Rheumatoid Arthritis: Bernelot-Moens HJ

Berthelot JM, Bernelot-Moens HJ, Klarlund M, McGonagle D, Calin A, Schumacher HR, Combe B, De Bandt M, Drosos AA, Flipo RM, Harris BJ, Kaarela K, Le Goff P, Meyer O, Punzi L, Zerbini CA, Saraux A, Anonymous00207. · Department of Rheumatology, Nantes University Medical School, CHU Nantes, France. · Clin Exp Rheumatol. · Pubmed #12051392 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To determine areas of agreement and disagreement among experts in the interpretation of the published criteria for RA (ACR) and spondylarthropathies ( ESSG). METHODS: Thirty-two experts (16 from France and 16 from 10 other countries) replied anonymously to a mailed questionnaire. RESULTS: Tenosynovitis and 'sausage-like' painless swelling of the toes were considered as criteria for RA by 18 and 14 experts, respectively. The definition of symmetry differed widely among experts (symmetry of only one group of joints was sufficient for 13). Twenty-five experts considered erosions of other joints than the wrists and fingers as a criterion for RA, 17 thought that fulfilment of criteria could be achieved cumulatively, and 19 would appreciate clarifications of the current criteria. Among possible clarifications for RA, it was frequently recommended that morning stiffness and nodules be eliminated and that new marker antibodies, X-rays of the feet, and exclusion criteria be added. Twenty-three of the 29 experts who gave an opinion (79%) agreed with the notion of SP in the absence of axial signs and sacroiliitis, 26/31 (84%) indicated that a patient can have both RA and SP, and 19/30 (63%) thought that RA and SP could be regarded as syndromes more than diseases. Only 5/32 experts relied more on the criteria than on their clinical judgement in diagnosing RA. CONCLUSIONS: There would seem to be a needfor the optimisation of RA and ESSG criteria, particularly within the context of early arthritis.

Berthelot JM, Klarlund M, McGonagle D, Bernelot-Moens HJ, Calin A, Harrison B, Schumacher HR, Kaarela K, Drosos AA, Hülsemann JL, Koh WH, Konttinen YT, Punzi L, Tanimoto K, Williams HJ, Wolfe F, Zerbini CA, Saraux A, Anonymous00239. · Department of Rheumatology, Nantes University Medical School, CHU Nantes, France. · J Rheumatol. · Pubmed #11361225 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine how experts would classify 10 early-arthritis cases (7 atypical) and to study discrepancies in diagnoses relative to ACR criteria for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or ESSG criteria for spondyloarthropathy (SpA). METHODS: Ten real cases (5 met ACR criteria for RA, 6 ESSG criteria for SpA, 3 both and 2 neither) followed for 28.5 +/- 4.8 months were sent as paper cases to 20 international and 12 French experts. Each expert selected a diagnosis among 8 possible choices and rated it on a 0-10 confidence scale. For each case, 3 analog scales (0-100 mm) were used to indicate the probability of RA, SpA or undifferentiated arthritis (UA). RESULTS: Experts often disagreed about diagnoses (up to 5 different diagnoses for a given case, with a mean of 3.9 per case). Similarly, expert opinions on probabilities for RA and SpA differed widely, with great overlap between confidence for RA, SpA and UA. Fulfilment of ACR or ESSG criteria was poorly related to the experts' diagnosis and evaluation of probabilities for RA and SpA. However, UA was a relatively infrequent choice (19%). CONCLUSIONS: There was no general consensus about the nosology of early RA and SpA. Classification of atypical early arthritis was not resolved by currently available criteria for RA and SpA. This may have implications for therapy in early disease.