What are the initial testing and treatment approaches for ankylosing spondylitis?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 1, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Initial Testing for Ankylosing Spondylitis

For patients with chronic low back pain (>3 months duration) starting before age 45, screen using inflammatory back pain criteria and HLA-B27 testing—these two parameters provide the highest diagnostic yield with post-test probabilities of 14% and 32% respectively. 1

Patient Selection Criteria

Apply screening only to patients meeting these specific parameters:

  • Chronic back pain duration >3 months 1
  • Age of symptom onset <45 years (AS starts in <4% of patients over age 40) 1

Primary Screening Tests

Clinical Assessment: Inflammatory Back Pain (IBP)

  • Sensitivity: 75%, Specificity: 75% 1
  • Post-test probability: 14% (1 in 7 patients referred will have axial SpA) 1
  • Look for: back pain and stiffness that improves with exercise, worsens with rest, particularly morning stiffness 1
  • No cost, good ease of interpretation 1
  • One limitation: in one-third of patients, it cannot be clearly determined whether back pain is inflammatory or mechanical 1

Laboratory Testing: HLA-B27

  • Sensitivity: 90%, Specificity: 90% 1
  • Post-test probability: 32% (1 in 3 patients will have axial SpA) 1
  • This is the single best screening parameter with the highest diagnostic yield 1
  • Moderate cost but very good ease of interpretation 1
  • 90-95% of AS patients are HLA-B27 positive 2

Alternative Clinical Test: NSAID Response

  • Sensitivity: 75%, Specificity: 85% 1
  • Post-test probability: 21% (1 in 5 patients will have axial SpA) 1
  • Assess response to full-dose NSAID within 48 hours 1
  • 75% of AS patients show good/very good response vs. only 15% with mechanical back pain 1
  • Low cost, good ease of interpretation 1

Secondary Screening Parameters (Lower Sensitivity)

These should not be used as primary screening tools due to low sensitivity:

  • Uveitis: Sensitivity 15%, but high specificity 98% 1
  • Family history: Sensitivity 25% 1
  • Peripheral arthritis: Sensitivity 40% 1
  • ESR/CRP: Sensitivity only 50%, post-test probability 11.6% 1

Imaging Studies

MRI of Sacroiliac Joints

  • Sensitivity: 90%, Specificity: 90% 1
  • Post-test probability: 32% (equal to HLA-B27) 1
  • Detects sacroiliitis years before radiographic changes appear 1
  • High cost, moderate ease of interpretation 1
  • Use when clinical suspicion is high and early diagnosis is critical 1, 3

Plain Radiographs

  • Sensitivity: 80%, Specificity: 80% 1
  • Post-test probability: 17.4% 1
  • May take several years of inflammation before radiological damage is visible 1
  • Less useful for early diagnosis but still part of classification criteria 4

Recommended Screening Algorithm

  1. Screen all patients with chronic back pain >3 months, onset <45 years 1
  2. First-line: Assess for inflammatory back pain + order HLA-B27 1
  3. If either positive: refer to rheumatology 1
  4. If high clinical suspicion despite negative initial tests: order MRI sacroiliac joints 1, 3

Critical Pitfall to Avoid

Do not wait for radiographic sacroiliitis to make a diagnosis—this causes the typical 5-7 year delay in diagnosis and misses the window for most effective treatment with TNF inhibitors (72% of patients with disease duration <10 years achieve ≥50% improvement vs. 50% overall). 1

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.