Shanzhi He

Objective: The aim of this review is to provide guidance on the selection of approaches to the screening and assessment of enthesitis in patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA). Methods: Twenty-four questions regarding the approaches to the screening and assessment of enthesitis and the implementation details were devised, followed by a systemic literature review. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology was employed in the development of this guideline, with modifications to evaluate non-interventional approaches under comprehensive consideration of costs, accessibility, and evidence strength. A consensus from the voting panel was required for the inclusion of the final recommendations and the strength of each recommendation. Results: Seventeen recommendations (including five strong recommendations) were included in this guideline. The voting panel expressed unequivocal support for the necessity of screening and assessment of enthesitis in patients with SpA. It was agreed unanimously that symptom evaluation and physical examination should serve as the initial steps to the recognition of enthesitis, whereas Maastricht Ankylosing Spondylitis Enthesitis Score is a reliable tool in both clinical trials and daily medical practice. Ultrasound examination is another reliable tool, with power Doppler ultrasound as an informative addition. Notwithstanding its high resolution, MRI is limited by the costs and relatively low accessibility, whereas radiographs had low sensitivity and therefore should be rendered obsolete in the assessment of enthesitis. PET/CT was strongly opposed in the detection of enthesitis. Conclusion: This guideline provides clinicians with information regarding the screening and assessment of enthesitis in patients with SpA. However, this guideline does not intend on dictating choices, and the ultimate decisions should be made in light of the actual circumstances of the facilities.

Objective: To develop a guideline for selecting biomarkers in the diagnosis and assessment in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA). Method: A joint effort was carried out by the core team, the literature review team and the multidisciplinary voting panel to formulate recommendations regarding biomarkers in axSpA, using an evidence-based and consensus-based strategy. Certainty of evidence and strength of recommendation were determined, and levels of agreement within the voting panel were calculated. Results: A total of 20 recommendations were formulated in this guideline, with levels of agreement ranging from 6.48 to 9.71. The two strong recommendations, HLA-B27 testing in patients suspected of axSpA and regular-interval monitoring of CRP/ESR represent the status quo of axSpA evaluation, while the 13 conditional recommendations represent the promising biomarkers with clinical utility in diagnosis, disease activity assessment, prediction of radiographic progression and therapeutic responses. This guideline does not dictate clinical choices of tests on axSpA, and decisions should be made based on comprehensive consideration of costs, accessibility, patients' values and willingness as well as the objective of testing in the local context. Conclusion: This guideline addresses the interpretation of the clinical significance of biomarkers in axSpA, and the biomarkers endorsed in this guideline composed a clinical toolkit for healthcare professionals to choose from.