Kellgren/Lawrence 分级在队列研究中的应用:使用荷兰髋关节和膝关节队列研究数据进行方法学更新和影响分析。

Kellgren/Lawrence Grading in Cohort Studies: Methodological Update and Implications Illustrated Using Data From a Dutch Hip and Knee Cohort.

机构信息

Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2022 Jul;74(7):1179-1187. doi: 10.1002/acr.24563. Epub 2022 Apr 19.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) is a cohort of middle-aged individuals with hip or knee pain. Radiographs were assigned Kellgren/Lawrence (K/L) scores under different conditions at each follow-up visit for 10 years. We aimed to describe and consolidate each scoring approach, then illustrate implications of their use by comparing baseline K/L scores assigned using 2 of these approaches, and evaluating their respective associations with joint replacement and incident radiographic osteoarthritis (ROA).

METHODS

We compared baseline K/L scores assigned to hips and knees using 2 scoring approaches: 1) assigned by senior researchers to baseline images alone and 2) assigned by trained readers, with images read paired and in known sequence with up to 10 years of follow-up radiographs (Poisson regression). We evaluated the associations of baseline ROA (any: K/L grade ≥1; established: K/L ≥2) with joint replacement, and of K/L 1 joints with incident established ROA (survival analysis).

RESULTS

Of 1,002 participants (79% women, mean ± SD age 55.9 ± 5.2 years, body mass index 26.2 ± 4.0 kg/m ), the second scoring approach had 2.4 times (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.8-3.1 for knees) and 2.9 times (95% CI 2.3-3.7 for hips) higher prevalence of established ROA than the first approach. Established hip ROA had a higher risk of joint replacement using the first approach (hazard ratio [HR] 24.2 [95% CI 15.0-39.8] versus second approach HR 7.7 [95% CI 4.9-12.1]), as did knees (HR 19.3 [95% CI 10.3-36.1] versus second approach HR 4.8 [95% CI 2.4-9.6]). The risk of incident ROA did not differ by approach.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that evaluating ROA prevalence and predicting outcomes depends on the scoring approach.

摘要

目的

Cohort Hip 和 Cohort Knee(CHECK)是一个中年人群队列,有髋部或膝关节疼痛。在每次随访的 10 年内,对每位患者的髋关节和膝关节进行放射学检查,并按照不同条件分配 Kellgren/Lawrence(K/L)评分。我们旨在描述和整合每种评分方法,然后通过比较使用其中两种方法在基线时分配的 K/L 评分,以及评估它们与关节置换和新发放射学骨关节炎(ROA)的相关性,来说明其使用的意义。

方法

我们比较了使用两种评分方法在基线时分配给髋关节和膝关节的 K/L 评分:1)由资深研究人员仅根据基线图像分配,2)由经过培训的读者分配,图像以配对方式读取,并与最多 10 年的随访放射学图像相关联(Poisson 回归)。我们评估了基线 ROA(任何:K/L 分级≥1;确诊:K/L≥2)与关节置换的相关性,以及 K/L 1 关节与新发确诊 ROA 的相关性(生存分析)。

结果

在 1002 名参与者中(79%为女性,平均年龄 55.9±5.2 岁,平均体重指数 26.2±4.0kg/m²),第二种评分方法在膝关节中确诊 ROA 的患病率是第一种评分方法的 2.4 倍(95%置信区间 [95%CI] 1.8-3.1),在髋关节中确诊 ROA 的患病率是第一种评分方法的 2.9 倍(95%CI 2.3-3.7)。使用第一种评分方法,确诊髋关节 ROA 的关节置换风险更高(风险比 [HR] 24.2[95%CI 15.0-39.8]与第二种评分方法 HR 7.7[95%CI 4.9-12.1]),膝关节也是如此(HR 19.3[95%CI 10.3-36.1]与第二种评分方法 HR 4.8[95%CI 2.4-9.6])。两种评分方法在预测新发 ROA 方面风险无差异。

结论

本研究表明,评估 ROA 患病率和预测结果取决于评分方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/95a8/9541941/5544cee18c31/ACR-74-1179-g002.jpg

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索