Literature DB >> 26003948

Validity and sensitivity to change of three scales for the radiographic assessment of knee osteoarthritis using images from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST).

L Sheehy1, E Culham2, L McLean3, J Niu4, J Lynch5, N A Segal6, J A Singh7, M Nevitt8, T D V Cooke9.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the concurrent validity and sensitivity to change of three knee osteoarthritis (OA) grading scales. The Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) and the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) joint space narrowing (JSN) grading scales are well-established. The third scale, the compartmental grading scale for OA (CG) is a novel scale which grades JSN, femoral osteophytes, tibial erosion and subluxation to create a total score.
METHODS: One sample of 72 posteroanterior (PA) fixed-flexion radiographs displaying mild to moderate knee OA was selected from the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST) to study validity. A second sample of 75 radiograph pairs, which showed an increase in OA severity over 30 months, was selected to study sensitivity to change. The three radiographic grading scales were applied to each radiograph in both samples. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were used to correlate the radiographic grades and the change in grades over 30 months with a Whole-organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS)-based composite score which included five articular features of knee OA.
RESULTS: Correlations between the KL, OARSI JSN and CG grading scales and the magnetic resonance image (MRI)-based score were 0.836, 0.840 and 0.773 (P < 0.0001) respectively while correlations between change in the radiographic grading scales and change in the MRI-based score were 0.501, 0.525 and 0.492 (P < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: All three radiographic grading scales showed high validity and are suitable to assess knee OA severity. They showed moderate sensitivity to change; therefore caution should be taken when using ordinal radiographic grading scales to monitor knee OA over time.
Copyright © 2015 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Grading; Knee osteoarthritis; Knee radiographs; Sensitivity to change; Validity

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26003948      PMCID: PMC4831715          DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2015.05.003

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


  29 in total

1.  Meniscal subluxation: association with osteoarthritis and joint space narrowing.

Authors:  D R Gale; C E Chaisson; S M Totterman; R K Schwartz; M E Gale; D Felson
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 6.576

2.  A power primer.

Authors:  J Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 17.737

3.  A new approach yields high rates of radiographic progression in knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  David T Felson; Michael C Nevitt; Mei Yang; Margaret Clancy; Jingbo Niu; James C Torner; C Elizabeth Lewis; Piran Aliabadi; Burton Sack; Charles McCulloch; Yuqing Zhang
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2008-09-15       Impact factor: 4.666

4.  Comparative evaluation of three semi-quantitative radiographic grading techniques for knee osteoarthritis in terms of validity and reproducibility in 1759 X-rays: report of the OARSI-OMERACT task force.

Authors:  L Gossec; J M Jordan; S A Mazzuca; M-A Lam; M E Suarez-Almazor; J B Renner; M A Lopez-Olivo; G Hawker; M Dougados; J F Maillefert
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2008-04-15       Impact factor: 6.576

5.  Comparison of conventional standing knee radiographs and magnetic resonance imaging in assessing progression of tibiofemoral joint osteoarthritis.

Authors:  F Cicuttini; J Hankin; G Jones; A Wluka
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 6.576

6.  Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis, revised.

Authors:  R D Altman; G E Gold
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.576

7.  Comparison of fixed-flexion positioning with fluoroscopic semi-flexed positioning for quantifying radiographic joint-space width in the knee: test-retest reproducibility.

Authors:  C Peterfy; J Li; S Zaim; J Duryea; J Lynch; Y Miaux; W Yu; H K Genant
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2003-02-06       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Relation of regional articular cartilage morphometry and meniscal position by MRI to joint space width in knee radiographs.

Authors:  D J Hunter; R Buck; E Vignon; F Eckstein; K Brandt; S A Mazzuca; B T Wyman; I Otterness; M P Hellio Le Graverand
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2009-04-17       Impact factor: 6.576

9.  Osteoarthritis: MR imaging findings in different stages of disease and correlation with clinical findings.

Authors:  Thomas M Link; Lynne S Steinbach; Srinka Ghosh; Michael Ries; Ying Lu; Nancy Lane; Sharmila Majumdar
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Is obesity a risk factor for progressive radiographic knee osteoarthritis?

Authors:  J Niu; Y Q Zhang; J Torner; M Nevitt; C E Lewis; P Aliabadi; B Sack; M Clancy; L Sharma; D T Felson
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2009-03-15
View more
  9 in total

1.  Radiographic evaluation of knee osteoarthritis in predicting outcomes after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy.

Authors:  William Alexander Cantrell; Ceylan Colak; Nancy A Obuchowski; Kurt P Spindler; Morgan H Jones; Naveen Subhas
Journal:  Knee       Date:  2020-06-27       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  A quantitative metric for knee osteoarthritis: reference values of joint space loss.

Authors:  C Ratzlaff; E L Ashbeck; A Guermazi; F W Roemer; J Duryea; C K Kwoh
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2018-05-26       Impact factor: 6.576

3.  Association of Visceral Adiposity With Pain but Not Structural Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Shanshan Li; Ann V Schwartz; Michael P LaValley; Na Wang; Nancy Desai; Xianbang Sun; Tuhina Neogi; Michael Nevitt; Cora E Lewis; Ali Guermazi; Frank Roemer; Neil Segal; David Felson
Journal:  Arthritis Rheumatol       Date:  2020-05-28       Impact factor: 10.995

4.  Reliability and Accuracy of Cross-sectional Radiographic Assessment of Severe Knee Osteoarthritis: Role of Training and Experience.

Authors:  Kristina Klara; Jamie E Collins; Ellen Gurary; Scott A Elman; Derek S Stenquist; Elena Losina; Jeffrey N Katz
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 4.666

5.  Predicting knee osteoarthritis severity: comparative modeling based on patient's data and plain X-ray images.

Authors:  Jaynal Abedin; Joseph Antony; Kevin McGuinness; Kieran Moran; Noel E O'Connor; Dietrich Rebholz-Schuhmann; John Newell
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Multicentre Study Using Machine Learning Methods in Clinical Diagnosis of Knee Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Ke Zeng; Yingqi Hua; Jing Xu; Tao Zhang; Zhuoying Wang; Yafei Jiang; Jing Han; Mengkai Yang; Jiakang Shen; Zhengdong Cai
Journal:  J Healthc Eng       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 2.682

7.  Association of Serum Low-Density Lipoprotein, High-Density Lipoprotein, and Total Cholesterol With Development of Knee Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Jessica L Schwager; Michael C Nevitt; James Torner; Cora E Lewis; Nirupa R Matthan; Na Wang; Xianbang Sun; Alice H Lichtenstein; David Felson
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2022-01-08       Impact factor: 4.794

8.  Automatic Knee Osteoarthritis Diagnosis from Plain Radiographs: A Deep Learning-Based Approach.

Authors:  Aleksei Tiulpin; Jérôme Thevenot; Esa Rahtu; Petri Lehenkari; Simo Saarakkala
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Complex Meniscus Tears Treated with Collagen Matrix Wrapping and Bone Marrow Blood Injection: Clinical Effectiveness and Survivorship after a Minimum of 5 Years' Follow-Up.

Authors:  Kinga Ciemniewska-Gorzela; Paweł Bąkowski; Jakub Naczk; Roland Jakob; Tomasz Piontek
Journal:  Cartilage       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 4.634

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.