It can be classified according to their configuration , shape , content , and can be described specifically with an anatomical term . “
Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by the development of osseous and cartilaginous damage .
The correct differentiation between a true erosion and other entities — then often called “ pseudoerosions”—is essential to avoid misdiagnosing rheumatoid arthritis and to correctly interpret the progress of the disease .
The aims of this systematic review were as follows : to create a definition and delineation of the term “ pseudoerosion ” , to point out morphological pitfalls in the interpretation of images , and to report on difficulties arising from choosing different imaging modalities .
Rheumatoid arthritis of the shoulder joint: comparison of conventional radiography, ultrasound, and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
OBJECTIVE To determine the role of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI ) compared with conventional radiography in the detection of chronic and acute inflammatory manifestations of rheumatoid arthritis ( RA ) of the shoulder joint . METHODS Forty-three consecutive patients with known RA prospect ively underwent clinical examination , radiography , ultrasound , and MRI of the shoulder joints . Each patient was assigned a clinical /laboratory score consisting of 7 parameters , including measurements of shoulder mobility , the erythrocyte sedimentation rate , and C-reactive protein level .  Conventional radiography was st and ardized and performed in 2 planes . Ultrasound was performed in 10 predefined planes using a 7.5-MHz linear transducer . MRI at 1.5 T comprised transverse and oblique coronal T1- and T2 * -weighted fast spin-echo , gradient-echo ( GRE ) , and inversion-recovery sequences with a matrix size of up to 512 pixels . A dynamic T1-weighted GRE sequence was acquired with intravenous administration of contrast medium . Erosions were assessed using all 3 imaging techniques on a 4-point scale . Soft-tissue involvement was evaluated according to the presence of synovitis , tenosynovitis , and bursitis on ultrasound and MRI . The results in the study group were compared with those obtained in a control group of 10 patients with shoulder pain . RESULTS In the study group , erosions of the humeroscapular joint were detected by conventional radiography in 26 patients , by ultrasound in 30 patients , and by MRI in 39 patients ; the differences were statistically significant for the comparisons of conventional radiography with MRI and for ultrasound versus MRI ( P < 0.0001 ) . Conventional radiography detected 12 erosions of the scapula and MRI detected 15 . Synovitis was demonstrated in 12 patients by ultrasound and in 27 patients by MRI ( P = 0.0003 ) . Tenosynovitis was observed in 15 patients by ultrasound and in 28 patients by MRI ( P = 0.0064 ) . Bursitis was detected in 13 patients by ultrasound and in 18 patients by MRI . The findings on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI correlated significantly with the detection of synovitis by ultrasound and erosions by static MRI ( P < 0.05 ) . CONCLUSION Ultrasound and MRI supplement conventional radiography in assessing the shoulder joint . Although conventional radiography can be used as the sole method of following up known joint destruction in RA , ultrasound and , preferably , MRI are recommended as additional techniques in the initial diagnostic evaluation when radiography yields negative results
It can be classified according to their configuration , shape , content , and can be described specifically with an anatomical term . “
Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic inflammatory disease characterized by the development of osseous and cartilaginous damage .
The correct differentiation between a true erosion and other entities — then often called “ pseudoerosions”—is essential to avoid misdiagnosing rheumatoid arthritis and to correctly interpret the progress of the disease .
The aims of this systematic review were as follows : to create a definition and delineation of the term “ pseudoerosion ” , to point out morphological pitfalls in the interpretation of images , and to report on difficulties arising from choosing different imaging modalities .