Double inversion recovery MRI versus contrast-enhanced MRI for evaluation of knee synovitis in juvenile idiopathic arthritis

Background: Double inversion recovery (DIR) MRI has the potential to accentuate the synovium without using contrast agents, as it allows simultaneous signal suppression of fluid and fat. The purpose of this study was (1) to compare DIR MRI to conventional contrast-enhanced (CE) MRI for delineation of the synovium in the knee in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) and (2) to assess the agreement between DIR MRI and CE-MRI regarding maximal synovial thickness measurements. Results: In this prospective study, 26 children with JIA who consecutively underwent 3.0-T knee MRI between January 2018 and January 2021 were included (presence of knee arthritis: 13 [50%]; median age: 14 years [interquartile range [IQR]: 11–17]; 14 girls). Median confidence to depict the synovium (0–100 mm visual analogue scale; scored by 2 readers [consensus based]) was 88 (IQR: 79–97) for DIR MRI versus 100 (IQR: 100–100) for CE-MRI (p value = <.001). Maximal synovial thickness per child (millimeters; scored by 4 individual readers) on DIR MRI was greater (p value = <.001) in the children with knee arthritis (2.4 mm [IQR: 2.1–3.1]) than in those without knee arthritis (1.4 mm [IQR: 1.0–1.6]). Good inter-technique agreement for maximal synovial thickness per child was observed (rs = 0.93 [p value = <.001]; inter-reader reliability: ICC DIR MRI = 0.87 [p value = <.001], ICC CE-MRI = 0.90 [p value = <.001]). Conclusion: DIR MRI adequately delineated the synovium in the knee of children with JIA and enabled synovial thickness measurement similar to that of CE-MRI. Our results demonstrate that DIR MRI should be considered as a child-friendly alternative to CE-MRI for evaluation of synovitis in children with (suspected) JIA

Ultrasound and MR muscle imaging in new onset idiopathic inflammatory myopathies at diagnosis and after treatment: a comparative pilot study

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively compare ultrasound (US) and whole-body MRI for detection of muscle abnormalities compatible with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). METHODS: Newly diagnosed IIM patients underwent US (14 muscles) and MRI (36 muscles) at diagnosis and after nine weeks monotherapy with intravenous immunoglobulin. Muscles were compatible with IIM when quantitative US echo-intensity (EI) z scores was ≥1.5, semi-quantitative US Heckmatt score was ≥2, qualitative US was abnormal, or when MRI showed oedema on T2-weighted images. At patient level, findings were classified as abnormal when quantitative US EI z scores was >1.5 (n = 3 muscles), >2.5 (n = 2 muscles) or >3.5 (n = 1 muscle), or if ≥3 muscles showed abnormalities as described above for the other diagnostic methods. RESULTS: At diagnosis, in 18 patients US of 252 muscles revealed abnormalities in 36 muscles (14%) with quantitative, in 153 (61%) with semi-quantitative and in 168 (67%) with qualitative analysis. MRI showed oedema in 476 out of 623 muscles (76%). Five patients (28%) reached abnormal classification with quantitative US, 16 (89%) with semi-quantitative and qualitative US, and all patients (100%) with MRI. Nine-week follow-up of 12 patients showed no change over time with quantitative US or MRI, and a decrease in abnormalities with semi-quantitative US (P <0.01), and qualitative US (P <0.01). CONCLUSION: At diagnosis, MRI was more sensitive than US to detect muscle abnormalities compatible with IIM. Semi-quantitative US and qualitative US detected abnormalities in the majority of the patients while evaluating fewer muscles than MRI and showed change over time after nine weeks of treatment

Ultrasound and MR muscle imaging in new onset idiopathic inflammatory myopathies at diagnosis and after treatment: a comparative pilot study

OBJECTIVES: To prospectively compare ultrasound (US) and whole-body MRI for detection of muscle abnormalities compatible with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM). METHODS: Newly diagnosed IIM patients underwent US (14 muscles) and MRI (36 muscles) at diagnosis and after nine weeks monotherapy with intravenous immunoglobulin. Muscles were compatible with IIM when quantitative US echo-intensity (EI) z scores was ≥1.5, semi-quantitative US Heckmatt score was ≥2, qualitative US was abnormal, or when MRI showed oedema on T2-weighted images. At patient level, findings were classified as abnormal when quantitative US EI z scores was >1.5 (n = 3 muscles), >2.5 (n = 2 muscles) or >3.5 (n = 1 muscle), or if ≥3 muscles showed abnormalities as described above for the other diagnostic methods. RESULTS: At diagnosis, in 18 patients US of 252 muscles revealed abnormalities in 36 muscles (14%) with quantitative, in 153 (61%) with semi-quantitative and in 168 (67%) with qualitative analysis. MRI showed oedema in 476 out of 623 muscles (76%). Five patients (28%) reached abnormal classification with quantitative US, 16 (89%) with semi-quantitative and qualitative US, and all patients (100%) with MRI. Nine-week follow-up of 12 patients showed no change over time with quantitative US or MRI, and a decrease in abnormalities with semi-quantitative US (P <0.01), and qualitative US (P <0.01). CONCLUSION: At diagnosis, MRI was more sensitive than US to detect muscle abnormalities compatible with IIM. Semi-quantitative US and qualitative US detected abnormalities in the majority of the patients while evaluating fewer muscles than MRI and showed change over time after nine weeks of treatment

Phantom Study Investigating the Accuracy of Manual and Automatic Image Fusion with the GE Logiq E9: Implications for use in Percutaneous Liver Interventions

Imaging- and therapeutic targets in neoplastic and musculoskeletal inflammatory diseas