Anatomic Distribution of Sacroiliac Joint Lesions on Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis and Control Subjects: A Prospective Cross‐Sectional Study, Including Postpartum Women, Patients With Disc Herniation, Cleaning Staff, Runners, and Healthy Individuals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the anatomic location and distribution of lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the sacroiliac (SI) joints in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA), women with and without postpartum pain (childbirth within 4-16 months), patients with disc herniation, cleaning staff, runners, and healthy persons. METHODS: In a prospective cross-sectional study of 204 participants, MRI of the entire cartilaginous compartment of the SI joint was scored blindly by 2 independent, experienced readers, according to Spondyloarthritis Research Consortium of Canada definitions of SI joint inflammation and structural lesions in each SI joint quadrant or half and in each of 9 slices. The locations of the lesions (unilateral/bilateral, upper/lower, sacral/iliac, and anterior/central/posterior slices) were analyzed based on concordant reads. RESULTS: Bone marrow edema (BME) occurred in all quadrants in nearly all participant groups, but rarely bilaterally, except in patients with axial SpA and women with postpartum pain. Fat lesions were mainly found in axial SpA and occurred in all quadrants, but mostly bilaterally in sacral quadrants. Erosion was rare, except in axial SpA, where it was mainly iliac and often bilateral. Sclerosis was exclusively iliac and most frequent in women with postpartum pain. CONCLUSION: The location and distribution of common SI joint lesions in axial SpA and non-axial SpA were reported, and group-specific patterns were revealed. BME distributed bilaterally or unilaterally, both locally and more widespread in the SI joint, is common in both postpartum women with pain and axial SpA patients, which limits the use of BME to differentiate these groups. This study indicates that the presence of fat lesions, especially when widespread, and/or erosion, particularly when located centrally or posteriorly, are diagnostically important and should be investigated further.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".