Search

Early recognition of joint inflammation will increase treatment efficacy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Yet, conventional power Doppler (PD) ultrasound might not be sufficiently sensitive to detect minor inflammation. We investigated the sensitivity of high-frame rate Doppler, combined with singular value decomposition technique, to suppress tissue signals, for microvascular flow in a flow phantom setup and in a proof-of-principle study in healthy controls and in RA patients with different disease activities. In the flow phantom, minimal detectable flow velocity was a factor 3 lower with high-frame-rate PD than with conventional PD ultrasound. In the proof-of-principle study we detected a positive PD signal in all volunteers, diseased or healthy, with high-frame-rate PD ultrasound. We saw a gradual increase in PD signal in RA patients depending on disease activity. In conclusion, high-frame rate Doppler is more sensitive in detecting vascularisation than conventional PD ultrasound.

OBJECTIVE: . To compare the screening performance of the Psoriasis Epidemiology Screening Tool (PEST), Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation (PASE) and Early Arthritis for Psoriatic Patients (EARP) questionnaires for detecting PsA among psoriasis patients in a primary care setting.METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 473 primary care psoriasis patients at risk for PsA completed the PEST, PASE and EARP questionnaires and were clinically evaluated by a trained research nurse. A PsA case was defined by a rheumatologist according to the CASPAR criteria. Sensitivity and specificity were determined for the PEST and EARP cut-offs (⩾3) and the PASE cut-offs (⩾44 and ⩾47).RESULTS: PsA was diagnosed in 53 patients. The PEST had a sensitivity of 0.68 and a specificity of 0.71. The PASE was validated for two different cut-offs. The cut-off of 47 led to a sensitivity of 0.59 and a specificity of 0.66, whereas the lower cut-off of 44 led to a sensitivity of 0.66 and a specificity of 0.57. For the EARP we found a sensitivity of 0.87 with a specificity of 0.34.CONCLUSION: The PEST questionnaire has the most favourable trade-off between sensitivity and specificity to screen for PsA. However, as the prevalence of psoriasis and PsA is fairly low in primary care, screening only psoriasis patients with musculoskeletal complaints may be a better allocation of resources.

ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of two tapering strategies after achieving controlled disease in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), during 1 year of follow-up.MethodsIn this multicentre single-blinded (research nurses) randomised controlled trial, patients with RA were included who achieved controlled disease, defined as a Disease Activity Score (DAS) ≤ 2.4 and a Swollen Joint Count (SJC) ≤ 1, treated with both a conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARD) and a TNF inhibitor. Eligible patients were randomised into gradual tapering csDMARDs or TNF inhibitors. Medication was tapered if the RA was still under control, by cutting the dosage into half, a quarter and thereafter it was stopped. Primary outcome was proportion of patients with a disease flare, defined as DAS > 2.4 and/or SJC > 1. Secondary outcomes were DAS, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ5D) and functional ability (Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index [HAQ-DI]) after 1 year and over time.ResultsA total of 189 patients were randomly assigned to tapering csDMARDs (n = 94) or tapering anti-TNF (n = 95). The cumulative flare rates in the csDMARD and anti-TNF tapering group were, respectively, 33 % (95% CI,24% to 43 %) and 43 % (95% CI, 33% to 53 % (p = 0.17). Mean DAS, HAQ-DI and EQ-5D did not differ between tapering groups after 1 year and over time.ConclusionUp to 9 months, flare rates of tapering csDMARDs or TNF inhibitors were similar. After 1 year, a non-significant difference was found of 10 % favouring csDMARD tapering. Tapering TNF inhibitors was, therefore, not superior to tapering csDMARDs. From a societal perspective, it would be sensible to taper the TNF inhibitor first, because of possible cost reductions and less long-term side effects.Trial registration numberNTR2754

textabstractObjective To estimate the prevalence of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in primary care patients diagnosed as having psoriasis and to estimate the prevalence of musculoskeletal symptoms in psoriasis patients in primary care. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study in adult primary care patients with psoriasis. Responding patients reporting pain in joints, entheses, or the lower back were interviewed by telephone to determine eligibility and, if eligible, were invited for clinical evaluation. During clinical evaluation, skin, nails, joints, and entheses were assessed. Additionally, ultrasound of the enthesis was performed by an independent trained examiner if a patient had at least 1 tender enthesis (determined by the Leeds Enthesitis Index and the Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score). Patients who fulfilled the Classification of Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) Study Group criteria were classified as having PsA. Results We invited 2,564 psoriasis patients from databases of 97 participating general practitioners. Of 1,673 responders (65.2%), 841 (50.3%) were willing to participate. A total of 823 patients (32.1%) reported having musculoskeletal symptoms; 659 of these patients were determined to be eligible, 524 of whom were clinically evaluated. We identified 64 cases of established PsA and another 17 cases of newly diagnosed PsA, leading to a prevalence of 3.2% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 2.5-3.9) among psoriasis patients in primary care. This prevalence would increase to 4.6% (95% CI 3.8-5.4) if PsA cases based on enthesitis were also taken into account. Conclusion Among psoriasis patients in primary care, the prevalence of PsA is conservatively estimated to be 3.2%, increasing to 4.6% if enthesitis is taken into account. The prevalence of musculoskeletal symptoms among psoriasis patients is comparable with the prevalence of musculoskeletal symptoms in the general population.

Background Sepsis is one of the leading causes of death in the hospital. Several warning scores have been developed to categorize patients’ degrees of illness, with the purpose of recognizing sepsis onset at an early stage and consequently reducing time before starting treatment. The most accurate classification method, known as the SOFA score, is developed for use in the intensive care unit (ICU). Objective Sepsis is not exclusively developing in the ICU and may occur in any hospitalized patient. Therefore, a reliable method for sepsis recognition using routinely gathered information from the general ward is of major importance. Methods Recently, the use of computational methods has been proposed for early sepsis prediction. Multiple sepsis classifiers have been devised using machine learning methods. We validated a linear classification model and improved upon it using a deep neural network trained on data from the MIMIC-III database. Results The reference model approach yielded an Area Under Precision-Recall Curve (AUPRC) of 0.45 for a 3-h prediction time. Our newly constructed deep neural network outperformed the reference model, reaching an AUPRC of 0.49 for a 3-h prediction time. These results demonstrate to be robust for multiple prediction times, utilizing different datasets and multiple sepsis criteria. Conclusions Our results are comparable to a high-resolution model, yet using only 8 simple and commonly performed measurements, instead of the complex set of dozens of measurements leveraged by other authors. Moreover, our method proves to adapt to different datasets and sepsis criteria, yielding a high accuracy. Therefore, sepsis onset prediction may also be viable in less monitored environments in the hospital, such as the general ward and the emergency room.

__Objective__ In this study we aimed to evaluate the effect of lowering the cut point of the 2010 criteria to identify more patients with RA among early inflammatory arthritis patients. __Methods__ We included early arthritis patients from the Rotterdam Early Arthritis Cohort with at least one joint with clinical synovitis and symptoms for

OBJECTIVES: Although RA patients achieve clinical remission, risk of flare still exists. Given the association between US synovitis and increased risk of flare, it is of clinical interest whether these patients report a different health status. Therefore, our aim was to evaluate the frequency of US remission in RA patients in clinical remission and to compare the health status of RA patients in clinical remission with those who were also in US remission.METHODS: In a prospective study, we included 89 RA patients (aged >17 years) treated with a synthetic DMARD and a TNF inhibitor who were in remission (DAS in 44 joints ⩽2.4 and swollen joint count ⩽1). Demographic characteristics, swollen and tender joints, laboratory variables, US (MCP2-5, PIP2-5, wrists and MTP2-5) and patient-reported outcomes (general health, functional ability, fatigue, depression and anxiety, pain and morning stiffness) were recorded at two consecutive visits (3 months apart). US remission was defined as grey scale grade ⩽1 and power Doppler = 0.RESULTS: At visit 1, 39% of patients were in US remission. At visit 2, 32% of patients were in US remission. At visit 1, functional ability (HAQ) was scored lower by patients in US remission (P = 0.029). At visit 2, HAQ scores were similar (P = 0.928). At visit 2, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety score and visual analog scale pain were significantly higher in patients in US remission. Similar levels were found for the other patient-reported outcomes.CONCLUSION: One-third of RA patients in clinical remission were in US remission. In our study population, we could not find a clear association between health status of RA patients and being in US remission.

Background To decrease the burden of disease of rheumatoid arthritis (RA), patients at risk for RA need to be identified as early as possible, preferably when no clinically apparent synovitis can be detected. Up to now, it has been fairly difficult to identify those patients with arthralgia who develop inflammatory arthritis (IA), but recent studies using ultrasound (US) suggest that earlier detection is possible. We aimed to identify patients with arthralgia developing IA within 1 year using US to detect subclinical synovitis at first consultation. Methods In a multi-centre cohort study, we followed patients with arthralgia with at least two painful joints of the hands, feet or shoulders without clinical synovitis over 1 year. Symptom duration was 30 minutes (OR 3.3) and PD signal (OR 3.4) were associated with incident IA. Conclusions The presence of PD signal, morning stiffness for > 30 minutes and age at baseline were independently associated with the development of IA. Regarding the value of US in the diagnostic workup of patients with early arthralgia at risk for IA, US did perform well in ruling out IA in patients who did not have US synovitis.

Introduction: In many patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) subclinical disease activity can be detected with ultrasound (US), especially using power Doppler US (PDUS). However, PDUS may be highly dependent on the type of machine. This could create problems both in clinical trials and in daily clinical practice. To clarify how the PDUS signal differs between machines we created a microvessel flow phantom.Methods: The flow phantom contained three microvessels (150, 1000, 2000 microns). A syringe pump was used to generate flows. Five US machines were used. Settings were optimised to assess the lowest detectable flow for each US machine.Results: The minimal detectable flow velocities showed very large differences between the machines. Only two of the machines may be able to detect the very low flows in the capillaries of inflamed joints. There was no clear relation with price. One of the lower-end machines actually performed best in all three vessel sizes.Conclusions: We created a flow phantom to test the sensitivity of US machines to very low flows in small vessels. The sensitivity of the power Doppler modalities of 5 different machines was very different. The differences found between the machines are probably caused by fundamental differences in processing of the PD signal or internal settings inaccessible to users. Machines considered for PDUS assessment of RA patients should be tested using a flow phantom similar to ours. Within studies, only a single machine type should be used.