Literature DB >> 25598855

Metabolic factors in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis - a review of clinical data.

Sruti Pillai1, Geoffrey Littlejohn1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to review the literature linking metabolic factors to Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH), in order to assess associations between growth factors and DISH.
METHOD: We identified studies in our personal database and PubMed using the following keywords in various combinations: "diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis", "ankylosing hyperostosis", "Forestier's disease", "diabetes", "insulin", "obesity", "metabolic", "growth factors", "adipokines", "glucose tolerance" and "chondrocytes".
RESULTS: We were not able to do a systematic review due to variability in methodology of studies. We found positive associations between obesity (especially abdominal obesity), Type 2 diabetes mellitus, glucose intolerance, hyperinsulinemia and DISH.
CONCLUSION: Current research indicates that certain metabolic factors associate with DISH. More precise studies deriving from these findings on these and other newly identified bone-growth factors are needed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone; DISH; diabetes; diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis; growth factors; insulin; metabolic; obesity.

Year:  2014        PMID: 25598855      PMCID: PMC4293739          DOI: 10.2174/1874312901408010116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Open Rheumatol J        ISSN: 1874-3129


INTRODUCTION

Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) is a common skeletal disorder characterised by the presence of new bone formation. The new bone is particularly prominent in entheseal areas, where ligaments, tendons, joint capsule and annulus fibrosis fibres insert into bone. In addition, there is also an increase in the amount of normal cancellous and cortical bone, as well as generalised hyperostosis and a tendency to form post-operative heterotopic new bone [1]. DISH is a systemic condition and not just the result of local mechanical factors present in each of the involved areas of the skeleton. Since the early descriptions of DISH there have been associations with a variety of metabolic factors. Many of these have subsequently been further studied to better define any associations between a particular metabolic factor and DISH. In this report we review the available literature on a number of the putative metabolic factors that have been studied in patients with DISH. Our aim was to identify associations between such factors and DISH in order to better focus future research in this area.

METHODS

Papers discussed in this review were identified from the authors’ own databases and were supplemented with searches on PubMed and online journals. The following keywords were used in various combinations: “diffuseidiopathic skeletal hyperostosis”, “ankylosing hyperostosis”, “Forestier’s disease”, “diabetes”, “insulin”, “obesity”, “metabolic”, “growth factors”, “adipokines”, “glucose tolerance” and “chondrocytes”. The bibliography of relevant identified papers was scanned and information from abstracts and non-English sources was included as deemed relevant. The derived information is presented in summary form. Differences in patient identification and other methodology varied to the degree that formal systematic review was not valid. The anatomical, radiological and clinical features of DISH have been described under various names for over 150 years. These studies also use different definitions for the diagnosis of DISH. These range from hyperostosis linking two vertebral bodies, without intervening disc disease and extend to different numbers of vertebrae linked by confluent anterior longitudinal ligament related new bone. The different criteria used are summarised in Table . In this review we have included studies using different criteria in order to maximize any associations with putative metabolic factors.

Obesity and DISH

In the defining paper of Forestier and Rotes-Querol it was noted that six of the nine males described with DISH, then termed ankylosing hyperostosis, were stated to be obese [11]. Other subsequent studies have also noted this association. A series of paleopathological studies is summarized in Table . These studies show that there is a significant difference in the prevalence of DISH between groups with different social status, with specific material from monastic and high-status burial sites being more affected by DISH than remains from laymen burials [12]. The proposition is that the higher social status groups were excessively nourished, with probable increased rates of obesity, compared to the poorer laymen [8]. It is noted that these studies vary in their criteria for defining DISH and that different definitions result in different rates of diagnosis in the same populations [12]. Nevertheless, it is the differences between rates of DISH in the higher and lower social status classes that imply an association between DISH and nutritional factors, particularly those relating to obesity. In one study the prevalence of DISH in skeletons from cemeteries in churches and chapels, serving priests, monks and lay benefactors, was compared to lay cemeteries in adjacent regions serving the general population [8]. By combining data from the Wells Cathedral and the Royal Mint sites, the authors found that skeletons deemed to derive from high social status individuals had a significantly higher prevalence of DISH compared to those deemed to be of lower social status (P<0.001). The diet of high social status individuals, such as those living in mediaeval monasteries, was high in animal fat and alcohol [8]. A diet rich in animal fat and alcohol and low in vegetables and fruit has been detailed in members of the Medici family found to have DISH [13]. These findings are consistent across many regions and in different countries even when variations of criteria for diagnosis of DISH are used. More contemporary clinical data on associations between DISH and obesity are presented in Table . Many of these studies are observational and of historical interest, with no appropriate comparator group. Schilling et al. found higher levels of obesity in patients with DISH compared to controls [24]. Additionally, Julkunen et al. found a significant association between DISH and obesity in a large population survey in Finland [3]. DISH patients had a higher weight - height index compared to controls without DISH, particularly in those over the age of sixty. An age and sex-matched comparative study of patients with DISH and those with spondylosis showed a significantly higher body mass index [BMI] in the DISH group and as well a higher weight at the age of 25 years in the DISH group (all p<0.001) [25]. Mader et al. found significantly higher waist circumference, a marker of obesity and metabolic syndrome [26], in both men and women with DISH [27]. The BMI was statistically higher in both the men and women with DISH compared to the controls and the percentage of DISH patients with BMI above 30, indicating obesity, was also significantly higher. In a review of patients with psoriatic arthritis [PsA] from the one cohort [28], 78 patients were identified with DISH using the spinal criteria of Utsinger [7]. These patients were compared to 234 PsA patients without DISH from the same cohort. There was a significant increase in BMI in the PsA patients with DISH compared to those with PsA without DISH. Obesity rates were higher in the PsA patients without DISH [mean ± standard deviation = 50 ± 33.8 versus the PsA plus DISH group [31 ± 70.5]. The very high variance in the data makes interpretation of the association of DISH and obesity in this population unclear, although the BMI was significantly elevated.

Diabetes and DISH

Overlapping and subsequent studies have focussed on the association between DISH and altered glucose tolerance and adult onset Type 2 diabetes mellitus. These studies have looked at various aspects of glucose intolerance defined in different ways. The studies used contemporaneous criteria for the diagnosis of diabetes and/or criteria based on different thresholds for glucose intolerance, following different glucose challenges. The studies seeking association between DISH and glucose intolerance and/or diabetes have addressed the issue in two ways. Firstly, studies have looked for abnormalities of glucose intolerance in patients defined as having DISH. These are summarized in Table . In a Finnish study Julkunen [3] found a significant difference between the rates of hyperglycaemia in patients with and without DISH [p<0.05]. Hyperglycaemia, was defined as >250mg/100ml one hour after an oral glucose tolerance test or the presence of established diabetes. Analyses of intercorrelations between glucose tolerance and obesity in this series suggested that decreased glucose tolerance and obesity contributed at least in part to DISH, independently of each other. Mader found higher fasting glucose levels in DISH patients compared to controls but many in each group were diabetic and medication was not taken into account. Overall these studies are very suggestive of an increased rate of Type 2 diabetes and/or impaired glucose tolerance in patients with diagnosed DISH, although there is marked inconsistency in diagnosis of DISH, selection of controls and definitions used to define diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance. Another series of studies have sought to assess the rates of DISH in patients with abnormal glucose tolerance or diabetes. These studies also vary significantly with respect to diagnostic criteria and study design and are summarized in Table . Although the quality of these studies varies, there is a general theme indicating that there is an excess prevalence of DISH in patients with diabetes or abnormal glucose tolerance compared to those with normal glucose tolerance. There is an increased prevalence of DISH in diabetic patients recruited from hospital clinics, likely reflecting bias due to comorbidity factors [57]. However, when non-diabetics, aged 60 - 69 years, were compared to diabetics of the same age the prevalence of DISH increased from 4% to 21% [p<0.001] [58]. Additionally, glucose intolerance and obesity seem to act as independent risk factors in their association with DISH [3]. There has been no relationship found between the degree of hyperglycaemia and the severity of the bony change in DISH [48]. Importantly no patient with juvenile onset, i.e., Type 1 [primary insulin deficient] diabetes has been recorded as having DISH.

Growth Hormone and Related Hormones and DISH

It has been proposed that growth hormone or related hormones may be involved in the new bone growth, and also the increased rates of diabetes, that characterize DISH. Table summarizes selected studies of growth hormone and related peptides in patients with DISH. Growth hormone measured in one study, both after an overnight fast and after a glucose challenge, showed no difference between DISH patients and weight-matched controls [61]. In contrast, in a study that involved DISH subjects that were significantly heavier than the controls the basal growth hormone was also significantly higher [62]. IGF-1 levels were not different to controls. In this study basal insulin was also significantly elevated. Overall, however there is no conclusive data to indicate elevation of growth hormone or Insulin-like growth factor in patients with DISH.

Insulin and Related Hormones and DISH

Insulin is elevated in Type 2 diabetes mellitus and is a bone growth promoting peptide [69]. Various studies seeking associations of these hormones with DISH are summarized in Table . Insulin, measured both after an overnight fast and after a glucose challenge, showed significant elevation in DISH patients compared to weight and BMI–matched controls [p<0.001] [61]. The change in insulin was noted despite no significant change in blood glucose levels, either at base-line or after glucose stimulation. Insulin levels, measured 2 hours after glucose challenge showed highly significant correlation to BMI in the DISH group. Some studies support this finding [68], while others (as outlined in Table ) do not. The fact that insulin levels correlate with being overweight [55, 60, 68, 70] is a potential confounder in these studies.

Adipokines

The increased rates of obesity, particularly abdominal fat, in patients with DISH might imply a role for various adipokines in the pathogenesis of this disorder. Many of these fat-derived cytokine-like hormones have significant effects on bone metabolism [71]. Leptin is encoded in the obese gene, secreted by adipose tissues and involved in maintenance of weight. Leptin has effects on bone in mice promoting osteoblast numbers and activity through peripheral pathways [72]. In humans leptin levels associate with increase cortical but not cancellous bone [73]. Hereditary obese rats [Zucker fatty (fa/fa) rats] have an aberration of the leptin receptor gene and develop ossification of spinal ligaments [OSL], a condition with similarities to DISH that targets the posterior longitudinal spinal ligament [74]. Japanese female patients with OSL, but not males have elevated leptin, which correlates with elevated insulin levels [74]. There is a positive correlation with extent and severity of ligamentous ossification in OSL [75]. The leptin receptor is expressed in human spinal ligaments, although in vitro studies did not show increased collagen synthesis after exposure to leptin [74]. Both leptin and its receptor are also expressed in the annulus, increasing with advanced age [76]. Leptin is found in high levels in osteophytes of patients with osteoarthritis [77]. Leptin has not been specifically studied in DISH but the studies in the related ossifying disorder of OSL are shown in Table . Leptin levels were significantly elevated in females with OSL in this study. In 37 patients with DISH the serum levels of the osteoblast inhibitor Dickkopf-related protein-1 DKK-1 were significantly lower compared to 22 healthy, age–matched controls. Lower levels associated with more spinal hyperostosis independent of age, sex, bone-turnover markers or bone mineral density [78]. However, another study did not find an association between DKK-1 and DISH [79] making this observation difficult to interpret.

BONE REGULATORY PROTEINS

Co-Morbid Metabolic Factors

Patients with DISH have significant associations with gout, hyperuricemia and dyslipidaemia, likely through the shared association with obesity [27, 55, 80-84]. There is no evidence that these factors in their own right cause the new bone formation characteristic of DISH

Vitamin A

Vitamin A –related products can cause hyperostosis in animals and man [85, 86]. Vitamin A has been shown to be elevated in patients with DISH [87] but it remains unclear as to the exact role of Vitamin A in DISH.

Animal Models

DISH has been described in numerous animal species but there are no well-designed animal experiments to demonstrate the causal relationship between metabolic factors and DISH [88, 89].

Metabolic Factors and Targets in DISH

The metabolic factors present in patients with DISH, such as insulin, likely interact with key candidate cellular targets linking to new bone formation. These include chondrocytes and periosteal mesenchymal cells within the enthesis [90, 91] (See Fig. ). These cells have been shown to proliferate under the influence of transforming growth factor- β1, insulin and bone morphogenic protein (BMP2) to form fibroblasts, myoblasts and osteoblasts [91]. Metabolic factors, such as insulin, growth hormone and insulin-like growth factor 1, all have the ability to promote bone formation through stimulation of proliferation of osteoblasts, chondrocytes and fibroblasts [82, 84]. The exact mechanisms that contribute to the new bone growth, particularly in entheseal regions, in patients with DISH are unknown. However, relevant important signalling pathways are likely to include the Wnt -β-catenin pathway, nuclear factor κB, BMP2, prostaglandin I2 and endothelin1 [92].

FUTURE STUDIES

There is a need for further studies to better define the important background metabolic factors that promote the new bone formation that characterizes DISH. These need to include a group of interacting factors, including genetic, epigenetic, metabolic and bone-related signalling pathways. Study of younger patients with early DISH may better identify important metabolic factors but this approach is limited by current diagnostic criteria that identify well-established DISH, with high rates of confounding co-morbidities [93]. It is important for future studies to incorporate direct examination of the cellular elements of the key target organ of DISH, the enthesis.

SUMMARY

This review examines the available literature on metabolic factors in patients with DISH. The identified literature was not considered robust enough to perform a structured systematic review due to inconsistencies with study methodologies. These include different criteria for diagnosis of DISH, and different definitions for diabetes, and impaired glucose tolerance. Metabolic studies varied in the protocols used, with different time frames and stimulation protocols. Controls were often lacking or poorly matched for metabolic factors. We have commented on these issues in the summary tables. Nevertheless we aimed to make this review a contemporary summary on the topic to act as a reference standard for future studies. Despite the above comments this review of metabolic factors in DISH does allow for certain conclusions. There is a general theme that metabolic factors are of great importance in DISH. Obesity, particularly abdominal obesity, is strongly linked to DISH. Further exploration of the role adipokines in patients with DISH is required. Type 2 diabetes is increased in DISH, independent of obesity. The link between obesity, type 2 diabetes and insulin elevation is strong. Of all the potential growth factors examined in patients with DISH, insulin is likely to have a key role in the pathophysiology of DISH. Finally, it is clear that more studies are required on this important aspect of DISH, a condition that is increasing in frequency and significance.
Table 1.

Criteria definitions for diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis.

CriteriaCharacteristics for “Definite” DISHComment
Contemporary*Variations on spinal bony bridges. No specific criteria stated.
Bywaters [2]Complete bridge between 2 vertebral bodies with normal intervening disc.Describes a minimal / inadequate criteria set.
Julkunen [3]Lateral thoracic spine x-ray showing “two typical hyperostotic bridges”.Radiological criteria for epidemiological purposes.
Harris [4]Hypertrophic bony spurs with at least 2 bony bridges, normal sacro-iliac jointsExcluded changes associated with other identifiable spinal disease
Resnick and Niwayama [5]Bridging of four contiguous vertebral bodies, minimal intervertebral disc disease, no facet joint ankylosis and no sacro-iliac joint inflammatory changes.Most widely used criteria, does not include extra-spinal changes.
Arlet and MaziÉres [6]Bridging of three contiguous vertebral bodies located in lower thoracic region, minimal intervertebral disc disease, no facet joint ankylosis no intra-articular erosion or ossification of sacro-iliac joints. “Possible DISH” allowed with variations of criteria allowed.
Utsinger [7]Bridging of four contiguous vertebral bodies primarily in thoracolumbar spine, minimal intervertebral disc disease, no facet joint ankylosis.‘Probable DISH” if bridging of two contiguous vertebral bodies plus bilateral patellar tufting, heel spurring and olecranon tufting. “Possible DISH” if two vertebrae joined in absence of extra-spinal enthesophytes or symmetrical extra-spinal enthesophytes in absence of spinal involvement.
Rogers and Waldron [8]Ossification of anterior longitudinal ligament affecting 3 vertebrae (with/without) ankylosis, confined to right side of thoracic spine, evidence of symmetrical extra-spinal DISH, including patellar tufting, heel spurring, olecranon tufting, ossification of ligamentum flavum and spurring of tibial tuberosities. Lack of intervertebral changes not required for diagnosis.Criteria used in paleopathological health assessments.
Maat et al. [9]Spinal ligament ossifications of four or more contiguous vertebral levels and/or extensive peripheral enthesopathies Criteria used in paleopathological health assessments.
CrubÉzy [10]Bridging of two intervertebral spaces at the lower thoracic spine or bridging of three intervertebral spaces at any level. Decreased disc height in elderly subjects and para-articular bony bridging of the sacroiliac joints do not rule out the diagnosisProbable DISH if flowing ossification along the anterolateral aspect of at least two contiguous vertebras and enthesopathies without remodeling of the cortex symmetrically involving the posterior calcanei, olecranons, and upper patellae.

Various authors.

Table 2.

Paleopathological studies associating DISH in adults with obesity.

Author [Year]No. SubjectsYear LocationDISH Criteria*Percent with DISHComment
Waldron [1985] [14]35 monks12-16th centuryMerton Priory, Surrey, UKResnick8.6%Monks were presumed to be well nourished
Rogers et al. [1985] [15]303 non-specifiedMediaevalVarious UK sites, including churches“large flowing spinal osteophytes -typical of Forestier’s disease”2.3%Probable mixed social status population - “control” group (includes 2 high SS clergy with DISH)
Bruintjes [1987] [16]1 high SS male10th centurySaint Servaas Basilica Maastricht The NetherlandsNot known100% 
Mays [1991] [17]Unclear number monastic skeletons 51 lay skeletonsMediaevalBlackfriars Priory Ipswich, UK21 had “DISH”, 10 met Rogers and Waldron criteria none had DISH13.4% crude estimateSkeletons examined from different grave sites showed high prevalence of DISH in high SS individuals
Costa and Weber [1995] [18]1 male of high SSRenaissanceBasilica of San Lorenzo Florence ItalyNot stated – typical description100%Another member of Medici family, obesity documented in writings and evident in portraits
Maat et al. [1995 and 1998] [9] [19]76 and 316 Friary skeletonsMediaevalFranciscan Priory Dordrecht The NetherlandsRogers and Waldron14.5% - 19% crude estimateHigh prevalence of DISH in high SS individuals
Janssen and Maat [1999] [20]27 CanonsMediaevalSaint Servaas Basilica Maastricht The NetherlandsRogers and Waldron100% High prevalence of DISH in high SS individuals
Vidal [2000] [21]99 non-specifiedMediaevalLorraine FranceCrubÉzy 2.8 - 3.7%Likely mixed SS population, indicating a “control” population
Rogers and Waldron [2001] [8]192 low SS laymen 80 high SS malesMediaevalWells Cathedral and Royal Mint London, UKRogers and WaldronLow SS = 3.1% High SS =13.7% P<0.001High prevalence of DISH in high SS individuals – “comparative study”
Verlaan et al. [2007] [22]51 priests, monks, high status citizensMediaevalChurch of Our Lady Maastricht The NetherlandsRogers and Waldron40.4% 10 male, 5 female, 2 non-determinantHigh prevalence of DISH in high SS individuals
Giuffra et al. [2010] [23]2 males of high SSRenaissanceBasilica of San Lorenzo Florence ItalyRogers and Waldron100%Members of Medici family, obesity documented in writings and evident in portraits

See Table 2 for DISH criteria, NA = not applicable, SS = social status.

Table 3.

Selected contemporary observations and studies associating DISH with obesity.

Author [Year]No. SubjectsDISH Criteria*Obesity Criteria#Percentage Obese Comment
Forestier et al. [1950] [11]9 MNot statedNot stated66%Important clinical observation No controls
Boulet et al. [1954] [29]8 M / 4 F“Forestier”Not stated17%No controls
Schilling et al. [1965] [24]66 M / 14 F 80 controls“Forestier” % above German norms66% >10% overweight, 25%>25% overweight; controls 34% and 9%Obesity strongly associated with DISH
Schoen et al. [1969] [30]507 patients, > 30yrs with abnormal GTNS – lateral Xray thoracic spineNS“Increased”Compared to 347 patients, >50 yrs with normal GT
Beardwell [1969] [31]4 M / 4F“Forestier”Not stated“Majority” Familial study
Julkunen et al. [1971] [3]12,858 unselected personsJulkunenWeight-height ratio, triceps skinfold thicknessSignificantly higher in both sexes [all age groups] with DISH compared to non-DISH subjects.Obesity strongly associated with DISH
Harris et al. [1974] [4]17 M / 17 FHarrisNot stated88%No controls
Utsinger et al. [1976] [32] 25 M / 5 FResnickNot stated30%No controls
Resnick [1978] [33]21 MResnickNot stated22%No controls
Boachie-Adjei et al. [1987] [34]21 of 75 autopsy spines“Forestier”Average weight DISH =85kg, non-DISH =65kgObesity strongly associated with DISH
Troillet and Gerster [1993] [35]17 M / 8 F, matched for age, sex, BMI ResnickBMIMean BMI = 29.5All obese
Daragon et al. [1995] [36]50 persons -DISH >60yrs 50 controls - matched sex, age, weight, heightResnickWeight-height indexNo difference between DISH and controlsStudy controlled for weight
Mata et al. [1997] [37]DISH -56, Spondylosis -43, Healthy controls -31ResnickWeight, BMI, WCDISH significantly higher weight at marker state** and at study time, higher BMI, higher WC [p< 0.001] Obesity strongly associated with DISH
Coaccioli et al. [2000] [38]Obese subjects- [1] 32 without T2DM, [2] 30 with T2DM Control - 30 subjectsUtsingerBMI>30 BMI <30[1] 37.5% DISH [2] 40% DISH 2.5% DISHHigh prevalence DISH in obese subjects
Kiss et al. [2002] [25]69 M / 62 F with DISH; 69 M/62 F with spondylosisResnickBMIDISH BMI 27.8, controls 26.0, [p<0.001]Obesity strongly associated with DISH
Miyazama and Akiyama [2006] [39]DISH 35 M / 10 F Control [spondylosis] 70 M /20 FResnickWeightDISH mean= 62.3 kg, Controls mean =58.33 kg [p<0.01]Obesity strongly associated with DISH
Mader et al. [2009] [27]13 M / 34 F DISH; 48 age-sex matched controlsResnickWC BMI > 30 WC significantly elevated in DISH, BMI > 30 in 39% DISH versus 26% controlsObesity strongly associated with DISH
Zincarelli et al. [2012] [40]DISH 105 M / 27 F Non-DISH 231 M / 73 FResnickBMI>3035.6% DISH obese compared with 23% non-DISH [p< 0.009]Obesity strongly associated with DISH-all had cardiovascular disease
Haddad et al. [2013] [28]57 M / 21 F with DISH and PsA; 171 M / 62 F control patients with PsA onlyModified Utsinger [thoracic spine only, no extra spinal assessment included]BMI Obesity definition not statedDISH BMI =32.9%, control BMI =28.7%, p<0.0001 DISH obesity=31%, control obesity=50%. [p<0.0001]Higher BMI strongly associated with DISH, large variance in obesity groups

M = males, F = females, # Weight-height ratio= weight in kilograms/height in centimetres-100, WC = waist circumference, BMI = Body Mass Index, GT = glucose tolerance, PsA =psoriatic arthritis, * “Forestier” indicates that diagnosis based on typical features of Forestier et al. description [11], ** marker state =weight at time of first marriage.

Table 4.

Selected studies of impaired glucose tolerance [IGT], including diabetes mellitus, in patients with DISH.

AuthorNo. of PatientsDish CriteriaDiabetic or IGTDiabeticIGTComment
Boulet et al. [1954] [29]8 M, 4 F“Forestier”100%100%NSNo controls, small sample
Recordier et al. [1959] [41]16 persons“Forestier”56%NS NSNo controls, small sample
Einaudi et al. [1960] [42]15 M, 4 FNS60% +60%“many”No controls, small sample
Cassan [1963] [43]43 personsNS23%NSNS6.5% controls
Ott et al. [1963] [44]100 personsNS50%25%25%Suggests association of DISH with abnormal GT
Dahmen [1967] [45]120 persons“Forestier”30%20%10%7.3% controls, suggests association with abnormal GT
Ott et al. [1967] [46]160 personsNS55%22%33%No controls but high prevalence abnormal GT
Perrotin [1968] [47]59 personsNS61% +61%NSNo controls but high prevalence abnormal GT
Lequesne et al. [1970] [48]43 persons with DISH, 46 without DISH“Forestier”DISH = 23% Control =6.5% [p<0.05] DISH = 23% Control =6.5% [p<0.05]NSSignificant association between DISH and diabetes
Julkunen et al. [1971] [3]94 M, 70 F with DISH / same number without DISHJulkunenDISH M 19.1% DISH F 28.6% Control M 7.4% Control F 12.8% [p < 0.05]NSNSSignificant association between DISH and hyperglycaemia
Bregeon et al. [1973] [49]21 persons“Forestier”43%30%13%No controls
Henrard and Bennett [1973] [50]48 DISH 35 non-DISH Pima Indians“Forestier”50% DISH 28% non-DISH [p<0.05]NS50% had OGTT, 2hr glucose> 160mg%Significant association between DISH and hyperglycaemia
Harris et al. [1974] [4]17 M, 17 FHarris8.5% +8.5% +Only 6 tested- all “normal”No controls
Utsinger et al. [1976] [32] 25 M, 5 FResnick17%NSFasting hyperglycaemiaNo controls
Rosenthal et al. [1977] [51]50 personsResnick32%NSNSNo controls
Tsukamoto et al. [1977] 157 M, 18 FResnick“no correlation between DISH and diabetes” in malesNSNSHiroshima survivors
Resnick et al. [1978] [33]21 MResnick29%NSNSNo controls
Arlet et al. [1978] [52]100 M“Forestier”14%9%5%No controls
El Garf and Khater [1984] [53]38 personsResnick37%NSNSNo controls
Cassim et al. [1990] [54]21 persons DISH 479 no DISHResnick52.4%33.3% history DM in DISH, 7.7% in controls [p<0.0001]19.1% IGT to glucose loadHigh diabetes in DISH group, but small number of patients
Troillet and Gerster [1993] [35]17 M, 8 F DISH 17 M, 8 F no DISH, matched for age, BMI.ResnickNo differenceNo differenceFasting hyperglycaemiaIGT not different, but small numbers
Daragon et al. [1995] [36]50 persons -DISH >60yrs 50 controls - matched sex, age, weight, heightResnickNo differenceNo difference No difference in glucose toleranceNo association DISH and Dbs / hyperglycaemia.
Vezyroglou et al. [1996] [55]100 DISH 100 controls, matched age, sex, BMI, excess body weightResnickNo difference22% in DISH, 3% in Controls [p<0.0001] Increased dyslipidemia /hyperuricemia and DM in DISH [p<0.0001]
Kiss et al. [2002] [25]69 M / 62 F -DISH; 69 M/62 F men /women - spondylosisResnickDISH =19.8% Control = 9.1% [p<0.05]DISH =19.8% Control = 9.1% [p<0.05]NSSignificant association between DISH and diabetes
Mader et al. [2009] [27]13 M / 34 F DISH; 48 age-sex matched controlsResnickNSDISH =49% Control = 33% NSDISH =40% Control = 10% Fasting glucose >110 mg/dL [p<0.05]Significant association between DISH and hyperglycaemia
Eckertova et al. [2009] [56]20 M, 9 F-DISH, 8 M, 9 F- non-DISH, matched for age, BMI.ResnickDISH = 41.4% Control =7.8% [p<0.05]NSDISH = 41.4% Control =7.8% [p<0.05]Significant association between DISH and hyperglycaemia
Zincarelli et al. [2012] [40]DISH 105 M / 27 F Non-DISH 231 M /73 FResnickNo difference in rates of T2DM or fasting blood glucose >100mg/dl  All patients had severe cardiac disease –no healthy controls

M = males, F = females, GT =glucose tolerance, IGT = Impaired glucose tolerance, T1DM = Type 1 diabetes mellitus, T2DM = Type 2 diabetes mellitus, NS = not stated, Dbs =diabetes, “Forestier” indicates that diagnosis based on typical features of Forestier et al. description [11].

Table 5.

Selected estimates of the prevalence of DISH in patients with abnormal glucose tolerance, including type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AuthorNo. of PatientsCriteria for Abnormal GTDishDish CriteriaComment
Boulet et al. [1954] [29]265 personsAll diabetics7%“Forestier”No controls
Ott et al. [1963] [44]82 persons, “mainly men”NS50%“Forestier”“Usually old, benign diabetes”
Hajkova et al. [1965] [57]83 F, 18 MNS41% F 33% MNSNo controls; age of patient & duration of diabetes increase likelihood of DISH
Julkunen et al. [1966] [58]510 personsAbnormal fasting BSL13%JulkunenOverall prevalence
Julkunen et al. [1966] [58]122 persons age 60-69Abnormal fasting BSL21%JulkunenControl group 4% DISH in 148 non diabetics
Julkunen et al. [1968] [59]83 Db M 1175 non-Db MExisting Db or 2 hour GTT abnormal4.8% 1.6%JulkunenNot significantly different, younger policemen
Schoen et al. [1969] [30]507 persons age > 30 yrs“Overt or latent diabetes”25%NS-lateral Xray thoracic spine Control group of 347 non-diabetics, age > 50 yrs - 2.6% DISH
Ott et al. [1967] [46]105 personsNS44%NS- lateral CXRNo controls
Lequesne (1970)52NS29%“Forestier”13% in 46 “controls”
Coaccioli et al. [2000] [38]170 “consecutive subjects” – 130 patients and 40 normal subjects30 T1DM 30 obese T2DM 20 non-obese T2DM 18 IGT 32 obese [BMI> 30] 40 normal subjects26.6% 40.0% 30.0% 22.2% 37.5% 2.5%UtsingerObese persons and obese diabetics had highest percentage of DISH. Statistics not presented, but DISH said to be statistically increased in these groups.
Sencan et al. [2005] [60]133 T2 DM outpatients 133 age, sex, weight –matched, outpatient controlsAll Type 2 diabetics12.0% in T2DM, 6.8% in Controls [NS - p>0.05]ResnickMean weight 67.7 and 65.4 kgs, respectively

M = males, F = females, NS = not stated, BSL = blood sugar level, DB = diabetic, GTT = glucose tolerance test, CXR = chest X-Ray, “Forestier” indicates that diagnosis based on typical features of Forestier et al. description [11], T2DM = Type 2 diabetes mellitus, kgs = kilograms.

Table 6.

Selected studies of growth hormone and related peptides in DISH.

AuthorPatientsDish CriteriaMethodsResultComment
Bregeon et al. [1973] [49] 10 M“Forestier”Basal and post-glucose GHGH-Normal levelsSmall sample
Harris et al. [1974] [4]5 younger personsHarrisNSGH-Normal levelsSmall sample
Resnick et al. [1978] [33]6 personsResnickNSGH -normal levelsSmall sample.
Littlejohn and Smythe [1981] [61, 63]11 M DISH 8 M, age/ weight -matched no DISH ResnickFasting basal and post-glucose GH, IGF-1GH- no difference IGF-1 –no differenceSmall sample, controlled for BMI.
Altomonte et al. [1992] [64]6 M, non-obese DISH, 10 M, weight-matched no DISHResnickFasting basal and post insulin tolerance test [ITT] GHBasal GH not elevated, significant GH elevation post-ITT compared to control [p<0.05]Only study to show post stimulation elevation of GH
Denko et al. [1994] [62]14 white M DISH, 22 M no DISH 8 white F / 8 black F DISH, 22 white F/ 10 black F no DISHResnickFasting morning GH, IGF-1GH- elevated IGF-1-no difference in males/ black females, elevated in white femalesStudy confounded by significant differences in weight, with DISH groups being heavier.
Denko et al. [1996] [65]8 M DISH 12 M OA 22 M no DISHResnickFasting morning GH, IGF-1Serum IGF-1 - same as controls, synovial IGF-1 same as OA. Serum GH- higher [and same] in DISH and OA than controls, synovial GH same as OA group. All DISH patients had knee effusions, no matching for weight
Denko et al. [2002] [66]15 M DISH 15 M controlsNSFasting morning GH, IGF-1GH but not IGF-1 lower in asymptomatic DISH patients, but NSPoorly controlled study
Denko et al. [2003] [67]19 M DISH 34 M no DISH, not controlled for weight ResnickFasting morning intra-erythrocyte GH Intra-erythrocyte GH same in DISH and controls 
Sencan et al. [2005] [60]133 T2 DM outpatients 133 age, sex, weight –matched, outpatient controlsResnickFasting IGF-1No difference  
Denko and Malemud [2006] [68]11 DISH with BMI 23-28 10 DISH with BMI >28ResnickFasting morning serum GH, IGF-1GH and IGF-1 no different between BMI groups “Additional” data from 25 DISH patients showed no correlation between BMI and GH or IGF-1.
Eckertova et al. [2009] [56]20M, 9F -DISH 8M, 5F- no DISH, matched for age, ResnickFasting and post-OGTT serum GH, IGF-1, IGF-BP3No difference between groups 

M = males, F = females, NS = not stated, BMI = body mass index, GH = Growth Hormone, IGF-1 = Insulin-like growth factor -1, OA = osteoarthritis, OGTT =oral glucose tolerance test, IGF-BP3 = insulin-like binding protein 3, ITT = insulin tolerance test.

Table 7.

Selected studies of Insulin and related hormones in DISH.

AuthorPatientsCriteriaMethodsResultComment
Littlejohn and Smythe [1981] [61]11 males DISH 8 age, weight-matched non-DISH malesResnickFasting and post-glucose insulin Insulin significantly elevated in basal and stimulated state.Small sample, controlled for BMI.
Altomonte et al. [1992] [64]6 M, non-obese DISH, 10 M, weight-matched no DISH“Resnick”Fasting and post-glucose insulin, C-peptideNo significant difference to controls 
Troillet and Gerster [1993] [35]17M, 8F DISH 17M, 8F matched for age, sex, BMI.ResnickFasting glucose, insulinNo significant difference to controls 
Denko et al. [1994] [62]14 white males 22 controls 8 black females 10 controlsResnickFasting morning serumInsulin – significantly elevatedStudy confounded by significant differences in weight, with DISH groups being heavier.
Denko and Malemud [2006] [68]11 DISH with BMI 23-28 10 DISH with BMI >28ResnickFasting morning insulinInsulin elevated significantly in DISH with BMI> 28“Additional” data from 25 DISH patients showed strong correlation between BMI and insulin levels.
Sencan et al. [2005] [60]133 T2 DM outpatients 133 age, sex, weight –matched, outpatient controlsResnickFasting insulin No difference Positive correlation between age and insulin levels in DISH patients without T2DM
Mader et al. [2009] 13/34 male/females DISH; 48 age-sex matched controlsResnickFasting insulin No differenceBMI in both groups >30
Eckertova et al. [2009] [56]20M, 9F DISH 8 M, 5F no DISHResnickFasting and post-OGTT, serum insulin, C-peptideNo difference Decreased insulinogenic index and insulin/C-peptide ratio in DISH

M = males, F = females, NS = not stated, BMI = body mass index, OGTT =oral glucose tolerance test.

Table 8.

Selected studies of adipokines in DISH-related disorders.

AuthorPatientsCriteriaMethodsResultComment
Shirakura et al. [2000] [74]32M/17F patients with OSL; 37M/32F age and BMI-matched controlsPatients with OSL identified -no criteriaSerum leptin and insulinLeptin and insulin significantly elevated in female but not male OSL patientsThe elevated leptin in females with OSL may link to insulin. The significance of this observation is unclear. No positive findings in males.
Ikeda et al. [2011] [75] 68M/57F patients with OSL; 35M/27F age and BMI-matched controlsPatients with OSL identified -no criteriaSerum leptin, insulinLeptin and insulin significantly elevated in females corrected for BMI, but not male OSL patientsElevated leptin and insulin correlated with extent of spinal ossification in females. Inconclusive associations with bone turnover. No positive findings in males.

OSL = ossification of spinal ligaments, BMI = body mass index.

  78 in total

1.  [Vertebral hyperostosis in diabetics].

Authors:  A M RECORDIER; G JOUVE; J M ALLIGNOL
Journal:  Mars Med       Date:  1959

2.  [Diabetic spine].

Authors:  P BOULET; H SERRE; J MIROUZE
Journal:  Sem Hop       Date:  1954-06-10

3.  [Is the hyperostotic spondylosis deformans a diabetic osteopathy?].

Authors:  D Schoen; M Eggstein; W Vogt
Journal:  Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Nuklearmed       Date:  1969-04

4.  Hyperostotic spondylosis and diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Z Hájková; A Streda; F Skrha
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1965-11       Impact factor: 19.103

5.  Growth hormone secretion in diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis.

Authors:  L Altomonte; A Zoli; L Mirone; G Marchese; P Scolieri; A Barini; M Magarò
Journal:  Ann Ital Med Int       Date:  1992 Jan-Mar

6.  Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis and new bone formation in male gouty subjects. A radiologic study.

Authors:  G O Littlejohn; S Hall
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 2.631

7.  Serum levels of insulin in overweight patients with osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  F Silveri; D Brecciaroli; F Argentati; C Cervini
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.666

Review 8.  Pathogenesis of hyperostosis: a key role for mesenchymatous cells?

Authors:  Jean-Marie Berthelot; Benoît Le Goff; Yves Maugars
Journal:  Joint Bone Spine       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 4.929

9.  Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH). A clinicoradiological study of the disease pattern in Middle Eastern populations.

Authors:  A el-Garf; R Khater
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 4.666

Review 10.  Rheumatologic complications of vitamin A and retinoids.

Authors:  G Nesher; J Zuckner
Journal:  Semin Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 5.532

View more
  18 in total

1.  Interobserver agreement using Schlapbach graded scale for diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH): can we reduce the cut-off point of vertebral affection?

Authors:  Stefanie Francesca Pini; Valentina Acosta-Ramón; Marian Tobalina-Segura; Emilio Pariente-Rodrigo; Javier Rueda-Gotor; José Manuel Olmos-Martínez; José Luis Hernández-Hernández
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2018-12-18       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Serum adiponectin levels in patients with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH).

Authors:  Reuven Mader; I Novofastovski; N Schwartz; E Rosner
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2018-08-18       Impact factor: 2.980

3.  Subjects with diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis have an increased burden of coronary artery disease: An evaluation in the COPDGene cohort.

Authors:  Sytse F Oudkerk; Firdaus A A Mohamed Hoesein; Willem PThM Mali; F Cumhur Öner; Jorrit-Jan Verlaan; Pim A de Jong; Gregory L Kinney; John Hokanson; David Lynch; Edwin K Silverman; Matthew J Budoff; Elizabeth A Regan
Journal:  Atherosclerosis       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 5.162

Review 4.  Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis (DISH) - A common but less known cause of back pain.

Authors:  Raju Vaishya; Vipul Vijay; Ifeanyi Charles Nwagbara; Amit K Agarwal
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2016-12-02

Review 5.  Growth and mechanobiology of the tendon-bone enthesis.

Authors:  Megan L Killian
Journal:  Semin Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2021-08-03       Impact factor: 7.727

6.  Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in elderly Icelanders and its association with the metabolic syndrome: the AGES-Reykjavik Study.

Authors:  A B Auðunsson; G J Elíasson; E Steingrímsson; T Aspelund; S Sigurdsson; L Launer; V Gudnason; H Jonsson
Journal:  Scand J Rheumatol       Date:  2021-03-07       Impact factor: 3.057

Review 7.  Rich table but short life: Diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis in Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546-1601) and its possible consequences.

Authors:  Sacha Kacki; Petr Velemínský; Niels Lynnerup; Sylva Kaupová; Alizé Lacoste Jeanson; Ctibor Povýšil; Martin Horák; Jan Kučera; Kaare Lund Rasmussen; Jaroslav Podliska; Zdeněk Dragoun; Jiří Smolík; Jens Vellev; Jaroslav Brůžek
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Selective mortality in middle-aged American women with Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis (DISH).

Authors:  George R Milner; Jesper L Boldsen; Stephen D Ousley; Sara M Getz; Svenja Weise; Peter Tarp; Dawnie W Steadman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Diagnosis of diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis with chest computed tomography: inter-observer agreement.

Authors:  S F Oudkerk; Pim A de Jong; M Attrach; T Luijkx; C F Buckens; W P Th M Mali; F C Oner; D L Resnick; R Vliegenthart; J J Verlaan
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Diffuse Idiopathic Skeletal Hyperostosis: Persistent Sore Throat and Dysphagia in an Elderly Smoker Male.

Authors:  Ana Goico-Alburquerque; Beenish Zulfiqar; Ranae Antoine; Mohammed Samee
Journal:  Case Rep Med       Date:  2017-09-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.