N A Segal1, E Frick2, J Duryea3, F Roemer4, A Guermazi4, M C Nevitt5, J C Torner2, D T Felson4, D D Anderson2. 1. University of Kansas, Kansas City, and University of Iowa, Iowa City. segal-research@kumc.edu. 2. University of Iowa, Iowa City. 3. Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 5. University of California, San Francisco.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether medial tibiofemoral joint space width (JSW) on 3-dimensional (3-D) standing computed tomography (SCT) correlates more closely with magnetic resonance imaging cartilage morphology (CM) and meniscal scores than does radiographic 2-D JSW. METHODS: Participants in the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study, who had standing fixed-flexion posteroanterior knee radiographs, were recruited. Medial tibiofemoral 3-D JSW on SCT and 2-D JSW on fixed-flexion radiographs were compared with medial tibiofemoral cartilage and meniscal morphology using the Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS). Associations between the area of the articular surface with 3-D JSW <2.5 mm on SCT, radiographic minimal 2-D JSW, and the WORMS-CM and meniscal scores were assessed using Spearman's rho. RESULTS: For the 19 participants included (33 knees), mean ± SD age was 66.9 ± 5.4 years, body mass index was 29.5 ± 4.4 kg/m(2) , 42.1% of participants were female, and the Kellgren/Lawrence grades were 0 (21.2%), 1 (36.4%), 2 (18.2%), and 3 (24.2%). The articular surface area with 3-D JSW <2.5 mm on SCT correlated with WORMS-CM scores for the central medial tibia (rs = 0.84, P < 0.001), central medial femur (rs = 0.60, P < 0.007), and posterior medial meniscal tear (rs = 0.39, P < 0.026), as did other cut points for 3-D JSW. Correlations with radiographic minimal 2-D JSW were -0.66, -0.52, and -0.40, respectively, differing from SCT only for tibial cartilage (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Greater surface area with a low JSW, measured by SCT, correlates more strongly with the severity of tibial cartilage lesions, while correlating with medial femoral cartilage and meniscal damage to a similar extent as radiographic minimal JSW. SCT may enable valid stratification of participants in clinical trials, through quickly and inexpensively characterizing osteoarthritis features.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether medial tibiofemoral joint space width (JSW) on 3-dimensional (3-D) standing computed tomography (SCT) correlates more closely with magnetic resonance imaging cartilage morphology (CM) and meniscal scores than does radiographic 2-D JSW. METHODS:Participants in the Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study, who had standing fixed-flexion posteroanterior knee radiographs, were recruited. Medial tibiofemoral 3-D JSW on SCT and 2-D JSW on fixed-flexion radiographs were compared with medial tibiofemoral cartilage and meniscal morphology using the Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score (WORMS). Associations between the area of the articular surface with 3-D JSW <2.5 mm on SCT, radiographic minimal 2-D JSW, and the WORMS-CM and meniscal scores were assessed using Spearman's rho. RESULTS: For the 19 participants included (33 knees), mean ± SD age was 66.9 ± 5.4 years, body mass index was 29.5 ± 4.4 kg/m(2) , 42.1% of participants were female, and the Kellgren/Lawrence grades were 0 (21.2%), 1 (36.4%), 2 (18.2%), and 3 (24.2%). The articular surface area with 3-D JSW <2.5 mm on SCT correlated with WORMS-CM scores for the central medial tibia (rs = 0.84, P < 0.001), central medial femur (rs = 0.60, P < 0.007), and posterior medial meniscal tear (rs = 0.39, P < 0.026), as did other cut points for 3-D JSW. Correlations with radiographic minimal 2-D JSW were -0.66, -0.52, and -0.40, respectively, differing from SCT only for tibial cartilage (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Greater surface area with a low JSW, measured by SCT, correlates more strongly with the severity of tibial cartilage lesions, while correlating with medial femoral cartilage and meniscal damage to a similar extent as radiographic minimal JSW. SCT may enable valid stratification of participants in clinical trials, through quickly and inexpensively characterizing osteoarthritis features.
Authors: Daichi Hayashi; Li Xu; Frank W Roemer; David J Hunter; Ling Li; Avinash M Katur; Ali Guermazi Journal: Radiology Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Shreyasee Amin; Michael P LaValley; Ali Guermazi; Mikayel Grigoryan; David J Hunter; Margaret Clancy; Jingbo Niu; Daniel R Gale; David T Felson Journal: Arthritis Rheum Date: 2005-10
Authors: Richard Kijowski; Donna G Blankenbaker; Paul T Stanton; Jason P Fine; Arthur A De Smet Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-04-26 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Neil A Segal; Michael C Nevitt; K Douglas Gross; Keith D Gross; Jean Hietpas; Natalie A Glass; Cora E Lewis; James C Torner Journal: PM R Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 2.298
Authors: Christoph Stehling; Richard B Souza; Marie-Pierre Hellio Le Graverand; Bradley T Wyman; Xiaojuan Li; Sharmila Majumdar; Thomas M Link Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: C G Peterfy; A Guermazi; S Zaim; P F J Tirman; Y Miaux; D White; M Kothari; Y Lu; K Fye; S Zhao; H K Genant Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Mayank Dineshkumar Kothari; Kaitlin G Rabe; Donald D Anderson; Michael C Nevitt; John A Lynch; Neil A Segal; Hayden Franz Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: Qian Cao; Alejandro Sisniega; Michael Brehler; J Webster Stayman; John Yorkston; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen; Wojciech Zbijewski Journal: Med Phys Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Molly A Day; Michael Ho; Kevin Dibbern; Karan Rao; Qiang An; Donald D Anderson; J Lawrence Marsh Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2020-07-10 Impact factor: 2.827
Authors: N A Segal; M T Murphy; B M Everist; K D Brown; J He; J A Lynch; M C Nevitt Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 6.576