Eckstein Felix, Wirth Wolfgang, Guermazi Ali, Roemer Frank, Nevitt Michael, Ladel Christoph, Sharma Leena, Hunter David J, Kwoh C Kent
Research Program for Musculoskeletal Imaging, Center for Anatomy and Cell Biology, and Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Arthritis and Rehabilitation (LBIAR), Paracelsus Medical University (PMU) Salzburg, Austria.
Chondrometrics GmbH, Freilassing, Germany.
Osteoarthr Cartil Open. 2025 Aug 5;7(4):100658. doi: 10.1016/j.ocarto.2025.100658. eCollection 2025 Dec.
We examined whether the trajectory of femorotibial cartilage loss differs between knees meeting a clinically defined virtual knee replacement (vKR) status based on patient-reported outcomes vs. those with low probability.
vKR cases (highest 10 % of probabilities for having surgical KR) were selected using knee pain and quality of life criteria, developed from knees with actual KR. Knees reaching such symptom state at 48 months (M) follow-up (vKR case 60 M) were matched 1:1 with vKR controls (lowest 20 % probability) by sex, age, and baseline radiographic status. Of 65 knees displaying vKR case status at 60 M; 33 maintained or increased pain and QOL levels at 72 M (vKR+/+); 32 did not (vKR+/-). The thickness of medial and lateral tibial and femoral cartilages was determined from MRI, at up to five annual visits prior to 60 M.
vKR case knees displayed substantially greater central medial femorotibial compartment cartilage thickness loss 2 years prior to reaching case status (-151 ± 337 [mean ± SD] vs. -38 ± 249 μm; odds ratio [OR] 1.95 (95 % confidence interval: 1.23-3.08). Cartilage loss did not apparently differ between vKR+/+ and vKR +/- knees (p = 0.73).
Substantially greater cartilage thickness loss was detected in knees reaching vKR case status defined by patient-reported clinical criteria vs. vKR controls. This was found independently of whether this status was maintained at a later annual visit. The observed association suggests greater knee cartilage loss to be prospectively related to worse clinical outcome. It indicates further that the vKR criterion used here may be useful to explore relationships with other structural (imaging) assessments.
我们研究了根据患者报告的结果达到临床定义的虚拟膝关节置换(vKR)状态的膝关节与低概率膝关节之间,胫股关节软骨损失的轨迹是否不同。
vKR病例(手术膝关节置换概率最高的10%)根据膝关节疼痛和生活质量标准进行选择,这些标准源自实际进行膝关节置换的膝关节。在48个月(M)随访时达到这种症状状态的膝关节(vKR病例60M)按性别、年龄和基线放射学状态与vKR对照(概率最低的20%)进行1:1匹配。在60M时显示vKR病例状态的65个膝关节中,33个在72M时疼痛和生活质量水平维持或提高(vKR+/+),32个没有(vKR+/-)。在60M之前最多五次年度就诊时,通过MRI确定内侧和外侧胫骨及股骨软骨厚度。
vKR病例膝关节在达到病例状态前2年显示出内侧胫股关节中央软骨厚度损失明显更大(-151±337[平均值±标准差]对-38±249μm;优势比[OR]为1.95(95%置信区间:1.23 - 3.08)。vKR+/+和vKR +/-膝关节之间的软骨损失没有明显差异(p = 0.73)
与vKR对照相比根据患者报告的临床标准达到vKR病例状态的膝关节中检测到明显更大的软骨厚度损失这一发现与该状态在随后年度就诊时是否维持无关观察到的关联表明更大的膝关节软骨损失可能与更差的临床结果相关前瞻性相关这进一步表明此处使用的vKR标准可能有助于探索与其他结构(影像学)评估的关系