AB1082 INFLUENCE OF THE VARIATION OF THE OPERATOR, PATIENT POSITION AND DEVICE ON THE MEASUREMENT PERFORMANCE OF RADIOFREQUENCY ECHOGRAPHIC MULTI SPECTROMETRY (REMS)

Background:

The monitoring of bone mineral density (BMD) is a key aspect for patients undergoing pharmacological treatments that might cause BMD changes at non-physiological rates. At present, the short-term follow-up of patients under treatment in terms of BMD change with time remains an unmet clinical need, since the current techniques, including the gold standard dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), require at least 1 year between two consecutive measurements [1]. Therefore, an effective strategy for the assessment of BMD should guarantee high accuracy, precision and repeatability of the measurements.

Objectives:

The aim is to assess the influence of the variation 1) in patient position, 2) operator (both intra- and inter-) and 3) device on the REMS performance at lumbar spine and femoral neck.

Methods:

210 women were enrolled, divided in 7 groups of 30-patient each for the assessment of the parameters of interest, i.e. inter-device, intra- and inter-operator repeatability for lumbar spine scans and inter-patient position, inter-device, intra- and inter-operator repeatability for femoral neck scans.

All patients underwent 2 REMS scans at lumbar spine or femoral neck, performed by the same operator or by 2 different operators or by the same operator using 2 different devices or in different patient position (i.e. supine without constraints or with a constrained 25°-rotation of the leg). The percentage coefficient of variation (CV%) with 95% confidence interval and least significant change for a 95% confidence level (LSC) have been calculated.

Results:

For lumbar spine, intra-operator repeatability resulted in CV%=0.37% (95%CI: 0.26%-0.48%), with LSC=1.02%, inter-operator repeatability resulted in CV%=0.55% (95% CI: 0.42%-0.68%), with LSC=1.52%, inter-device repeatability resulted in CV%=0.53% (95% CI: 0.40%-0.66%), with LSC=1.47%.

For femoral neck, intra-operator repeatability resulted in CV%=0.33% (95%CI: 0.23%-0.43%), with LSC=0.91%, inter-operator repeatability resulted in CV%=0.47% (95% CI: 0.35%-0.59%), with LSC=1.30%, inter-device repeatability resulted in CV%=0.42% (95% CI: 0.30%-0.51%), with LSC=1.16%, inter-patient position repeatability resulted in CV%=0.24% (95% CI: 0.18%-0.30%), with LSC=0.66%.

Conclusion:

REMS densitometry is highly precise for both anatomical sites, showing high performance in repeatability. These results suggest that REMS might be a suitable technology for short-term monitoring. Moreover, thanks to its ionizing radiation-free approach, it might be applied for population mass investigations and prevention programs also in paediatric patients and pregnant women.

References:

Note:Carla Caffarelli, Giovanni Adami§, Giovanni Arioli§, Gerolamo Bianchi§, Maria Luisa Brandi§, Sergio Casciaro§, Luisella Cianferotti§, Delia Ciardo§, Francesco Conversano§, Davide Gatti§, Giuseppe Girasole§, Monica Manfredini§, Maurizio Muratore§, Paola Pisani§, Eugenio Quarta§, Laura Quarta§, Stefano Gonnelli

§Equal contributors listed in alphabetical order

Disclosure of Interests:

Carla Caffarelli: None declared, Giovanni Adami: None declared, Giovanni Arioli *: None declared, Gerolamo Bianchi Grant/research support from: Celgene, Consultant of: Amgen, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Abiogen, Alfa-Sigma, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Chiesi, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Medac, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Servier, UCB, Maria Luisa Brandi: None declared, Sergio Casciaro: None declared, Luisella Cianferotti: None declared, Delia Ciardo: None declared, Francesco Conversano: None declared, Davide Gatti Speakers bureau: Davide Gatti reports personal fees from Abiogen, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Mundipharma, outside the submitted work., Giuseppe Girasole: None declared, Monica Manfedini: None declared, Maurizio Muratore: None declared, Paola Pisani: None declared, Eugenio Quarta: None declared, Laura Quarta: None declared, Stefano Gonnelli: None declared

SAT0455 RADIOFREQUENCY ECHOGRAPHIC MULTI SPECTROMETRY (REMS) FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF FRAIL BONES

Background:

Radiofrequency Echographic Multi Spectrometry (REMS) is the first clinically available approach for direct non-ionizing measurement of bone mineral density (BMD) at lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN). Available scientific evidences describe BMD estimated by REMS as an accurate parameter for the diagnosis of osteoporosis [1].

Objectives:

To investigate the effectiveness of the T-score values provided by REMS scans at FN and LS in the identification of frail patients at risk for osteoporotic fractures and to compare the performance of REMS with the dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) one.

Methods:

The patients underwent DXA and REMS scans at FN and at LS. Five clusters of fractures occurred during a median 3.5-year follow-up were identified whether involving the upper limb (forearm, elbow, humerus, wrist, hand), lower limb (tibia, ankle, metatarsus), thorax (shoulder blade, shoulder, rib), hip (femur or pelvis bones), or vertebrae. The ability of REMS and DXA T-score values to assess the incidence and site of fractures was evaluated through an analysis of covariance.

Results:

Seven hundred twenty-one Caucasian women were enrolled. Ninety-five fractures occurred, in particular 41 at upper limb, 16 at hip, 15 at thorax, 14 at lower limb, 9 at vertebrae. Patients characteristics are reported in table. Considering subcategories of fractured patients, there were not statistically significant differences for age, height, weight and BMI.

In the analysis of covariance including age and BMI as covariates, the difference of T-score values between fractured and non-fractured patients is statistically significant for REMS and DXA at both sites.

Lower FN T-score values were found for patients with fractures at hip or vertebra with respect to non-fractured patients both for REMS and DXA (p<0.001). Considering LS T-score, lower values were found for patients with fractures at hip, vertebra or upper limb with respect to non-fractured patients both for REMS and DXA (p<0.001, Figure).

Conclusion:

REMS T-score measured at axial sites is an effective parameter for identification of patients at the risk of incident fragility fractures, in particular occurring at hip, vertebra or upper limb in a population-based sample of female subjects.

References:

[1]Diez-Perez, Aging Clin Exp Res 2019;31(10):1375–89

Table 1.

Baseline patient characteristics, expressed as median (25th– 75thpercentiles).

Patients with incident fragility fracturePatients without incident fragility fracturep-value*Age [years]70 (60-73)59 (54-64)<0.001Height [cm]159 (155-164)160 (156-165)0.08Weight [kg]63 (58-70)62 (57-69)0.42BMI [kg/m2]24.97 (23.13-26.86)24.24 (22.22-26.59)0.04FN REMS T-score-2.3 (-2.8 – -1.7)-1.8 (-2.3 – -1.1)<0.001FN DXA T-score-2.2 (-2.8 – -1.6)-1.7 (-2.3 – -1.1)<0.001LS REMS T-score-3.0 (-3.5 – -2.0)-2.0 (-2.8 – -1.0)<0.001LS DXA T-score-2.8 (-3.4 – -1.8)-1.9 (-2.7 – -1.0)<0.001

* Wilcoxon ranksum test

Figure.

Boxplot of the distribution of T-score values estimated REMS and DXA at FN and LS among patients without incident fragility fracture and patients with incident fragility fractures at different sites.

Note:G. Adami, G. Arioli§, G. Bianchi§, M.L. Brandi§, C. Caffarelli§, L. Cianferotti§, G. Girasole§, S. Gonnelli§, M. Manfredini§, M. Muratore§, E. Quarta§, L. Quarta§, D. Gatti§ equal contributors listed in alphabetical order.

Disclosure of Interests:

Giovanni Adami: None declared, Giovanni Arioli *: None declared, Gerolamo Bianchi Grant/research support from: Celgene, Consultant of: Amgen, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, UCB, Speakers bureau: Abbvie, Abiogen, Alfa-Sigma, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Chiesi, Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Medac, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi Genzyme, Servier, UCB, Maria Luisa Brandi: None declared, Carla Caffarelli: None declared, Luisella Cianferotti: None declared, Giuseppe Girasole: None declared, Stefano Gonnelli: None declared, Monica Manfedini: None declared, Maurizio Muratore: None declared, Eugenio Quarta: None declared, Laura Quarta: None declared, Davide Gatti Speakers bureau: Davide Gatti reports personal fees from Abiogen, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Mundipharma, outside the submitted work.

Radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry compared with dual X-ray absorptiometry for osteoporosis diagnosis on lumbar spine and femoral neck

An innovative, non-ionizing technique to diagnose osteoporosis on lumbar spine and femoral neck was evaluated through a multicenter study involving 1914 women. The proposed method showed significant agreement with reference gold standard method and, therefore, a potential for early osteoporosis diagnoses and possibly improved patient management.

INTRODUCTION

To assess precision (i.e., short term intra-operator precision) and diagnostic accuracy of an innovative non-ionizing technique, REMS (Radiofrequency Echographic Multi Spectrometry), in comparison with the clinical gold standard reference DXA (dual X-ray absorptiometry), through an observational multicenter clinical study.

METHODS

In a multicenter cross-sectional observational study, a total of 1914 postmenopausal women (51-70 years) underwent spinal (n = 1553) and/or femoral (n = 1637) DXA, according to their medical prescription, and echographic scan of the same anatomical sites performed with the REMS approach. All the medical reports (DXA and REMS) were carefully checked to identify possible errors that could have caused inaccurate measurements: erroneous REMS reports were excluded, whereas erroneous DXA reports were re-analyzed where possible and otherwise excluded before assessing REMS accuracy. REMS precision was independently assessed.

RESULTS

In the spinal group, quality assessment on medical reports produced the exclusion of 280 patients because of REMS errors and 78 patients because of DXA errors, whereas 296 DXA reports were re-analyzed and corrected. Analogously, in the femoral group there were 205 exclusions for REMS errors, 59 exclusions for DXA errors, and 217 re-analyzed DXA reports. In the resulting dataset (n = 1195 for spine, n = 1373 for femur) REMS outcome showed a good agreement with DXA: the average difference in bone mineral density (BMD, bias ± 2SD) was -0.004 ± 0.088 g/cm² for spine and - 0.006 ± 0.076 g/cm² for femur. Linear regression showed also that the two methods were well correlated: standard error of the estimate (SEE) was 5.3% for spine and 5.8% for femur. REMS precision, expressed as RMS-CV, was 0.38% for spine and 0.32% for femur.

CONCLUSIONS

The REMS approach can be used for non-ionizing osteoporosis diagnosis directly on lumbar spine and femoral neck with a good level of accuracy and precision. However, a more rigorous operator training is needed to limit the erroneous acquisitions and to ensure the full clinical practicability.

Italian consensus on EULAR recommendations 2005 for the management of hip osteoarthritis

The recommendations for the management of osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip were proposed by EULAR in 2005. Among the most important objectives of the expert charged to provide these recommendations were their wide dissemination and implementation. Thus, the information generated can be used by each individual country to produce their own set of management guidelines and algorithms for treatment in primary care. According with that previously executed for the EU-LAR recommendation 2003 for the knee, the Italian Society of Rheumatology (SIR) has organised a Consensus on the EULAR recommendations 2005 for the management of hip OA. To obtain an acceptability as large as possible, the group of experts was composed by many physicians interested in the management of hip OA, including Orthopaedics, Rheumatologists, Physiatrists, and General Practitioners. Main aim of the Consensus was to analyse the acceptability and applicability of the recommendations according to own experience and local situations in the Italy. The results of this Consensus have demonstrated that a large majority of the EULAR recommendations are endorsed by the Italian experts. Furthermore, the final document of the Italian Consensus clearly indicated the need that the specialists involved in the management of hip OA strongly encourage the dissemination of the EULAR 2005 recommendations also in Italy.

Symptoms and signs in fibromyalgia syndrome

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) is a common chronic pain condition that affects at least 2% of the adult population. Chronic widespread pain is the defining feature of FM, but patients may also exhibit a range of other symptoms, including sleep disturbance, fatigue, irritable bowel syndrome, headaches, and mood disorders. The etiology of FM is not completely understood and the syndrome is influenced by factors such as stress, medical illness, and a variety of pain conditions. Establishing diagnosis may be difficult because of the multifaceted nature of the syndrome and overlap with other chronically painful conditions. A unifying hypothesis is that FM results from sensitization of the central nervous system; this new concept could justify the variety of characteristics of the syndrome. FM symptoms can be musculoskeletal, non-musculoskeletal, or a combination of both; and many patients will also experience a host of associated symptoms or conditions. The ACR classification criteria focus only on pain and disregard other important symptoms; but three key features, pain, fatigue and sleep disturbance, are present in virtually every patient with FM. Several other associated syndromes, including circulatory, nervous, digestive, urinary and reproductive systems are probably a part of the so called central sensitivity or sensitization syndrome. A minority subgroup of patients (30-40%) has a significant psychological disturbance. Psychological factors are an important determinant of any type of pain, and psychological comorbidity is frequent in FM. Psychiatric disorders most commonly described are mood disorders, but psychiatric illness is not a necessary factor in the etiopathogenesis of FM.

The evaluation of the fibromyalgia patients

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a rheumatic disease characterized by musculoskeletal pain, chronic diffuse tension and/or stiffness in joints and muscles, easy fatigue, sleep and emotional disturbances, and pressure pain sensitivity in at least 11 of 18 tender points. At present, there are no instrumental tests or specific diagnostic markers for FM; in fact, many of the existing indicators are significant for research purposes only. Many differential diagnoses may be excluded by an extensive clinical examination and patient history. Considering overlap of FM with other medical conditions, the treating physicians should be vigilant: chest-X-rays and abdominal ultrasonography are the first steps of general evaluation for all the patients with suspected FM. Functional neuroimaging methods have revealed a large number of supraspinal effects in FM, a disorder mediated by mechanisms that are essentially unknown. Many treatments are used in FM patients, but evaluating their therapeutic effects in FM is difficult because the syndrome is so multifaceted. To address the identification of core outcome domains, the Initiative on IMMPACT and OMERACT workshop convened a meeting to develop consensus recommendations for chronic pain clinical trials.

Etiopathogenetic mechanisms of fibromyalgia syndrome

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a common chronic condition of widespread pain with causal mechanisms that are largely unknown. It is characterized by moderate to severe musculoskeletal pain and allodynia, but its pathogenesis appears confined to the nociceptive structures of the central nervous system. FMS is often triggered by negative environmental influences, especially if they occur in childhood. In a fetus, these environmental triggers may influence the development of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPA). Increasing evidence supports the comorbidity of psychological conditions including depression, panic disorders, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Recent evidence suggests that genetic factors may play a role in the pathogenesis of FMS. Central sensitization has long been associated with FMS pain. It describes enhanced excitability of dorsal horn neurons, which leads to transmission of altered nociceptive information to the brain. Understanding of pathogenetic pathways in FMS has advanced beyond observing patient responses to neurophysiologically targeted therapies and basic research.

[Italian consensus on Eular 2003 recommendations for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis]

The recommendations for the management of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee firstly proposed by the EULAR in 2000, have been updated in 2003. One of the most important objectives of the expert charged to provide these recommendations was their dissemination. Thus, the information generated may be used by each individual country to produce their own set of management guidelines and algorithms for treatment in primary care. The Italian Society of Rheumatology (SIR) and the Italian League against Rheumatism (LIMAR) have organised a Consensus on the EULAR recommendations 2003 with the aim to analyse their acceptability and applicability according to our own experience and local situations in the Italy. The results of this Consensus have demonstrated that a large majority of the EULAR recommendations are endorsed by the Italian experts. Furthermore, the final document of the Italian Consensus clearly indicated the need that specialists involved in the management of knee OA strongly encourage the dissemination of the EULAR 2003 recommendations also in Italy.

[Topical therapy of acute skeletal muscle diseases. Results of a comparative study on piroxicam cream 1% versus diclofenac emulgel 1%]

An open comparative study on 75 patients with the aim to compare efficacy and safety of two non steroidal antiinflammatory drugs for topic use, piroxicam 1% cream (38 patients) and diclofenac 1% emulgel (37 patients) in the acute musculoskeletal disorders (tendinitis, distortion, muscular disorders etc.) has been carried out. Piroxicam has been administered at the dose of 0.5-1 g cream and diclofenac at the dose of 4 g emulgel, both 4 times a day for a period of 14 days. At baseline, 3rd, 7th and 14th days were evaluated: pain on movement, on pressure, function restriction, and the global evolution of symptomatology; at the end of the treatment the patient gave an evaluation on the physical characteristics of the two drugs, and the physician and the patients gave also global evaluation of efficacy and safety. The statistical analysis of the quantitative data (ANOVA and Student's t-tests) and qualitative data (Wilcoxon's test, chi 2 - and Fisher-tests) showed a significative reduction of pain on movement and of function's capacity at 3rd day, of pain on pressure and of function restriction on 7th day with both drugs with a superiority of piroxicam for some of the above mentioned parameters (7th and 14th days). Also the evaluation of the physical characteristics and the global evaluation of efficacy were more favourable for piroxicam. No adverse systemic or local reactions are reported for both drugs.