SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • imaging;
  • midfoot;
  • rheumatoid arthritis;
  • subtalar joint

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

Foot involvement is not uncommon and occurs early in the disease course of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Inflammation and ongoing synovitis of foot joints lead to joint destruction and instability, tendon dysfunction, and eventually collapse of the medial longitudinal arch and pes planovalgus that contributes to difficulty in walking and gait abnormalities. This article reviews foot-related problems in patients with RA, focusing on the prevalence, natural history and role of imaging in both diagnosis and management of midfoot and subtalar joint disease in RA.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA)[1] is a multisystemic, chronic progressive inflammatory disease affecting all ethnic groups with overall prevalence of 1–2% of the population.[2] Joint pain, stiffness and swelling are the most notable presenting complaints among patients with RA. The severity of joint disease may fluctuate over time and its clinical course is often unpredictable. Ongoing synovitis with joint inflammation leads to joint destruction, deformity, chronic pain and disability. Early diagnosis of RA followed by the early use of synthetic and biologic disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) may further modify the disease course.[3] In early disease, the wrists, metacarpophalangeal joints, proximal interphalangeal joints of fingers and metatarsophalangeal joints are most commonly affected. As the disease progresses, the shoulders, elbows, knees, feet and ankles may also be involved if diagnosis is delayed and treatment is not initiated early.[4, 5]

The rheumatoid foot

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

Foot problems are not uncommon in RA and approximately 90% of patients report foot-related complains within 10 years of RA onset.[6-8] Minaker et al. who studied the prevalence of foot problems in 55 RA patients reported foot pain at some stage during the course of disease in up to 90% of their patients. Of these, 86% had clinical involvement and 92% had radiological changes in their feet. Overall, 16–19% of patients being treated for RA presented with signs and symptoms of foot and ankle involvement.[9, 10] Hallus valgus, splaying of forefoot, pes planus and valgus hindfoot are the most typical foot deformities in RA.[11] In a recent study conducted in a cohort of 40 RA patients with disease duration of more than 10 years, frequency of foot deformities was determined as 78%, in which 62% of them had metatarsus primus varus and 41% had splaying of the forefoot.[8] Besides articular pathologies of the feet and ankles, patients with RA may have associated tendinopathies, although the incidence has only been reported to be approximately 7%.[12] Overall, the involvement of the peroneal tendons is more common than the posterior tibial tendon and other extensor tendons of the foot.

Foot problems in early RA

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

Clinical signs of foot disease in RA are often subtle. Discrepancies between clinical examination and true synovitis or tendon abnormalities have been observed and clinical examination alone is unable to diagnose the precise extent of joint, tendon and soft tissue involvement in RA patients.[7, 13-15] In fact, patients may complain of ill-defined “ankle pain”, swelling behind the malleoli, or dorsum of the feet, and localization of signs may be difficult to pinpoint to specific structures/joints in the ankles/feet. A recent study in a cohort of RA patients with early disease of < 2 years' duration noted that 90% of the patients experienced foot pain at some point of their illness.[10] Among patients with disease duration < 1 year, individual joints of the foot, especially the fifth metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ), have been shown to erode more frequently than the individual joints of the hands over a year.[16] In another study, the first MTPJ was shown to be affected in 15% within 1 year, and 28% within 3 years in early RA patients who were on DMARDs.[17] Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an assessment tool, Calisir et al.[18] observed that there was no significant difference between the MCPJ and MTPJ with respect to RA-based changes obtained in the MRI, with synovitis being evident in 81% of hands and 71% of feet.

Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

The subtalar joint, or the talocalcaneal joint, is one of the three hindfoot joints. It controls eversion and inversion of the foot on the talus. The midfoot is the link-bridge between the hindfoot and forefoot. It includes the midtarsal (talonavicular and calcaneocuboid), naviculocuneiform (medial, intermediate and lateral), cuboidocuneiform and Lisfranc joints. The prevalence of subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA has been reported by Vainio et al.[11] as early as 1956, in which subtalar, talonavicular and calcaneocuboid joint pathologies occurred in 70% of RA patients compared with the ankle, which occurred in 9%. Vidigal et al.[19] who examined the feet of 200 consecutive admissions with chronic RA found that 104 of these patients had foot pain or deformity. Radiologically, midtarsal joint involvement was seen in 62% (124 feet) and subtalar joint disease was noted in 32% (64 feet). In order of decreasing frequency, arthritis in the foot affects the forefoot, midtarsal, subtalar and ankle.

Subtalar joint pain is felt mainly in the lateral hindfoot on activity due to chronic inflammation and destruction. If left untreated, progressive eversion at the subtalar joint, together with dysfunction of peritalar ligaments and the tibialis posterior tendon, subsequently lead to instability of the subtalar and midtarsal joints.[20, 21] Lateral subluxation beginning in the midfoot, causes the collapse of the medial longitudinal arch, pes planovalgus or valgus deformity that contributes to difficulty in walking.[21, 22] The gait abnormalities detected in early RA patients are similar to those reported in established disease. Turner et al.[23] who examined foot function in a small cohort of 12 early RA patients with disease duration < 2 years, found small but clinically important changes and disability in these patients when compared to controls. These included slower walking speeds, a longer double-support phase, reduced heel rise angle in terminal stance, lower medial arch height and greater peak eversion in stance. Pressure analysis indicated lesser toe contact area, elevated peak forefoot pressure and a larger midfoot contact area in these patients.

Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

Imaging plays a crucial role in the assessment of RA. Among all the imaging techniques, plain radiographs remain the initial screening test for RA patients. In the midfoot, characteristic radiographic features include diffuse joint space loss, bony sclerosis and osteophytosis, with osseous erosion being uncommon. The differentiation of RA involvement from degenerative, post-traumatic or neuropathic disorders may be difficult in these regions.[12] For radiological progression of RA, either the modified Sharp method or the Larsen method is used, but both methods do not specifically address midfoot or subtalar joint involvement.[24] As an assessment and monitoring tool, conventional radiography, despite its low cost, high availability and reproducibility, provides very little information because changes usually take months or even years to develop,[15] by which time the “window of opportunity” for early escalation of treatment may have passed. Moreover, X-ray of the foot is limited by multiple factors, including projectional superimposition caused by the 2-dimensional representation of a 3-dimensional pathology, use of ionizing radiation, relative insensitivity to early bone damage and total insufficiency for assessment of soft tissue changes, including synvoitis (Fig. 1).[25]

image

Figure 1. Radiographs of the ankle (anteroposterior and lateral views) showed degenerative changes at tibiotalar joint space and subchondral sclerotic change. Bilateral calcaneal spurs are seen. Tib, tibia; Tal, talus; Cal, calcaneus.

Download figure to PowerPoint

It is well known that synovitis, bone marrow edema and bone erosion are important pathologies associated with RA. Imaging modalities should be able to address such changes in the joint, especially in the early stage of disease. MRI and computed tomography (CT) provide useful information about both the features and the extent of anatomic damage in selected RA patients. MRI is very sensitive in detecting bone marrow edema, while CT is good at detection of bone erosion (Fig. 2). However, the high cost, availability of the machines and high radiation exposure hinder their use in clinical practice.[26]

image

Figure 2. Magnetic resonance imaging of an ankle in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis. Sagittal image of ankle (post-intravenous gadolinium injection) showing synovial thickening, joint space narrowing and small amount of joint effusion at tibiotalar, subtalar, and cuboidal-calcaneal joints. Tib, tibia; Tal, talus; Cal, calcaneus.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Ultrasonography is one of the techniques that has gained wide acceptance for studying joint, tendon, bursal and bone involvement in RA (Figs 3, 4). It has been increasingly used in rheumatology clinics for assessment and follow-up of these patients as it provides real-time visualization as well as direct identification of bone lesions and extent of synvoitis (Fig. 5). Wakefield et al. reported that ultrasound (US) detected 3.5 times more erosions than radiography in RA.[27] This difference was even greater with early disease. Ultrasound has other benefits, including guidance of steroid injections, thus ensuring accurate treatment applications.[28-31] In recent years, standardized US definitions for different pathologies and scanning guidelines were published by the Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT) US group, although further validation is still pending.[32-34]

image

Figure 3. Ultrasonography of posterior tibialis tendon (transverse view) showing abnormal hypoechoic area around the tendon with thickened tendon sheath. This was associated with increase power Doppler signal suggestive of tenosynovitis.

Download figure to PowerPoint

image

Figure 4. Ultrasound showing posterior tibialis tendon tenosynovitis (longitudinal view).

Download figure to PowerPoint

image

Figure 5. Ultrasound showing synovitis of tibotalar joint (longitudinal plane). Abnormal hypoechoic noncompressible area was seen at the tibiotalar joint suggestive of synovial proliferation (*).

Download figure to PowerPoint

Advances in imaging have led to the ability to distinguish between active synovitis and joint destruction. The fifth MTPJ has been reported to be the most common sonographic site of erosion in the foot in patients with RA, suggesting US assessment should be included in the baseline approach to patients with arthritis.[13, 35, 36] MRI and US have also been shown to be more sensitive than clinical examination for detecting synovitis in the forefoot in RA.[25] Further, low-field MRI and US were superior to clinical examination for detection of joint inflammation in RA feet.[13, 37] Using MRI as the gold standard, Wakefield et al.[38] reported that US was more specific in identifying hindfoot and midtarsal joint synovitis and tenosynovitis compared with clinical examination in patients with established RA. Woodburn et al.[39] who utilized MRI techniques to compare geometric architecture of subtalar and midtarsal joints in normal and symptomatic feet of 23 RA patients, concluded that only subtalar joint synovitis was predictive of abnormal subtalar and midtarsal architecture.

Conclusion

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References

To date, most published reports on foot and ankle involvement in RA have focused predominantly on forefoot and hindfoot pathologies. More studies are needed for better understanding of the impact of the RA foot, especially on the prevalence, pattern of involvement and imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA. With the help of different imaging techniques in rheumatology practice, such as ultrasonography, MRI and CT, detection of early or subclinical foot problems is facilitated, which allows prompt pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment, ultimately improving foot function and quality of life for RA patients.

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. The rheumatoid foot
  5. Foot problems in early RA
  6. Subtalar and midfoot joint involvement in RA
  7. Imaging of subtalar and midfoot joint disease in RA
  8. Conclusion
  9. References
  • 1
    Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA et al. (1988) The American Rheumatism Association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 31 (3), 31524.
  • 2
    Symmons DP, Barrett EM, Bankhead CR, Scott DG, Silman AJ (1994) The incidence of rheumatoid arthritis in the United Kingdom: results from the Norfolk Arthritis Register. Br J Rheumatol 33 (8), 7359.
  • 3
    Aletaha D, Neogi T, Silman AJ et al. (2010) 2010 Rheumatoid arthritis classification criteria: an American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum 62 (9), 256981.
  • 4
    Fleming A, Crown JM, Corbett M (1976) Incidence of joint involvement in early rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Rehabil 15 (2), 926.
  • 5
    Scott DL, Coulton BL, Popert AJ (1986) Long term progression of joint damage in rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 45 (5), 3738.
  • 6
    Shi K, Tomita T, Hayashida K, Owaki H, Ochi T (2000) Foot deformities in rheumatoid arthritis and relevance of disease severity. J Rheumatol 27 (1), 849.
  • 7
    Minaker K, Little H (1973) Painful feet in rheumatoid arthritis. Can Med Assoc J 109(8), 7245. passim.
  • 8
    Goksel Karatepe A, Gunaydin R, Adibelli ZH, Kaya T, Duruoz E (2010) Foot deformities in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the relationship with foot functions. Int J Rheum Dis 13 (2), 15863.
  • 9
    Otter SJ, Lucas K, Springett K et al. (2010) Foot pain in rheumatoid arthritis prevalence, risk factors and management: an epidemiological study. Clin Rheumatol 29 (3), 25571.
  • 10
    Jaakkola JI, Mann RA (2004) A review of rheumatoid arthritis affecting the foot and ankle. Foot Ankle Int 25 (12), 86674.
  • 11
    Vainio K (1956) The rheumatoid foot; a clinical study with pathological and roentgenological comments. Ann Chir Gynaecol Fenn Suppl 45 (1), 1107.
  • 12
    Cimino WG, O'Malley MJ (1998) Rheumatoid arthritis of the ankle and hindfoot. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 24 (1), 15772.
  • 13
    Riente L, Delle Sedie A, Scire CA et al. (2011) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. XXXI. Sonographic assessment of the foot in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 29(1), 15.
  • 14
    Koski JM (1993) Ultrasonography of the subtalar and midtarsal joints. J Rheumatol 20 (10), 17535.
  • 15
    Riente L, Delle Sedie A, Iagnocco A et al. (2006) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist V. Ultrasonography of the ankle and foot. Clin Exp Rheumatol 24(5), 4938.
  • 16
    Hulsmans HM, Jacobs JW, van der Heijde DM, van Albada-Kuipers GA, Schenk Y, Bijlsma JW (2000) The course of radiologic damage during the first six years of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 43 (9), 192740.
  • 17
    van der Heijde DM, van Leeuwen MA, van Riel PL et al. (1992) Biannual radiographic assessments of hands and feet in a three-year prospective followup of patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 35 (1), 2634.
  • 18
    Calisir C, Murat Aynaci AI, Korkmaz C (2007) The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging of the hands and feet in the diagnosis of early rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine 74 (4), 3627.
  • 19
    Vidigal E, Jacoby RK, Dixon AS, Ratliff AH, Kirkup J (1975) The foot in chronic rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 34 (4), 2927.
  • 20
    Jernberg ET, Simkin P, Kravette M, Lowe P, Gardner G (1999) The posterior tibial tendon and the tarsal sinus in rheumatoid flat foot: magnetic resonance imaging of 40 feet. J Rheumatol 26 (2), 28993.
  • 21
    Turner DE, Woodburn J, Helliwell PS, Cornwall MW, Emery P (2003) Pes planovalgus in RA: a descriptive and analytical study of foot function determined by gait analysis. Musculoskelet Care 1 (1), 2133.
  • 22
    Sweeney SE, Harris ED Jr, Firestein GS (2008) Course and complications of established Rheumatoid Arthritis. Involvement of specific joints: effects of disease on form and function. In: Gary S. Firestein, Ralph C. Budd, Sherine E. Gabriel, Iain B. Mclnnes, James R. O’dell (eds) Kelley's Textbook of Rheumatology. Chapter 70, pp 11091136. Saunders, Elsevier, Philadelphia.
  • 23
    Turner DE, Helliwell PS, Emery P, Woodburn J (2006) The impact of rheumatoid arthritis on foot function in the early stages of disease: a clinical case series. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 7, 102.
  • 24
    Chau SYL, Mok CC (2002) Assessment of Disease Activity and Functional Outcome in Rheumatoid Arthritis. Hong Kong Bull Rheumatic Dis 2 (1), 104.
  • 25
    Ostergaard M, Pedersen SJ, Dohn UM (2008) Imaging in rheumatoid arthritis–status and recent advances for magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasonography, computed tomography and conventional radiography. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 22 (6), 101944.
  • 26
    Levy G, Chow C, Cimmino MA, Schmidt WA (2009) RA Imaging Study Group: which imaging in rheumatoid arthritis? Joint Bone Spine 76 (4), 4389.
  • 27
    Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG et al. (2000) The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis Rheum 43 (12), 276270.
  • 28
    Kane D, Grassi W, Sturrock R, Balint PV (2004) Musculoskeletal ultrasound–a state of the art review in rheumatology. Part 2: clinical indications for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Rheumatology (Oxford) 43 (7), 82938.
  • 29
    Haslam KE, McCann LJ, Wyatt S, Wakefield RJ (2010) The detection of subclinical synovitis by ultrasound in oligoarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a pilot study. Rheumatology (Oxford) 49 (1), 1237.
  • 30
    d'Agostino MA, Ayral X, Baron G, Ravaud P, Breban M, Dougados M (2005) Impact of ultrasound imaging on local corticosteroid injections of symptomatic ankle, hind-, and mid-foot in chronic inflammatory diseases. Arthritis Rheum 53 (2), 28492.
  • 31
    Wakefield RJ, Kong KO, Conaghan PG, Brown AK, O'Connor PJ, Emery P (2003) The role of ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in early rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 21, S429.
  • 32
    Backhaus M, Burmester GR, Gerber T et al. (2001) Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis 60 (7), 6419.
  • 33
    Wakefield RJ, Balint PV, Szkudlarek M et al. (2005) Musculoskeletal ultrasound including definitions for ultrasonographic pathology. J Rheumatol 32 (12), 24857.
  • 34
    Keen HI, Brown AK, Wakefield RJ, Conaghan PG (2005) MRI and musculoskeletal ultrasonography as diagnostic tools in early arthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 31 (4), 699714.
  • 35
    Grassi W, Filippucci E, Farina A, Salaffi F, Cervini C (2001) Ultrasonography in the evaluation of bone erosions. Ann Rheum Dis 60 (2), 98103.
  • 36
    Sheane BJ, Beddy P, O'Connor M, Miller S, Cunnane G (2009) Targeted ultrasound of the fifth metatarsophalangeal joint in an early inflammatory arthritis cohort. Arthritis Rheum 61 (7), 10048.
  • 37
    Lehtinen A, Paimela L, Kreula J, Leirisalo-Repo M, Taavitsainen M (1996) Painful ankle region in rheumatoid arthritis. Analysis of soft-tissue changes with ultrasonography and MR imaging. Acta Radiol 37 (4), 5727.
  • 38
    Woodburn J, Udupa JK, Hirsch BE et al. (2002) The geometric architecture of the subtalar and midtarsal joints in rheumatoid arthritis based on magnetic resonance imaging. Arthritis Rheum 46 (12), 316877.
  • 39
    Wakefield RJ, Freeston JE, O'Connor P et al. (2008) The optimal assessment of the rheumatoid arthritis hindfoot: a comparative study of clinical examination, ultrasound and high field MRI. Ann Rheum Dis 67 (12), 167882.