impact factor, citescore
logo
 

Diagnosis

 

Evaluation of salivary gland ultrasonography in primary Sjögren's syndrome: does it reflect clinical activity and outcome of the disease?


1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8

 

  1. Division of Rheumatology, Marmara University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. inanc.nevsun@gmail.com
  2. Division of Rheumatology, Marmara University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
  3. Department of Health Management, Marmara University Faculty of Health Sciences, Istanbul, Turkey.
  4. Division of Immunology, Marmara University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
  5. Marmara University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
  6. Division of Rheumatology, Marmara University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
  7. Division of Rheumatology, Marmara University, School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
  8. Department of Rheumatology, MC Groep Hospitals, Leystad, The Netherlands.

CER12104
2019 Vol.37, N°3 ,Suppl.118
PI 0140, PF 0145
Diagnosis

Free to view
(click on article PDF icon to read the article)

PMID: 31287407 [PubMed]

Received: 22/01/2019
Accepted : 29/04/2019
In Press: 05/07/2019
Published: 28/08/2019

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:
To evaluate associations between salivary gland ultrasonography (SGUS) and clinical characteristics, disease activity and outcome in patients with primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS).
METHODS:
The parotid and submandibular salivary glands were examined by ultrasonography using two different scoring systems proposed by Hocevar et al. and Milic et al. on 85 pSS patients. Patients with inhomogeneity/hypoechoic areas with scores ≥2 in parotid and submandibular glands were classified as severe parotid or severe submandibular involvements, respectively. Disease activity and patient-reported severity were evaluated using the European League Against Rheumatism Sjögren’s Disease Activity Index (ESSDAI) and the European League Against Rheumatism Sjögren’s Patient Reported Index (ESSPRI). Salivary gland functional capacity was investigated by unstimulated whole saliva flow rate (U-WSFR).
RESULTS:
Of the activity scores, ESSPRI dryness component was higher in pSS patients who had scores above the cut-off values for Hocevar (6.1±2.3 vs. 4.9±2.6, p=0.026). The patients with any type of systemic involvement more frequently showed higher SGUS scores, according to both Hocevar (72.4 vs. 44.6%, p=0.013) and Milic (75.9 vs. 51.8%, p=0.026). These patients also showed a higher percentage of severe parotid/submandibular changes on US imaging (65.5 vs. 33.9%, p=0.005 and 75.9 vs. 51.8%, p=0.026 respectively). Higher SGUS scores according to cut-off values of both scoring systems and severe parotid/submandibular involvements were associated with both anti-Ro or double anti-Ro/La autoantibodies and inversely associated with U-WSFR.
CONCLUSIONS:
SGUS may be a useful imaging modality for the selection of patients with more severe disease status or who may require a tight follow-up schedule.

Rheumatology Article