was compared to the synovial biopsy results. The sensibility, the specificity of the combination of 4, 3 and 2 MRI features were 50% and 96%, 72% and 84%, 83% and 56%, respectively. Conclusion: Compared to the synovial biopsy results, MRI had the high value method for the diagnosis of synovial joint infection.

Article Details

Keywords

guided ultrasound synovial biopsy, synovial joint infection, synovial joint

References

1. Graif M, Schweitzer ME, Deely D, Matteucci T. The septic versus nonseptic inflamed joint: MRI characteristics. Skeletal radiology. 1999;28(11):616-620.
2. Padovano I, Costantino F, Breban M, D’Agostino MA. Prevalence of ultrasound synovial inflammatory findings in healthy subjects. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(10):1819-1823. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208103.
3. Wakefield RJ, Balint PV, Szkudlarek M, et al. Musculoskeletal ultrasound including definitions for ultrasonographic pathology. The Journal of rheumatology. 2005;32(12):2485-2487.
4. Hong SH, Kim SM, Ahn JM, Chung HW, Shin MJ, Kang HS. Tuberculous versus pyogenic arthritis: MR imaging evaluation. Radiology.2001;218(3):848-853..
5. Gerlag DM, Tak PP. How useful are synovial biopsies for the diagnosis of rheumatic diseases? Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2007;3(5):248-249. doi:10.1038/ncprheum0485.
6. Kelly S, Humby F, Filer A, 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. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2015;74(3):611-617.
7. Østergaard M, Stoltenberg M, Løvgreen‐Nielsen P, Volck B, Jensen CH, Lorenzen IB. 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 & Rheumatism. 1997;40(10):1856-1867.
8. Ostergaard M, Stoltenberg M, Løvgreen-Nielsen P, Volck B, Sonne-Holm S, 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. Magnetic resonance imaging. 1998;16(7):743-754.
9. Hopkins KL, Li KC, Bergman G. Gadolinium-DTPA-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of musculoskeletal infectious processes. Skeletal radiology. 1995;24(5):325-330.
10. Jaganathan S, Goyal A, Gadodia A, Rastogi S, Mittal R, Gamanagatti S. Spectrum of synovial pathologies: a pictorial assay. Current Problems in Diagnostic Radiology. 2012;41(1):30-42.