Abstract
Objectives To prospectively demonstrate the feasibility of performing dual-phase SPECT/CT for the assessment of the small joints of the hands of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, and to evaluate the reliability of the quantitative and qualitative measures derived from the resulting images.
Methods A SPECT/CT imaging protocol was developed in this pilot study to scan both hands simultaneously in RA patients, in two phases of 99mTc-MDP radiotracer uptake; namely the soft-tissue blood pool phase (within 15 minutes after radiotracer injection) and osseous phase (after 3 hours). Joints were evaluated qualitatively (normal vs. abnormal uptake) and quantitatively (by measuring the maximum corrected count ratio [MCCR]). Qualitative and quantitative evaluations were repeated to assess reliability.
Results Four participants completed seven studies (all four were imaged at baseline, and three of them at follow-up after 1-month of arthritis therapy). A total of 280 joints (20 per hand) were evaluated. The MCCR from soft-tissue phase scans was significantly higher for clinically abnormal joints compared to clinically normal ones; p<0.001, however the MCCR from the osseous phase scans were not different between the two groups. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) for MCCR was excellent (0.9789, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9734-0.9833). Intra-observer agreement for qualitative SPECT findings was good for both the soft-tissue phase (kappa=0.78, 95%CI: 0.72-0.83) and osseous-phase (kappa=0.70, 95%CI: 0.64-0.76) scans.
Conclusion Extracting reliable quantitative and qualitative measures from dual-phase 99mTc-MDP SPECT/CT hand scans is feasible in RA patients. SPECT/CT may provide a unique means for assessing both synovitis and osseous involvement in RA joints using the same radiotracer injection.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
No registration with NCT was required as this is an observational diagnostic study, that does not interfere with standard clinical management
Funding Statement
This work was supported in part by Philips Healthcare and the National Institutes of Health grant number R01 AR076088.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This pilot study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of California Davis (IRB #436672). Written informed consent was obtained from all study participants.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Funding: This work was supported in part by Philips Healthcare and the National Institutes of Health grant number R01 AR076088. The views expressed in this article are the authors’ own and do not necessarily represent the views of Philips Healthcare, or the National Institutes of Health.
Data Availability
Data can be made available on a reasonable request to the corresponding author
