van der Heijde Désirée, Landewé Robert, Hermann Kay-Geert, Rudwaleit Martin, Østergaard Mikkel, Oostveen Ans, O'Connor Phil, Maksymowych Walter P, Lambert Robert G, Lukas Cédric, Jurik Anne Grethe, Boers Maarten, Baraliakos Xenofon, Braun Jürgen
Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, University Hospital Maastricht and CAPHRI Research Institute, University Maastricht, The Netherlands. d.vanderheijde.kpnplanet.nl
J Rheumatol. 2007 Apr;34(4):871-3.
This report summarizes the discussion during a module update at OMERACT 8 on scoring methods for activity in the spine on magnetic resonance imaging. The conclusion was that the 3 available scoring methods are all very good with respect to discrimination and feasibility: the Ankylosing Spondylitis spine MRI score for activity (ASspiMRI-a), the Berlin method (a modification of the ASspiMRI-a), and the Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada Magnetic Resonance Imaging Index for Assessment of Spinal Inflammation in AS (SPARCC). All 3 methods were judged to be similar with respect to responsiveness and discrimination, although the differences in between-reader intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were judged to be relevant (the SPARCC method provided consistently higher ICC). The Berlin and SPARCC methods were preferred most frequently. The development of a new method combining the best elements of all methods is an additional possibility.
本报告总结了在OMERACT 8关于磁共振成像脊柱活动度评分方法的模块更新期间的讨论。结论是,现有的3种评分方法在区分度和可行性方面都非常出色:强直性脊柱炎脊柱MRI活动度评分(ASspiMRI-a)、柏林方法(ASspiMRI-a的一种改良方法)以及加拿大脊柱关节炎研究联盟磁共振成像评估强直性脊柱炎脊柱炎症指数(SPARCC)。尽管读者间组内相关系数(ICC)的差异被认为具有相关性(SPARCC方法的ICC始终较高),但所有3种方法在反应性和区分度方面被判定为相似。柏林方法和SPARCC方法最常被优先选用。结合所有方法的最佳要素开发一种新方法是另一种可能。