Imaging findings of XXXX in @entity5145 and other rheumatic conditions.

@entity1 @entity4916 @entity6592 @entity627 @entity3947 @entity2001 @entity79 @entity1463 @entity5145 @entity7334 @entity2720 @entity236
PURPOSE: The authors sought to evaluate the role of the different imaging techniques in the study of @entity2720 in @entity1 with @entity5145 ( @entity5145 ) and other rheumatic conditions and to assess potential pitfalls in the radiological diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-three consecutive @entity1 with @entity6592 as the predominant symptom of a @entity627 were retrospectively studied. Radiography, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging were performed. The following imaging findings were evaluated: @entity236 , @entity7334 , synovial reaction, joint-space widening, @entity79 or @entity4916 , @entity2001 and, in final stages, joint-space narrowing and @entity3947 . All images were independently reviewed by two musculoskeletal radiologists. RESULTS: Radiography demonstrated @entity79 in 10 @entity1 (23%), @entity2001 in 15 (34%), jointspace widening in 8 (18%), joint-space narrowing in 17 (39%) and @entity3947 in 3 (6%). CT examination showed @entity1463 of the sacroiliac joint in 17 @entity1 (41%), @entity2001 in 21 (53%), joint-space widening in 22 (53%), joint-space narrowing in 18 (43%) and @entity3947 in 7 (17%). At MR, we found @entity236 in 25 @entity1 (92%), @entity7334 in 26 (96%), synovial reaction in 21 (77%) and joint-space widening in 5 (18%). CONCLUSIONS: Radiological study of the @entity2720 in @entity1 with different @entity627 represents a problem of difficult diagnostic evaluation due to the complexity of the anatomical region and the variability of radiographic findings. The integrated use of conventional radiography, CT and MR imaging is suggested to avoid misdiagnosis.
