4.7 Article

Degree of bone marrow oedema in sacroiliac joints of patients with axial spondyloarthritis is linked to gut inflammation and male sex: results from the GIANT cohort

期刊

ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES
卷 73, 期 6, 页码 1186-1189

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-203854

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ghent University Hospital
  2. fund of Scientific Research-Flanders (FWO)
  3. Research Council of Ghent University
  4. Interuniversity Attraction Pole (IUAP) from the Belspo Agency [P7/07]
  5. EU [305266]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction Bone marrow oedema (BMO) of the sacroiliac joints (SIJs) is a hallmark of axial spondyloarthritis (SpA). However, the relationship between the extent of BMO and disease phenotype is poorly understood. Objective To assess the link between BMO of the SIJs and gut inflammation. We have also evaluated the correlation between BMO and established disease activity parameters. Methods Sixty-eight patients with axial SpA from the Gent Inflammatory Arthritis and spoNdylitis cohorT underwent ileocolonoscopy and MRI of the SIJs. Histopathological analysis and SPondyloArthritis Research Consortium of Canada (SPARCC) scores were performed. Results A significant higher SPARCC score (median (range)) was observed in axial SpA patients showing chronic gut inflammation (16.9 (3.8-68.3)) compared with axial SpA patients showing normal gut histology (9.8 (0.0-45.0); p<0.05). In a multiple linear regression model, we identified, besides chronic gut inflammation (effect size of 11.3, 95% CI (2.1 to 20.4)), male sex (effect size of 10.5, 95% CI (3.3 to 17.8)) to be independently associated to the extent of BMO. There was a low to moderate correlation between the degree of BMO and C-reactive protein(r=0.39, p=0.002) and Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Score (r=0.35, p=0.007). Conclusions Higher degrees of BMO were observed in patients showing chronic gut inflammation. These data solidify a link between mucosal inflammation and progressive disease in axial SpA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据