骨关节炎
医学
膝关节痛
置信区间
优势比
体质指数
磁共振成像
鹿特丹研究
人口
物理疗法
内科学
放射科
病理
替代医学
环境卫生
作者
D. Schiphof,Edwin H.G. Oei,Albert Hofman,J.H. Waarsing,Harrie Weinans,Sita Bierma‐Zeinstra
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.joca.2013.12.017
摘要
ObjectivesIs a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) definition for tibiofemoral osteoarthritis [(TFOAMRI) (definite osteophyte and full-thickness cartilage loss (or a combination of these factors with other MRI osteoarthritis (OA) features)] more sensitive to detect structural OA compared with the Kellgren & Lawrence (K&L) grading? And which definition shows the strongest association with (1) knee pain at baseline, (2) persistent knee pain during 2-year follow-up, (3) new onset of knee pain ±2 years later, and (4) body mass index (BMI).DesignOf 888 females of the open population Rotterdam Study, radiographs and MRI of both knees were assessed for knee OA defined by K&L ≥ 2 and TFOAMRI. Pain in or around the knee is measured at baseline and ±2 years later. GEE analyses are used for the associations.ResultsOf 1766 knees, 77 knees (4%) were diagnosed with K&L ≥ 2, whereas 160 knees (9%) met the TFOAMRI criteria. Only 43 knees met both definitions (34 knees were graded with K&L ≥ 2 and no TFOAMRI and 117 knees met only the TFOAMRI criteria). The association between the definitions and knee pain at baseline was higher when TFOAMRI was included [TFOAMRI alone: odds ratio (OR) = 2.83 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.84–4.36); TFOAMRI & K&L ≥ 2: OR = 6.28 (95% CI: 2.99–13.19)] than for K&L ≥ 2 alone (OR = 1.83 (95% CI: 0.63–5.32)). This was similar for the association between the definitions and persistent knee pain, and between the definitions and BMI.ConclusionsTFOAMRI detects more cases of knee OA than K&L ≥ 2. Together with a better content validity and at least equal construct validity, we conclude that the TFOAMRI definition for knee OA is more sensitive in detecting structural knee OA.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI