Monday, 24 Feb 2020

You are here

PANLAR Ultrasound Study Group: Recommendations On Imaging Modalities In Gout

Gout is a systemic inflammatory disease with high potential for joint damage due to erosive changes and MSU deposits resulting in disability and chronic pain. Prompt diagnosis and effective treatment are key to better long term outcomes and decreased disability.

To date there are no guidelines as for when and how to use imaging modalities in diagnosis and monitoring of patient of gout. PANLAR Ultrasound Study Group evaluated existent evidence to develop recommendations for use of imaging modalities in management of gout patients. 

A group that include rheumatologists, radiologists, sonographers and statisticians conducted systematic literature review evaluating imaging modalities such as conventional radiography (CR), ultrasound (US), computer tomography (CT), MRI and dual-energy CT (DECT). 

8 following recommendations were developed and graded according to levels of evidence form the Oxford Center of Medicine in 2011:

 1.   When diagnosis is doubtful use US for detection of elementary lesions or DECT for MSU crystals considered sensitivity and specific complimentary tools (levels of evidence (LE)II, grade B)

2.   US and DECT may have lower sensitivity in patients with disease duration of <2 years but high specificity justifies its use (LE II,  grade B)

3.   CR and CT show poor sensitivity. Low cost and high specificity justify use for initial evaluation, differential diagnosis and erosion detection (LE II, grade B).

4.   MRI valid for assessment of synovitis regardless of disease duration (LE III, grade B)

5.   CR is the choice technique for quantification of structural damage (sharp score). CT is a more sensitive but more expensive alternative ( LE II, grade B).

6.   US &MRI alternative tools to detect structural damage. Both lacking validated scale for quantification. DECT should NOT be used for detection and quantification of structural damage (LE III, grade B).

7.   US &DECT methods of choice to detect and quantify MSU DEPOSITS in different tissues (LE III, grade B)

8.   No sufficient evidence of recommend using imaging modalities for follow up and treatment guidance of patients with gout. Detection of synovitis by US and MRI  and MSU deposits but US and DECT can be used complimentary for monitoring ( LE III, grade D)

Add new comment

More Like This

Hypersensitivity Reactions and Gout Tx: Watch the Dose

Both allopurinol and febuxostat (Uloric) were associated with an increased risk of hypersensitivity reactions among new users of these urate-lowering therapies, a large U.S. study found.

Diabetics using SGLT2 Inhibitors have a lower Gout Risk

Researchers from the Brigham and Women's Hospital have reported that adults with type 2 diabetes who were treated with SGLT2 inhibitors had a lower risk of gout compared to GLP1 agonist, suggesting that sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors may reduce the risk for gout with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

A Role for SGLT2 Inhibition in Gout?

The antidiabetic medication canagliflozin (Invokana) lowered serum urate and reduced the risk of gout flare in a post-hoc analysis of data from two large clinical trials.

Predicting Inpatient Gout Flares

Analysis of New Zealand hospitalized patients revals nine predictors of inpatient flare for people with comorbid gout.

This retrospective cohort study of hospitalised patients with comorbid gout included 625 hospitalised patients, 87 experienced inpatient gout flare.

There were 9 predictors of an inpatient gout flare:

Pegradicase+ImmTOR SEL-212 Shows Promising Results In Active Gout

Therapies targeting sUA accumulation or improving its excretion are widely used for treatment of symptoms and prevention of progression of gout for decades. Despite our best effort, there is still a significant amount of patients who remain symptomatic and/or experiences progressive joint damage and disability. Regardless of the cause, either its lack of compliance or poor tolerability, more effective treatments are needed.