Adam G Culvenor1, Cathrine N Engen2, Britt Elin Øiestad3, Lars Engebretsen4, May Arna Risberg2,3. 1. Division of Physiotherapy, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia. a.culvenor@uq.edu.au. 2. Department of Sports Medicine, Norwegian School of Sports Science, Sognsvannsveien 220, 0806, Oslo, Norway. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Norwegian Research Centre for Active Rehabilitation (NAR), Oslo University Hospital, Pb. 3843, Ullevål Stadion, 0805, Oslo, Norway. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Pb. 4950, Nydalen, 0424, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The Kellgren and Lawrence (K/L) system and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas are frequently used to define radiographic knee osteoarthritis (OA). The purpose of the current study was to determine the extent to which tibiofemoral OA rates differ between the K/L system and OARSI atlas criteria and to compare qualitative (K/L and OARSI) and quantitative (millimetres) measures of joint space narrowing (JSN). METHODS: Posteroanterior radiographs of 1,178 knees, from 621 individuals with varying severity of OA, were graded by a trained physician with the K/L system (grade 0-4) and the OARSI atlas (osteophytes/JSN graded 0-3). Using the K/L system, the presence of OA was defined with the traditional cut-off of ≥grade 2 (definite osteophyte and possible JSN) and an alternative cut-off of at least a definite osteophyte alone (≥grade 2/osteophyte). For the OARSI atlas, OA was considered present if the sum of osteophytes or JSN ≥grade 2, or grade 1 JSN occurred in combination with grade 1 osteophyte. Minimum joint space width (mJSW) was measured manually in millimetres. RESULTS: According to the K/L system (≥grade 2), 167 knees (14.2 %) had tibiofemoral OA and 203 (17.3 %) had ≥grade 2/osteophyte. In contrast, 309 knees (26.2 %) had tibiofemoral OA according to OARSI atlas criteria. K/L and OARSI JSN descriptions were significantly associated with mJSW (p < 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic tibiofemoral OA was almost twice as common using OARSI atlas criteria compared with the K/L system. This discrepancy is likely to contribute to the large variability of OA prevalence observed in the literature and is important for clinicians to consider when diagnosing radiographic OA. The cut-off for defining radiographic knee OA using the two systems should not be considered comparable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: The Kellgren and Lawrence (K/L) system and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas are frequently used to define radiographic knee osteoarthritis (OA). The purpose of the current study was to determine the extent to which tibiofemoral OA rates differ between the K/L system and OARSI atlas criteria and to compare qualitative (K/L and OARSI) and quantitative (millimetres) measures of joint space narrowing (JSN). METHODS: Posteroanterior radiographs of 1,178 knees, from 621 individuals with varying severity of OA, were graded by a trained physician with the K/L system (grade 0-4) and the OARSI atlas (osteophytes/JSN graded 0-3). Using the K/L system, the presence of OA was defined with the traditional cut-off of ≥grade 2 (definite osteophyte and possible JSN) and an alternative cut-off of at least a definite osteophyte alone (≥grade 2/osteophyte). For the OARSI atlas, OA was considered present if the sum of osteophytes or JSN ≥grade 2, or grade 1 JSN occurred in combination with grade 1 osteophyte. Minimum joint space width (mJSW) was measured manually in millimetres. RESULTS: According to the K/L system (≥grade 2), 167 knees (14.2 %) had tibiofemoral OA and 203 (17.3 %) had ≥grade 2/osteophyte. In contrast, 309 knees (26.2 %) had tibiofemoral OA according to OARSI atlas criteria. K/L and OARSI JSN descriptions were significantly associated with mJSW (p < 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Radiographic tibiofemoral OA was almost twice as common using OARSI atlas criteria compared with the K/L system. This discrepancy is likely to contribute to the large variability of OA prevalence observed in the literature and is important for clinicians to consider when diagnosing radiographic OA. The cut-off for defining radiographic knee OA using the two systems should not be considered comparable. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Entities:
Keywords:
Classification; Kellgren and Lawrence; Knee; OARSI; Osteoarthritis; Radiographic
Authors: Manish Kothari; Ali Guermazi; Gabriele von Ingersleben; Yves Miaux; Martine Sieffert; Jon E Block; Randall Stevens; Charles G Peterfy Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2004-05-19 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: N E Lane; K Brandt; G Hawker; E Peeva; E Schreyer; W Tsuji; M C Hochberg Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2011-03-23 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Paul Neuman; Martin Englund; Ioannis Kostogiannis; Thomas Fridén; Harald Roos; Leif E Dahlberg Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Erin M Macri; Adam G Culvenor; Hayden G Morris; Timothy S Whitehead; Trevor G Russell; Karim M Khan; Kay M Crossley Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2017-05-09 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Farhad Pishgar; Ali Guermazi; Amir Ashraf-Ganjouei; Arya Haj-Mirzaian; Frank W Roemer; Bashir Zikria; Christopher Sereni; Michael Hakky; Shadpour Demehri Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2021-03-08 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Kevin Leung; Bofei Zhang; Jimin Tan; Yiqiu Shen; Krzysztof J Geras; James S Babb; Kyunghyun Cho; Gregory Chang; Cem M Deniz Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Alankar A Ramteke; Ketaki A Ramteke; Aviral C Meshram; Wasudeo M Gadegone; Dhananjay V Raje Journal: Indian J Orthop Date: 2020-07-02 Impact factor: 1.251
Authors: Josh S Everhart; Morgan H Jones; Sercan Yalcin; Emily K Reinke; Laura J Huston; Jack T Andrish; Charles L Cox; David C Flanigan; Christopher C Kaeding; Robert A Magnussen; Nancy Obuchowski; Richard D Parker; Angela D Pedroza; Rosemary A Sanders; Carl S Winalski; Kurt P Spindler Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2021-04 Impact factor: 6.202