| Literature DB >> 32161274 |
Ji Suk Shim1, Chulhan Kim2, Jae Jun Ryu3, Sung Jae Choi4.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of rheumatic disease as a risk factor for temporomandibular disease (TMD). A total of 143 outpatients reporting symptoms indicating rheumatic disease at their first visit to the rheumatology clinic were included. We evaluated the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) with scintigraphic images, and standard questionnaires were administered for the symptomatic assessment for all patients. The patients were classified into 'healthy controls' or as per their diagnosis into 'osteoarthritis', 'axial spondyloarthritis', 'peripheral spondyloarthritis', 'rheumatoid arthritis', or 'other rheumatic diseases' groups. The patients were also differentiated depending on the presence or absence of axial involvement. The relation between the rheumatic disease type and findings at the TMJ were evaluated using statistical analyses. Axial spondyloarthritis, peripheral spondyloarthritis, and rheumatic arthritis patients showed significantly higher scintigraphic uptake at the TMJ compared with those in the control and osteoarthritis groups (axial spondyloarthritis: 4.5, peripheral spondyloarthritis: 4.5, rheumatoid arthritis: 4.09, control: 3.5, osteoarthritis: 3.4, p < 0.0001). Compared with patients without axial involvement, patients with axial involvement also showed significantly higher TMJ scintigraphic uptake (axial involvement: 4.24, without axial involvement: 3.50, p < 0.0001) with elevated symptomatic rates in TMD (axial involvement: 17.82, without axial involvement: 9.97, p < 0.005).Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32161274 PMCID: PMC7066130 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-60804-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Study design. All recruited subjects were new patients at the rheumatology clinic, and diagnosis of the rheumatic disease and the evaluation of TMJ were processed separately. (RT: Department of rheumatology. NU: Department of nuclear medicine. DT: Department of dentistry).
Figure 2Scintigraphic evaluation. The uptake ratio was acquired by drawing 10 × 10 pixel sized and square-shaped regions of interest (ROIs) on the temporomandibular joint and the parietal area of the skull. The patients were also divided into (a) low and (b) high scintigraphy uptake groups using the reference uptake value of 3.88 which is a standard value to reveal osteoarthritic results.
Descriptive statistics and comparison between patients with rheumatic diseases and healthy controls. *p < 0.05 by ANOVA; Groups with the same letter did not show any statistically significant differences (P ≥ 0.05) by Tukey’s HSD test. N: number, SD: standard deviation.
| Healthy Control | Osteoarthritis | Rheumatic Arthritis | Axial Spondyloathritis | Peripheral Spondyloathritis | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19 | 56 | 21 | 15 | 18 | |
| 6/13 | 17/39 | 5/16 | 9/6 | 6/12 | |
| 42.5 (13.3) | 51.6 (10.6) | 53.7 (16.3) | 39.1 (11.2) | 32.4 (9.8) | |
| 18.5 (20.4) | 30.5 (31.2) | 51.5 (32.3) | 20.6 (19.9) | 21.6 (28.9) | |
| 6 (31.6%) | 19 (33.9%) | 13 (61.9%) | 11 (73.3%) | 14 (77.8%) | |
| 3.5 (0.9)A | 3.4 (0.8)A | 4.09 (1.1)B | 4.5 (1.2)B | 4.5 (0.9)B | |
| 13.0 (12.5)A | 12.4 (16.2)A | 10.4 (12.9)A | 8.08 (11.5)A | 21.8 (26.1)A | |
Scintigraphic uptake ratio and symptomatic rate depending on axial involvement.
| Control (do not involve axial articular, N = 81) | Axial involvement (N = 48) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| < | |||
| 3.50 (0.89) | 4.24 (1.03) | ||
| 3.27 (2.89, 4.10) | 4.09 (3.52, 4.83) | ||
| (1.76, 6.10) | (2.22, 6.89) | ||
| < | |||
| 9.97(12.05) | 17.82 (20.89) | ||
| 7.50 (0.00, 20.00) | 10.00 (0.00, 30.00) | ||
| (0.00, 40.00) | (0.00, 75.00) |
*P by Student’s t-test. N: number, SD: standard deviation, Q1: quartile 1 Q3: quartile 3.
Correlation coefficient and the level of significance between temporomandibular joint parameters and rheumatic laboratory indices.
| ESR | CRP | Anti-CCP | Tender (number) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.18 | 0.18 | −0.05 | −0.04 | |||||
| −0.08 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.04 | |||||
| −0.10 | 0.03 | 0.03 | −0.04 | |||||
| 0.02 | −0.03 | 0.04 | −0.05 | |||||
*P for null hypothesis that correlation is zero by Pearson’s correlation method. ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate, CRS: C-reactive protein, RF: rheumatoid factor, CC: Pearson’s correlation coefficients.
Comparison of rheumatic indicators between high and low uptake groups.
| ESR | CRP | Anti-CCP | Tender (number) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High uptake (≥3.88) Mean(SD) | 26.75 (23.97) | 0.91 (2.07) | 34.24 (166.7) | 8.21 (7.69) |
| Low uptake (<3.88) Mean(SD) | 17.56 (20.72) | 0.32 (0.64) | 40.10 (180.5) | 8.65 (7.33) |
| 1.38 (2.62) | 3.59 (1.08) | 3.09 (1.02) | 20.19 (27.40) | |
| 1.63 (2.60) | 3.43 (0.95) | 3.04 (0.88) | 23.27 (29.88) | |
ESR: erythrocyte sedimentation rate, *P by Student’s t-test. CRS: C-reactive protein, RF: rheumatoid factor, CC: correlation coefficients.
Correlation of age with scintigraphic uptake and symptomatic rate.
| Total patients | HC and OA | inflammatory rheumatic diseases (RA, axial SpA, and peripheral SpA) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CC | −0.44 | −0.48 | −0.26 |
| CC | −0.13 | −0.12 | 0.34 |
*P for null hypothesis that correlation is zero by Pearson’s correlation method. HC: healthy control, OA: osteoarthritis, RA: rheumatic arthritis, SpA: spondyloarthritis, N: number, SD: standard deviation, CC: correlation coefficients.