Winds of change in imaging of calcium crystal deposition diseases

Imaging Features of Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition Disease: Consensus Definitions From an International Multidisciplinary Working Group

OBJECTIVE

To develop definitions for imaging features being considered as potential classification criteria for calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) disease, additional to clinical and laboratory criteria, and to compile example images of CPPD on different imaging modalities.

METHODS

The American College of Rheumatology and European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology CPPD classification criteria Imaging Advisory Group (IAG) and Steering Committee drafted definitions of imaging features that are characteristic of CPPD on conventional radiography (CR), conventional computed tomography (CT), dual-energy CT (DECT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). An anonymous expert survey was undertaken by a 35-member Combined Expert Committee, including all IAG members. The IAG and 5 external musculoskeletal radiologists with expertise in CPPD convened virtually to further refine item definitions and voted on example images illustrating CR, CT, and DECT item definitions, with ≥90% agreement required to deem them acceptable.

RESULTS

The Combined Expert Committee survey indicated consensus on all CR definitions. The IAG and external radiologists reached consensus on CT and DECT item definitions, which specify that calcium pyrophosphate deposits appear less dense than cortical bone. The group developed an MRI definition and acknowledged limitations of this modality for CPPD. Ten example images for CPPD were voted acceptable (4 CR, 4 CT, and 2 DECT), and 3 images of basic calcium phosphate deposition were voted acceptable to serve as contrast against imaging features of CPPD.

CONCLUSION

An international group of rheumatologists and musculoskeletal radiologists defined imaging features characteristic of CPPD on CR, CT, and DECT and assembled a set of example images as a reference for future clinical research studies.

Reliability and Diagnostic Accuracy of Radiography for the Diagnosis of Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition: Performance of the Novel Definitions Developed by an International Multidisciplinary Working Group

OBJECTIVE

To assess the reliability and diagnostic accuracy of new radiographic imaging definitions developed by an international multidisciplinary working group for identification of calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD).

METHODS

Patients with knee osteoarthritis scheduled for knee replacement were enrolled. Two radiologists and 2 rheumatologists twice assessed radiographic images for presence or absence of CPPD in menisci, hyaline cartilage, tendons, joint capsule, or synovial membrane, using the new definitions. In case of disagreement, a consensus decision was made and considered for the assessment of diagnostic performance. Histologic examination of postsurgical specimens under compensated polarized light microscopy was the reference standard. Prevalence-adjusted bias-adjusted kappa values were used to assess reliability, and diagnostic performance statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients were enrolled for the reliability study. The interobserver reliability was substantial in most of the assessed structures when considering all 4 readers (κ range 0.59-0.90), substantial to almost perfect among radiologists (κ range 0.70-0.91), and moderate to almost perfect among rheumatologists (κ range 0.46-0.88). The intraobserver reliability was substantial to almost perfect for all the observers (κ range 0.70-1). Fifty-one patients were included in the accuracy study. Radiography demonstrated an overall specificity of 92% for CPPD, but sensitivity remained low for all sites and for the overall diagnosis (54%).

CONCLUSION

The new radiographic definitions of CPPD are highly specific against the gold standard of histologic diagnosis. When the described radiographic findings are present, these definitions allow for a definitive diagnosis of CPPD, rather than other calcium-containing crystal depositions; however, a negative radiographic finding does not exclude the diagnosis.

Dual-Energy Computed Tomography for Detection and Characterization of Monosodium Urate, Calcium Pyrophosphate, and Hydroxyapatite: A Phantom Study on Diagnostic Performance

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) to detect and distinguish crystal deposits in a phantom. The primary objective was to determine the cutoff DECT ratio and the cross-sectional area (CSA) of a crystal deposit necessary to differentiate monosodium urate (MSU), calcium pyrophosphate (CPP), and calcium hydroxyapatite (HA) using DECT. Our secondary objective was to determine the concentration for limit of detection for MSU, CPP, and HA crystal deposits. Exploratory objectives included the comparison between 2 generations of DECT scanners from the same manufacturer as well as different scanner settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used a cylindrical soft tissue phantom with synthetic MSU, CPP, and HA crystals suspended in resin. Crystal suspension concentration increased with similar attenuation between MSU, CPP, and HA in conventional CT. The phantom was scanned on 2 dual-source DECT scanners, at 2 dose levels and all available tube voltage combinations. Both scanners had a tin (Sn) filter at the high-energy spectra. Dual-energy CT ratios were calculated for a given tube voltage combination by dividing linear regression lines of CT numbers against concentration. Dual-energy CT ratios were compared using an analysis of covariance. Receiver operating characteristic curves and corresponding areas under the curve (AUCs) were calculated for individual crystal suspension comparisons (HA vs CPP, MSU vs CPP, and MSU vs HA).

RESULTS

At standard clinical scan settings with 8 mGy and 80/Sn150 kV, the DECT ratios were as follows: CPP, 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.98-2.07); HA, 2.00 (95% CI, 1.96-2.05); and MSU, 1.09 (95% CI, 1.06-1.11). Ratios varied numerically depending on the scanner and tube voltage combination. Monosodium urate crystal DECT ratios were significantly different from HA and CPP (P < 0.001), whereas DECT ratios for HA and CPP crystals did not differ significantly (P = 0.99). The differentiation of MSU crystals from both calcium crystals (HA and CPP) was excellent with an AUC of 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00-1.00) and an optimal cutoff DECT ratio of 1.43:1.40 depending on the scanner. In addition, differentiation of MSU and calcium-containing crystals (HA and CPP) required a CSA of minimum 4 pixels of crystal at standard clinical scan conditions. In contrast, differentiation between CPP and HA crystals was moderate with AUCs ranging from 0.66 (95% CI, 0.52-0.80) to 0.80 (95% CI, 0.69-0.91) and an optimal cutoff DECT ratio of 2.02:2.06 depending on the scanner. Furthermore, differentiation between CPP and HA crystals required a CSA of minimum 87 pixels of crystal at standard clinical scan conditions, corresponding to a region of interest of 3.7 mm diameter. When scanning at highest possible spectral separation and maximum dose of 50 mGy, the limit of detection for crystals within a region of interest of 50 pixels was 14 mg/cm3 for MSU and 2 mg/cm3 for both CPP and HA.

CONCLUSIONS

This phantom study shows that DECT can be used to detect MSU, CPP, and HA crystal deposits. Differentiation of CPP and HA was not possible in crystals deposits less than 3.7 mm in diameter, but MSU could accurately be differentiated from CPP and HA crystal deposits at standard clinical scan conditions.

Can Dual-Energy Computed Tomography Be Used to Identify Early Calcium Crystal Deposition in the Knees of Patients With Calcium Pyrophosphate Deposition?

OBJECTIVE

To assess the ability of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) in identifying early calcium crystal deposition in menisci and articular cartilage of the knee, depending on the presence/absence of chondrocalcinosis seen on conventional CT.

METHODS

One hundred thirty-two knee DECT scans from patients with suspected crystal-associated arthropathy were reviewed and assigned to a calcium pyrophosphate deposition (CPPD) group (n = 50) or a control group (n = 82). Five DECT attenuation parameters were measured in preset regions of interest (ROIs) in menisci and articular cartilage and compared between groups using linear mixed models with adjustment for confounders. Subgroup analysis, excluding ROIs with chondrocalcinosis seen on conventional CT, was performed.

RESULTS

In both menisci and articular cartilage, and for all 5 DECT attenuation parameters, calcified ROIs in CPPD patients showed significantly higher values than ROIs in controls (P ≤ 0.036). Conversely, noncalcified ROIs in CPPD patients were comparable with those in controls (P ≥ 0.09). While specific DECT parameters yielded good accuracy (area under the curve [AUC] 0.87-0.88) in differentiating calcified ROIs in CPPD patients from ROIs in controls, DECT failed to distinguish between noncalcified ROIs in CPPD patients and controls (AUC 0.58-0.59).

CONCLUSION

While DECT has the potential to characterize knee intraarticular mineralization, this technique cannot yet accurately identify early calcium crystal deposition that is not visible as chondrocalcinosis on conventional CT.

Imaging of crystalline arthropathy in 2020

Crystal-related arthropathies are the result of crystal deposition in joint and periarticular soft tissues. Identification of urate crystals is mandatory to distinguish gout from other crystalline arthropathies, including calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate and basic calcium phosphate crystal deposition diseases. ACR/EULAR classification criteria for gout included dual-energy computed tomography and ultrasound with equal impact to the final score. Different diagnostic strengths of these imaging modalities depend on disease duration and scanned anatomic site. While ultrasound has been indicated as the first-choice imaging technique, especially in the early stages of the disease, dual-energy computed tomography has shown to be highly specific, allowing the detection of crystal deposits in anatomic sites not accessible by ultrasound, such as the spine. At the spinal level, MRI findings are usually nonspecific. Finally, there is preliminary evidence that at the knee, dual-energy computed tomography may discriminate calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate from basic calcium phosphate crystal deposits.

Dual-energy computed-tomography-based discrimination between basic calcium phosphate and calcium pyrophosphate crystal deposition in vivo

Background:

Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) is being considered as a non-invasive diagnostic and characterization tool in calcium crystal-associated arthropathies. Our objective was to assess the potential of DECT in distinguishing between basic calcium phosphate (BCP) and calcium pyrophosphate (CPP) crystal deposition in and around joints in vivo.

Methods:

A total of 13 patients with calcific periarthritis and 11 patients with crystal-proven CPPD were recruited prospectively to undergo DECT scans. Samples harvested from BCP and CPP calcification types were analyzed using Raman spectroscopy and validated against synthetic crystals. Regions of interest were placed in BCP and CPP calcifications, and the following DECT attenuation parameters were obtained: CT numbers (HU) at 80 and 140 kV, dual-energy index (DEI), electron density (Rho), and effective atomic number (Z_eff). These DECT attenuation parameters were compared and validated against crystal calibration phantoms at two known equal concentrations. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted to determine the highest accuracy thresholds for DEI and Z_eff.

Results:

Raman spectroscopy enabled chemical fingerprinting of BCP and CPP crystals both in vitro and in vivo. DECT was able to distinguish between HA and CPP in crystal calibration phantoms at two known equal concentrations, most notably by DEI (200 mg/cm³: 0.037 ± 0 versus 0.034 ± 0, p = 0.008) and Z_eff (200 mg /cm³: 9.4 ± 0 versus 9.3 ± 0, p = 0.01) analysis. Likewise, BCP calcifications had significantly higher DEI (0.041 ± 0.005 versus 0.034 ± 0.005, p = 0.008) and Z_eff (9.5 ± 0.2 versus 9.3 ± 0.2, p = 0.03) than CPP crystal deposits with comparable CT numbers in patients. With an area under the ROC curve of 0.83 [best threshold value = 0.0 39, sensitivity = 90. 9% (81.8, 97. 7%), specificity = 64.6% (50.0, 64. 6%)], DEI was the best parameter in distinguishing between BCP and CPP crystal depositions.

Conclusion:

DECT can help distinguish between crystal-proven BCP and CPP calcification types in vivo and, thus, aid in the diagnosis of challenging clinical cases, and in the characterization of CPP and BCP crystal deposition occurring in osteoarthritis.

Utility of Ultrasound and Dual Energy CT in Crystal Disease Diagnosis and Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The objective of this review is to critically discuss the latest evidence on the use of ultrasound and dual energy computed tomography (DECT) for the assessment of microcrystalline arthritis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Both techniques have been included in the classification and diagnostic criteria for gout, while only ultrasound appears in the diagnostic recommendations for CPPD. Regarding the management of the diseases, there is encouraging evidence for the use of both techniques for the follow-up of gout patients, while very few or null data are available for CPPD. Ultrasound has been adequately validated for the diagnosis of CPPD, while some issues have still to be clarified regarding gout. DECT has also demonstrated to be accurate for gout diagnosis, but very few data are available regarding CPPD. Future research should aim to improve the reliability of both techniques and to create scoring systems for a more accurate follow-up of patients.