Update on Imaging of Inflammatory Arthritis and Related Disorders.

Arthritis and other rheumatic disorders are very frequent in the general population and responsible for a huge physical and disability burden to affected patients as well as a major cost to the society. Precise evaluation often relies on clinical data only but additional imaging may be required i) for a more objective assessment of the disease status, such as in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or ankylosing spondyloarthritis (AS), ii) for providing prognostic information and evaluating response to treatment or iii) for establishing diagnosis, in patients with unclear clinical picture, such as polymyalgia rheumatica (PMR) and large-vessel vasculitis (LVV). Besides radiological techniques (x-rays, ultrasound, and MRI), functional and molecular imaging has emerged as a valid tool for this purpose in several disorders. Bone scanning has long been a method of choice but is now more used as a triage tool in patients with unclear complaints, including degenerative disorders (eg osteoarthritis). 18F-FDG-PET/CT (FDG) proved efficient in assessing the extent of the disease and response to treatment in RA and related disorders, and to provide accurate diagnosis in some systemic disorders, including PMR and LVV. Based on glucose metabolism, FDG-PET/CT is able to show increased metabolism in peripheral cells involved in inflammation (eg neutrophils, lymphocytes or monocytes/macrophages) but also in fibroblasts that proliferate in the pannus. The lack of specificity of FDG is a limitation and many alternative tracers were developed at the preclinical stage or applied in the clinics, especially within clinical trials. They include imaging of macrophages using translocator protein (TSPO), folate-receptors or other targets on activated cells. These new tools will undoubtedly become more and more available in the everyday clinical workup of patients with rheumatisms. Finally, it should be kept in mind that a very simple tracer, 18F-fluoride is widely more performant in AS than FDG.

The Effect of an Asymmetric Energy Window on Bone Scintigraphy Image Quality.

Bone scintigraphy is one of the most common nuclear medicine tests. Previous work investigated the effectiveness of an asymmetric window (ASW) for planar bone scintigraphy using simulation and phantom data. Phantom studies concluded that the ASW improved both the resolution and the contrast-to-noise ratio when imaging objects with high scatter. The aim of this study was to confirm this improvement increased image quality in patients. This study also investigated whether the differences between a symmetric window (SW) and an ASW depended on body mass index. Methods: Fifty-eight patients had 2 scans: a standard scan using an SW of 140 keV ± 10% and a scan using an ASW of 140 keV + 10% and - 7.5%. Three readers independently compared the 2 image sets and scored them using a 5-score scale (ranging from 1 = ASW better [clinically important] to 5 = SW better [clinically important]). Scores from all radiologists were pooled and analyzed statistically. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: In 93 cases (53%), the readers scored the ASW images better than the SW images. In 5 cases (3%), the ASW images were preferred, with the difference considered clinically important; there were no cases in which the SW was similarly preferred. For the sign test, we determined whether the total of 93 scores of 1 or 2 (ASW preferred) was significantly different from the 15 scores of 4 or 5 (SW preferred). The P value was less than 0.00001, demonstrating that the difference was significant. Conclusion: In patients undergoing bone scintigraphy, ASW provided an improvement in image quality that in some cases was judged clinically important.

Return of the pulmonary nodule: the radiologist's key role in implementing the 2015 BTS guidelines on the investigation and management of pulmonary nodules.

The British Thoracic Society has published new comprehensive guidelines for the management of pulmonary nodules. These guidelines are significantly different from those previously published, as they use two malignancy prediction calculators to better characterize the risk of malignancy. There are recommendations for a higher nodule size threshold for follow-up (≥5 mm or ≥80 mm(3)) and a reduction of the follow-up period to 1 year for solid pulmonary nodules; both of these will reduce the number of follow-up CT scans. PET-CT plays a crucial role in characterization also, with an ordinal scale being recommended for reporting. Radiologists will be the key in implementing these guidelines, and routine use of volumetric image-analysis software will be required to manage patients with pulmonary nodules correctly.