– . , : .
, . , .
, . – . – .
, , .
, , . - :
- ()
- - ()
- ().
. , - . . .
, - . . .. , 55-82%.

, , .
, 5-12% – .

, , , – 2%.
, 2-13% [1].
. . .. , .
, . , , . , .
, , . .
, . . , .
. . ., , .
- 2010 . – .
.. .. , 98,8% , 47,5% [2].

, .
96,3% . : , - 80% , , [3].
, . , , , .
, . .. .. , «» [2].
, , , . , , , .
:
- .., .., .. // . .. , 2011. – 2. – .3. – .58
- http://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=14866483 .., .. // - , 2010. – 2. – 43-48
- Van Tubergen A., Heuft-Dorenbosch L., Schulpen G. Radiographic assessment of sacroiliitis by radiologist and rheumatologists: does training improve quality? Ann Rheum Dis 2003; 62: 519–25
? !
:


























:
:
:




