Article Text

PDF
Concise report
Comparison of a high sensitivity and standard C reactive protein measurement in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis
  1. DA Poddubnyy1,
  2. M Rudwaleit1,
  3. J Listing2,
  4. J Braun3,
  5. J Sieper1
  1. 1Department of Rheumatology, Charité – Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin, Germany
  2. 2Department of Epidemiology, German Rheumatism Research Centre, Berlin, Germany
  3. 3Rheumazentrum Ruhrgebiet, Herne and Ruhr-University, Bochum, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Joachim Sieper, Department of Rheumatology, Charité – Campus Benjamin Franklin, Hindenburgdamm 30, 12203 Berlin, Germany; joachim.sieper{at}charite.de

Abstract

Objective This study was aimed at comparing high sensitivity C reactive protein (hsCRP) measurement with routine C reactive protein (CRP) evaluation as disease activity parameters in patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and non-radiographic axial spondyloarthritis (nrSpA).

Methods A total of 269 patients (153 with AS and 116 with nrSpA) were included. Level of hsCRP was measured using particle-enhanced immunoturbidimetric method with the lowest detected level of 0.1 mg/litre. The hsCRP values were compared to results of routine turbidimetric CRP test with the lowest detected level of 6 mg/litre.

Results In the whole group of patients with AS, hsCRP showed a better than routine CRP correlation with clinical parameters. In the whole group of patients with nrSpA, hsCRP correlated with the level of enthesitis-related tenderness only. In the AS subgroup with a negative routine CRP (<6 mg/litre) there was a clear trend for an increased level of pain, stiffness and functional impairment in patients with higher hsCRP concentration. Such a trend was less pronounced in patients with nrSpA.

Conclusions hsCRP correlates better than routine CRP with clinical disease activity parameters in patients with axial SpA, especially in AS. Therefore, hsCRP could be superior to standard CRP in assessing disease activity in axial SpA.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Competing interests None.

  • Ethics approval The study protocol was approved by the Berlin Ethics Committee and by the regional ethics committees of all participating centres. Writing informed consent was obtained from all patients.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.