POS1315 USEFULNESS OF SYNOVIAL BIOPSY IN THE DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS AND AS POSSIBLE PREDICTOR OF RESPONSE TO TREATMENT IN JUVENILE IDIOPATHIC ARTHRITIS
Authors: S. Costi, F. Pregnolato, A. Parafioriti, E. Armiraglio, T. Giani, R. Cimaz
Journal: Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases (2021)

Background: While synovial biopsy is an invasive procedure and is not required for the diagnosis of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), it may be useful in doubtful cases. Objectives: Aims of the study were i.to verify the role of synovial biopsy in the differential diagnosis of JIA and ii. to review the pathology slides in order to evaluate possible associations of a histologic pattern with response to treatment. Methods: We reviewed data from medical records of patients under the age of 18 years who underwent a synovial biopsy requested by our Pediatric Rheumatology Unit over the last 10 years. We collected information on demographic, clinical, laboratory, radiological, histopathological characteristics, as well as treatment response (in particular, remission at the last visit and number of examination, number of biologic drugs used). Among variables in the histologic score, number of layers in the synovial lining and inflammatory infiltrate (0-5) were compared to clinical status at last visit. Potential differences in variables between responders and non responders were assessed by unpaired t-test or non-parametric Mann-Whitney test, as appropriate. Results: We identified 64 patients (40F, 24M) with a median age at disease onset of 9 years (range 1-15) and a median follow-up time of 161 months (range 8-1160). We recognized two groups of interest: patients with a known JIA diagnosis (28/64) and patients with unknown diagnosis (36/64) at the moment of synovial biopsy. In the group with known JIA, most underwent the procedure during orthopedic surgery, and in all cases the histology was consistent with JIA. Among the unknown diagnosis group, in 19 cases results were consistent with a chronic synovitis, while among the other 17 histology could lead to a diagnosis of other conditions in 6 cases (foreign body and villonodular synovitis n=2 each, sarcoidosis and osteochondromatosis n=1 each). In the remaining 11 the final diagnoses were varied (mostly genetic forms eg skeletal dysplasia, CACP, Thiemann disease). Between the two groups we identified 46 patients with a definite JIA diagnosis. At the last follow-up visit 29 of them were in clinical remission, albeit on medication. The remaining 17 had a severe course of disease, with persistent activity and use of at least two biologic drugs. In 26 cases we could evaluate the correlation between status at last visit and number of layers/inflammatory infiltrate, but no statistical significant correlation was found. Conclusion: Despite its limited use nowadays, synovial biopsy may still be a useful tool in patients whose diagnosis is unclear. In our study, while it confirmed the suspicion in most cases, in other instances it allowed the diagnosis of rare conditions that would have been otherwise missed. No association between disease course and histological features in a small JIA cohort was found. We are currently expanding the study with a larger series. Disclosure of Interests: None declared