The lack of association between the burden of monosodium urate crystals assessed with dual-energy computed tomography or ultrasonography with cardiovascular risk in the commonly high-risk gout patient

Table 2 Comparison of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) volumes of monosodium urate deposition, number of joints presenting with the double contour (DC) sign, and serum urate levels depending on whether the metabolic syndrome is present or not

	Total population (n = 42)	No metabolic syndrome (n = 14)	Metabolic syndrome (n = 28)	p value
Number of joints with DC sign	2 (2–3)	2 (1–3)	2 (2–3)	0.65
DECT volume knees (mm³)	0.2 (0–1)	0.4 (0–0.6)	0.1 (0–1.2)	0.91
DECT volume feet (mm³)	0.5 (0.1–1.8)	0.8 (0.3–1.9)	0.4 (0–1.3)	0.46
DECT volume knees + feet (mm³)	0.8 (0.2–2.8)	1.2 (0.6–2.2)	0.4 (0.1–2.3)	0.29
Serum urate level (mg/dL)	7.6 (6.8–9.4)	7.6 (7.2–8.8)	7.5 (6.0–9.4)	0.63

As the Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test was used (no normality), data are expressed as median (interquartile range)

ISSN: 1478-6362