Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34049855›Full record

ArticleAnnals of the rheumatic diseases2022

Choose wisely: imaging for diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis.

Torsten Diekhoff, Iris Eshed, Felix Radny, Katharina Ziegeler, Fabian Proft, Juliane Greese, Dominik Deppe, Robert Biesen, Kay Geert Hermann, Denis Poddubnyy

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Fibroblast activation protein-targeted PET/CT withEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Axial Imaging in Spondyloarthritis.Rheumatic diseases clinics of North America · 2024
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Torsten Diekhoff *Department of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany torsten.diekhoff@charite.de.ORCID 0000-0003-3593-1449
Iris Eshed *Radiology, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-4655-9606
Felix RadnyDepartment of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Katharina ZiegelerDepartment of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9763-2420
Fabian ProftDepartment of Gastroenterology, Infectiology and Rheumatology, Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4306-033X
Juliane GreeseDepartment of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Dominik DeppeDepartment of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Robert BiesenDepartment of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0434-7832
Kay Geert HermannDepartment of Radiology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Denis PoddubnyyDivision of Gastroenterology, Infectious Diseases and Rheumatology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4537-6015
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DECenter for Rheumatology · USFranklin University · USSheba Medical Center · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of radiography (X-ray, XR), CT and MRI of the sacroiliac joints for diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA).

methods163 patients (89 with axSpA; 74 with degenerative conditions) underwent XR, CT and MR. Three blinded experts categorised the imaging findings into axSpA, other diseases or normal in five separate reading rounds (XR, CT, MR, XR +MR, CT +MR). The clinical diagnosis served as reference standard. Sensitivity and specificity for axSpA and inter-rater reliability were compared.

resultsXR showed lower sensitivity (66.3%) than MR (82.0%) and CT (76.4%) and also an inferior specificity of 67.6% vs 86.5% (MR) and 97.3% (CT). XR +MR was similar to MR alone (sensitivity 77.5 %/specificity 87.8%) while CT+MR was superior (75.3 %/97.3%). CT had the best inter-rater reliability (kappa=0.875), followed by MR (0.665) and XR (0.517). XR +MR was similar (0.662) and CT+MR (0.732) superior to MR alone.

conclusionsXR had inferior diagnostic accuracy and inter-rater reliability compared with cross-sectional imaging. MR alone was similar in diagnostic performance to XR+MR. CT had the best accuracy, strengthening the importance of structural lesions for the differential diagnosis in axSpA.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAxial SpondyloarthritisDiagnostic ImagingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedRadiographySensitivity and SpecificityTomography, X-Ray Computedankylosinglow back painmagnetic resonance imagingspondylitis

Identifiers

PMID34049855
PMCPMC8762031
OpenAlexW3165580553

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.