title: Imaging modalities for the classification of gout: systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Although there has been major progress in gout imaging, no gout classification criteria currently include advanced imaging techniques.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To examine the usefulness of imaging modalities in the classification of gout when compared to monosodium urate (MSU) crystal confirmation as the gold standard, in order to inform development of new gout classification criteria.
  
  
  METHODS
  We systematically reviewed the published literature concerning the diagnostic performance of plain film radiography, MRI, ultrasound (US), conventional CT and dual energy CT (DECT). Only studies with MSU crystal confirmation as the gold standard were included. When more than one study examined the same imaging feature, the data were pooled and summary test characteristics were calculated.
  
  
  RESULTS
  11 studies (9 manuscripts and 2 meeting abstracts) satisfied the inclusion criteria. All were set in secondary care, with mean gout disease duration of at least 7 years. Three features were examined in more than one study: the double contour sign (DCS) on US, tophus on US, and MSU crystal deposition on DECT. The pooled (95% CI) sensitivity and specificity of US DCS were 0.83 (0.72 to 0.91) and 0.76 (0.68 to 0.83), respectively; of US tophus, were 0.65 (0.34 to 0.87) and 0.80 (0.38 to 0.96), respectively; and of DECT, were 0.87 (0.79 to 0.93) and 0.84 (0.75 to 0.90), respectively.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  US and DECT show promise for gout classification but the few studies to date have mostly been in patients with longstanding, established disease. The contribution of imaging over clinical features for gout classification criteria requires further examination.
authors.affiliation: Division of Rheumatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
authors.forename: Alexis
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Ogdie
authors.affiliation: Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
authors.forename: William J
authors.initials: WJ
authors.lastname: Taylor
authors.affiliation: Department of Medicine, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
authors.forename: Mark
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Weatherall
authors.affiliation: Department of Rheumatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Jaap
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Fransen
authors.affiliation: Department of Rheumatology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
authors.forename: Tim L
authors.initials: TL
authors.lastname: Jansen
authors.affiliation: Sections of Epidemiology and Rheumatology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
authors.forename: Tuhina
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Neogi
authors.affiliation: Division of Rheumatology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
authors.forename: H Ralph
authors.initials: HR
authors.lastname: Schumacher
authors.affiliation: Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
authors.forename: Nicola
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Dalbeth
mesh_terms: D006073:Gout / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000379:methods; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000379:methods; D014463:Ultrasonography; D014527:Uric Acid / Q000032:analysis
chemical_list: D014527:Uric Acid
keywords: Arthritis; Gout; Ultrasonography