High prevalence of symptomatic enthesopathy of the shoulder in ankylosing spondylitis: Deltoid origin involvement constitutes a hallmark of disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the prevalence and characteristics of shoulder involvement in ankylosing spondylitis (AS). To analyze the sensitivity and specificity of shoulder lesions defined by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with AS. METHODS: Prevalence of shoulder involvement was ascertained by chart review of 400 AS patients. One hundred of these patients and 285 controls were selected for clinical evaluation. AS patients with a clinically defined shoulder disorder (n = 15) and a control group of 91 patients (94 shoulders) with nonspecific shoulder pain were studied with MRI. Fifty-four MRI-defined variables per shoulder were analyzed by 2 observers. A third cohort of patients with AS (n = 76) was prospectively evaluated by clinical exam for AS-specific shoulder lesions identified on MRI. RESULTS: Shoulder pain was recorded in 3.5% of patients by chart review. Shoulder involvement by clinical evaluation was noted in 24.7% of patients versus 14.2% of controls (odds ratio [OR] 8.17, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 3.14-21.28, P < 0.001). Rotator cuff tendinitis was significantly more prevalent in patients (15.1%) than controls (3.5%; OR 8.17, 95% CI 2.66-25.14, P < 0.001). Acromioclavicular joint arthrosis was the most common lesion observed in AS shoulders (94%), although specificity was low (32%). Bone marrow edema at any entheseal site was noted in significantly more AS shoulders (70.6%) than in control (19.1%) shoulders (P < 0.001, corrected P = 0.02). Erosion of the greater tuberosity with or without adjacent bone edema had the best combination of sensitivity (58-65%) and specificity (86-92%). Intense acromial entheseal edema at the deltoid origin was observed only in AS shoulders (41.2%; P < 0.001). Evaluation of a prospective cohort of patients with AS showed that 22.4% had rotator cuff enthesopathy. CONCLUSION: Shoulder lesions in AS are common and characterized clinically by rotator cuff tendinitis and on MRI by intense bone edema localized to the supraspinatus/greater tuberosity and deltoid/acromial entheses. Intense acromial bone edema at the deltoid origin is a hitherto undescribed and highly specific feature of AS. Enthesopathy of the rotator cuff is underrecognized in AS and should be incorporated into instruments measuring enthesitis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".