ArticleRheumatology (Oxford, England)2020
Improving the feasibility of MRI in clinically suspect arthralgia for prediction of rheumatoid arthritis by omitting scanning of the feet.
Article in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Imaging tests as predictors of progression to rheumatoid arthritis in clinically suspect arthralgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Pooled it
- T-cell subset biomarkers across the rheumatoid arthritis disease continuum: from clinical utility to adoption in daily practice.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Early rheumatoid arthritis, two distinctive structural damage patterns revealed by MRI: an 8-year longitudinal study.European radiology · 2025Article
- Ultrasound of the forefeet besides the hands in patients at risk for rheumatoid arthritis: is it worth the effort? A longitudinal cohort study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Hand and foot MRI in contemporary undifferentiated arthritis: in which patients is MRI valuable to detect rheumatoid arthritis early? A large prospective study.Rheumatology (Oxford, England) · 2022Article
- The value of MRI for detecting subclinical joint inflammation in clinically suspect arthralgia.RMD open · 2022Review
- When and how should we use imaging in individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis?Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Challenges and Opportunities of Targeted Behavioral Interventions for Groups at Risk for Developing Rheumatoid Arthritis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- The Role of Imaging in Predicting the Development of Rheumatoid Arthritis.Rheumatology and immunology research · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe use of MR-imaging is recommended for the early detection of RA. Next to the small joints of the hands, foot-joints are often involved. Therefore, imaging inflammation of the feet in addition to hands may be informative, but prolongs scan-time and leads to additional costs. We studied the value of MRI of the feet alone and complementary to MRI of the hands in patients with clinically suspect arthralgia (CSA).
methods357 consecutively included CSA patients underwent contrast-enhanced 1.5 T-MRI of hand (MCP2-5 and wrist) and foot (MTP1-5) joints at baseline. Scans were scored for synovitis, osteitis and tenosynovitis. After ⩾1 year follow-up, the development of clinically apparent inflammatory arthritis (IA) was studied. Cox regression was performed and test characteristics were evaluated. Sensitivity analyses were performed for the outcome RA-development (2010-criteria).
resultsMRI-detected tenosynovitis of the feet was associated with IA-development, independently from synovitis and osteitis hazard ratio (HR) (95%CI) 4.75 (2.38; 9.49), and independently from ACPA and CRP, HR 3.13 (1.48; 6.64). From all CSA patients, 11% had inflammation in hands and feet, 29% only in hands and 3% only in feet. In line with this finding, the addition of MRI-feet to MRI-hands did not increase the predictive accuracy; the sensitivity remained 77%, while the specificity decreased from 66% to 62%. Sensitivity analyses with RA development as outcome showed similar results.
conclusionTenosynovitis at the forefeet in CSA predicted IA and RA development. Addition of foot MRI to hand MRI did not increase the accuracy. Foot MRI can be omitted to reduce scan time and costs and increase the feasibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.