To compare joint ultrasound measurements between the sexes in healthy volunteers. A cross-sectional study compared the joint ultrasound measurements between the sexes in healthy volunteers. Quantitative (synovial hypertrophy and perpendicular measurement in the largest synovial recess) and semiquantitative (synovial hypertrophy, power Doppler, and bone erosion; score 0–3) ultrasound measurements were performed. Forty-six articular recesses were evaluated and compared between group 1 (100 females) and group 2 (60 males) who were matched by age and BMI. For the quantitative measurements, 7360 recesses were studied. For the semiquantitative measurements, 22,720 recesses were evaluated. Higher values (p < .05) were found in females for the quantitative measurements of synovial hypertrophy for the following: radiocarpal, distal radioulnar and ulnocarpal, second/third dorsal and second/third palmar interphalangeal, second palmar metacarpophalangeal, glenohumeral, hip, talocrural, talonavicular, and talocalcaneal recesses; the highest difference was found for the hip (6.21 ± 1.35 vs. 4.81 ± 2.40) and distal radioulnar (1.46 ± 0.40 vs. 1.07 ± 0.70) recesses. For the semiquantitative measurements, significant differences were found. For synovial hypertrophy, higher measurements for females in the second/third palmar metacarpophalangeal, second palmar proximal interphalangeal, hip, tibiotalar, talonavicular, talocalcaneal, and second metatarsophalangeal recesses (highest difference for second palmar metacarpophalangeal [44 (22.0%) vs. 5 (4.2%)]). For power Doppler, there were higher values for females in the talonavicular recesses and higher values for males in the first/second/fifth metatarsophalangeal recesses (highest difference for fifth [9 (7.5%) vs. 2 (1.0%)]). For bone erosion, there were higher measurements for females in the radiocarpal recesses (10 [5.0%] vs. 0 [0.0%]) and higher values for males in the talonavicular recesses (4 [3.3%] vs. 0 [0.0%]). Higher quantitative and semiquantitative ultrasound measurements of synovial hypertrophy were typically found in females.

1. Wakefield, R, D’Agostinho, M. Essential Applications of Musculoskeletal Ultrasound in Rheumatology. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 2010.
Google Scholar | Crossref2. Schmidt, WA, Schmidt, H, Schicke, B, Gromnica-Ihle, E. Standard reference values for musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(8):988-94.
Google Scholar3. Machado, FS, Natour, J, Takahashi, RD, de Buosi, AL, Furtado, RN. Sonographic assessment of healthy peripheral joints: evaluation according to demographic parameters. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(12):2087-98.
Google Scholar | Medline4. Ellegaard, K, Torp-Pedersen, S, Holm, C, Danneskiold-Samsøe, B, Bliddal, H. Ultrasound in finger joints: findings in normal subjects and pitfalls in the diagnosis of synovial disease. Ultraschall Med. 2007;28(04):401-8.
Google Scholar | Medline5. Backhaus, M, Burmester, GR, Gerber, T, Grassi, W, Machold, KP, Swen, WA, et al. Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis. 2001;60(7):641-49.
Google Scholar | Medline6. Wakefield, RJ, Balint, PV, Szkudlarek, M, Filippucci, E, Backhaus, M, D’Agostino, MA, et al. Musculoskeletal ultrasound including definitions for ultrasonographic pathology. J Rheumatol. 2005;32(12):2485-7.
Google Scholar | Medline7. Szkudlarek, M, Court-Payen, M, Jacobsen, S, Klarlund, M, Thomsen, HS, Østergaard, M. Interobserver agreement in ultrasonography of the finger and toe joints in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;48(4):955-62.
Google Scholar8. Zar, JH . Biostatistical Analysis. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1999.
Google Scholar9. Moromizato, K, Kimura, R, Fukase, H, Yamaguchi, K, Ishida, H. Whole-body patterns of the range of joint motion in young adults: masculine type and feminine type. J Physiol Anthropol. 2016;35(1):23.
Google Scholar | Medline10. Koski, JM. Axillar ultrasound of the glenohumeral joint. J Rheumatol. 1989;16:664-7.
Google Scholar | Medline11. Koski, JM. Ultrasonography of the elbow joint. Rheumatol Int. 1990;10(3):91-4.
Google Scholar | Medline12. Sada, PN, Rajan, P, Jeyaseelan, L, Washburn, MC. Standards for ultrasonographic measurements of the hip joint in Indian adults. Skeletal Radiol. 1994;23(2):111-2.
Google Scholar | Medline13. Boutry, N, Lardé, A, Demondion, X, Cortet, B, Cotten, H, Cotten, A. Metacarpophalangeal joints at US in asymptomatic volunteers and cadaveric specimens. Radiology. 2004;232(3):716-24.
Google Scholar | Medline14. Luukkainen, R, Ekman, P, Luukkainen, P, Koski, JM. Ultrasonographic findings in metatarsophalangeal and talocrural joints in healthy persons. Clin Rheumtol. 2009;28(3):311-3.
Google Scholar | Medline15. Rosenberg, C, Arrestier, S, Etchepare, F, Fautrel, B, Rozenberg, S, Bourgeois, P. High frequency of ultrasonographic effusion in interphalangeal joints of healthy subjects: a descriptive study. Joint Bone Spine. 2009;76(3):265-7.
Google Scholar16. Millot, F, Clavel, G, Etchepare, F, Gandjbakhch, F, Grados, F, Saraux, A, et al. Musculoskeletal ultrasonography in healthy subjects and ultrasound criteria for early arthritis (the ESPOIR cohort). J Rheumatol. 2011;38(4):613-20.
Google Scholar | Medline17. Machado, FS, Furtado, RN, Takahashi, RD, de Buosi, AL, Natour, J. Sonographic cutoff values for detection of abnormalities in small, medium and large joints: a comparative study between patients with rheumatoid arthritis and healthy volunteers. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015;41(4):989-98.
Google Scholar | Medline18. Machado, FS, Natour, J, Takahashi, RD, Furtado, RNV. Articular ultrasound in asymptomatic volunteers: identification of the worst measures of synovial hypertrophy, synovial blood flow and joint damage among small-, medium- and large-sized joints. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2017;43(6):1141-52.
Google Scholar