| Literature DB >> 36076236 |
Tianxiang Fan1, Shibo Chen1, Muhui Zeng1, Jia Li2, Xiaoshuai Wang1, Guangfeng Ruan1, Peihua Cao1, Yan Zhang1, Tianyu Chen1, Qianhua Ou1, Qianyi Wang1, Anita E Wluka3, Flavia Cicuttini3, Changhai Ding4,5,6,7, Zhaohua Zhu8,9.
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate whether the associations between cartilage defects and cartilage volumes with changes in knee symptoms were mediated by osteophytes.Entities:
Keywords: Cartilage; Knee osteoarthritis; Knee pain; Magnetic resonance imaging; Osteophytes
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36076236 PMCID: PMC9454107 DOI: 10.1186/s13075-022-02905-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arthritis Res Ther ISSN: 1478-6354 Impact factor: 5.606
Fig. 1Flowchart for the study sample
Fig. 2Model of the potential mediating effect of osteophytes on the relationship between cartilage morphology and changes in knee symptoms
Characteristics of participants
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Agea | 63.3 ± 7.2 |
| Female (%)b | 46% |
| BMI (kg/m2)a | 29.4 ± 4.9 |
| Baseline MTF osteophytes (0–18)c | 4.0 (2.0, 7.0) |
| Baseline LTF osteophytes (0–18)c | 4.0 (2.0, 8.0) |
| Baseline patellar osteophytes (0–6)c | 2.0 (2.0, 3.8) |
| Baseline total cartilage defects (0–24)c | 15.0 (12.0, 18.0) |
| Baseline total cartilage volume (cm3)c | 5.7 (4.6, 7.0) |
| Baseline total knee pain (0–500)c | 115.0 (66.0, 196.8) |
| Change in total knee painc | − 33.0 (− 95.0, 8.0) |
| Baseline weight-bearing pain (0–300)c | 79.5 (42.0, 126.0) |
| Change in weight-bearing painc | − 21.0 (− 63.0, 10.0) |
| Baseline non-weight-bearing pain (0–200)c | 32.0 (73.0, 74.0) |
| Change in non-weight-bearing painc | − 8.0 (− 44.0, 4.0) |
| Baseline knee dysfunction (0–1700)c | 412.5 (218.3, 668.0) |
| Change in knee dysfunctionc | − 108.5 (− 301.3, 16.3) |
| Baseline knee stiffness (0–200)c | 54.0 (25.0, 92.0) |
| Change in knee stiffnessc | − 13.5 (− 43.0, 8.8) |
BMI Body mass index, MTF Medial tibiofemoral, LTF Lateral tibiofemoral
aValues are mean ± standard deviation
bValues are percentage
cValues are median (interquartile range)
Mediation by osteophytes on the associations between total cartilage defects and changes in knee symptoms
| Outcomes | MTF osteophyte, | LTF osteophyte, | Patellar osteophyte, | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indirect effect | 0.84 (− 0.94, 2.81) | 0.36 | ||||
| Direct effect | 2.68 (− 0.80, 6.27) | 0.13 | 1.78 (− 1.40, 4.93) | 0.28 | 1.58 (− 1.45, 4.76) | 0.30 |
| Total effect | ||||||
| Proportion mediated % | ||||||
| Indirect effect | 0.62 (− 0.60, 1.91) | 0.29 | ||||
| Direct effect | 1.43 (− 0.72, 3.53) | 0.19 | 0.79 (− 1.38, 2.98) | 0.49 | 0.81 (− 1.11, 2.71) | 0.41 |
| Total effect | ||||||
| Proportion mediated % | NA | |||||
| Indirect effect | 0.22 (− 0.56, 1.04) | 0.56 | 0.48 (− 0.28, 1.26) | 0.22 | ||
| Direct effect | 1.29 (− 0.23, 2.84) | 0.10 | 1.03 (− 0.50, 2.52) | 0.15 | 0.81 (− 0.41, 2.06) | 0.21 |
| Total effect | ||||||
| Proportion mediated % | NA | NA | ||||
| Indirect effect | 0.35 (− 0.40, 1.11) | 0.36 | ||||
| Direct effect | 0.17 (− 1.35, 1.75) | 0.82 | − 0.65 (− 2.25, 0.80) | 0.39 | − 0.30 (− 1.80, 1.11) | 0.67 |
| Total effect | 0.52 (− 0.86, 1.93) | 0.45 | 0.52 (− 0.80, 1.88) | 0.46 | 0.52 (− 0.90, 1.91) | 0.50 |
| Proportion mediated % | NA | NA | NA | |||
| Indirect effect | 4.22 (− 0.90, 9.55) | 0.10 | ||||
| Direct effect | 2.74 (− 6.08, 11.64) | 0.56 | 0.33 (− 8.07, 9.99) | 0.92 | 1.77 (− 6.74, 10.03) | 0.69 |
| Total effect | 6.96 (− 1.78, 15.72) | 0.11 | 6.96 (− 0.72, 16.12) | 0.09 | 6.96 (− 1.22, 15.71) | 0.10 |
| Proportion mediated % | NA | NA | NA | |||
Adjusted for age, sex, BMI, and vitamin D supplement
Statistically significant associations are shown in bold
MTF Medial tibiofemoral, LTF Lateral tibiofemoral
Mediation by osteophytes on the associations between total cartilage volume and changes in knee symptoms
| Outcomes | MTF osteophyte, | LTF osteophyte, | Patellar osteophyte, | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indirect effect | − 1.64 (− 4.17, 0.25) | 0.10 | ||||
| Direct effect | − 4.66 (− 14.13, 4.17) | 0.29 | − 3.79 (− 13.66, 5.77) | 0.44 | − 3.14 (− 12.55, 6.18) | 0.49 |
| Total effect | − 6.30 (− 15.81, 2.56) | 0.16 | − 6.30 (− 16.31, 3.29) | 0.19 | − 6.30 (− 15.86, 2.99) | 0.17 |
| Proportion mediated % | NA | NA | NA | |||
| Indirect effect | − 1.04 (− 2.71, 0.13) | 0.09 | ||||
| Direct effect | − 5.45 (− 12.06, 1.04) | 0.10 | − 4.75 (− 11.34, 1.31) | 0.13 | − 4.56 (− 11.03, 1.60) | 0.15 |
| Total effect | ||||||
| Proportion mediated % | NA | |||||
| Indirect effect | − 0.67 (− 1.72, 0.08) | 0.09 | ||||
| Direct effect | − 0.56 (− 4.73, 3.85) | 0.81 | − 0.28 (− 4.54, 3.92) | 0.88 | 0.02 (− 4.26, 4.10) | 0.99 |
| Total effect | − 1.24 (− 5.40, 2.97) | 0.59 | − 1.24 (− 5.64, 3.00) | 0.53 | − 1.24 (− 5.42, 2.85) | 0.54 |
| Proportion mediated % | NA | NA | NA | |||
| Indirect effect | − 0.38 (− 1.32, 0.39) | 0.33 | ||||
| Direct effect | − 2.56 (− 6.91, 1.97) | 0.25 | − 1.71 (− 6.07, 2.47) | 0.43 | − 1.78 (− 6.07, 2.65) | 0.45 |
| Total effect | − 2.94 (− 7.28, 1.54) | 0.19 | − 2.94 (− 7.56, 1.45) | 0.19 | − 2.94 (− 7.20, 1.40) | 0.19 |
| Proportion mediated % | NA | NA | NA | |||
| Indirect effect | − 4.85 (− 12.25, 0.57) | 0.08 | ||||
| Direct effect | − 24.08 (− 49.24, 3.49) | 0.08 | − 24.42 (− 49.60, 1.95) | 0.07 | ||
| Total effect | ||||||
| Proportion mediated % | NA | |||||
Adjusted for age, sex, BMI, and vitamin D supplement
Statistically significant associations are shown in bold
MTF Medial tibiofemoral, LTF Lateral tibiofemoral