Literature DB >> 17451975

Hand bone midshaft enthesophytes: the influence of age, sex, and heritability.

L Kalichman1, I Malkin, E Kobyliansky.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aims of the present study were (1) to evaluate whether development of enthesophytes is an age- and/or sex-associated phenomenon; (2) to clarify whether enthesophyte development is controlled by genetics; (3) to evaluate the correlations between the enthesophytes and osteophytes of the hand joints.
DESIGN: The studied cohort comprised 359 Chuvashian (Russian Federation) pedigrees (424 nuclear families) and included 786 males and 723 females aged 18-90 years. The enthesophyte score (ES) was constructed as the overall number of enthesophytes at the midshaft of the phalanges of the second to the fifth fingers of both hands. The osteophyte score (OS) was constructed similarly. We used variance component (VC) analysis to examine the age-related patterns and compare the contribution of the genetic and common environmental factors to ES and OS variations. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSIONS: After age 25, ES increases with age (on average linearly). Age explains 45% of the ES variation in males but only 25% of the variation in females, in contrast to about 75% of the variation of OS in both sexes. At any age, males showed higher ES than females and the difference between sexes increased with age. Genetic components explained 20% of enthesophyte development variation. We did not find common additive genetic factors for ES and OS. The correlation coefficients between ES and OS were r=0.62 (P=0.0001) in males and r=0.50 (P=0.0001) in females. After age adjustment, the correlation decreased to r=0.087 (P=0.014) and r=0.14 (P=0.001) correspondingly. Most probably, enthesophytes and osteophytes are manifestations of different etiological processes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17451975     DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.03.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage        ISSN: 1063-4584            Impact factor:   6.576


  6 in total

Review 1.  Imaging modalities in hand osteoarthritis--and perspectives of conventional radiography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography.

Authors:  Ida K Haugen; Pernille Bøyesen
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 5.156

2.  Relation of hand enthesophytes with knee enthesopathy: is osteoarthritis related to a systemic enthesopathy?

Authors:  Nadia Gibson; Ali Guermazi; Margaret Clancy; Jingbo Niu; Peter Grayson; Piran Aliabadi; Frank Roemer; David T Felson
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 4.666

3.  Bony palmar ridges of the phalanges of the human fingers.

Authors:  Jie Meng; Inneke Willekens; Erik Cattrysse; Evie Vereecke; Caroline Geers; Toon Van Cauteren; Johan de Mey; Michel De Maeseneer
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 1.246

4.  Bone-formers and bone-losers in an archaeological population.

Authors:  Simon Mays
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  2015-12-15       Impact factor: 2.868

5.  Osteo-Proliferative Lesions of the Phalanges on Radiography: Associations with Sex, Age, and Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Sandra Hermann; Iris Eshed; Iván Sáenz; Niclas Doepner; Katharina Ziegeler; Kay Geert A Hermann
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-02

6.  Osteophytes, enthesophytes, and high bone mass: a bone-forming triad with potential relevance in osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Sarah A Hardcastle; Paul Dieppe; Celia L Gregson; Nigel K Arden; Tim D Spector; Deborah J Hart; Mark H Edwards; Elaine M Dennison; Cyrus Cooper; Martin Williams; George Davey Smith; Jon H Tobias
Journal:  Arthritis Rheumatol       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 10.995

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.