The ciliary protein IFT88 controls post‐natal cartilage thickness and influences development of osteoarthritis.

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative disease of joint cartilage affecting the elderly people around the world. Visualization and quantification of cartilage is very much essential for the assessment of OA and rehabilitation of the affected people. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is the most widely used imaging modality in the treatment of knee joint diseases. But there are many challenges in proper visualization and quantification of articular cartilage using MRI. Volume rendering and 3D visualization can provide an overview of anatomy and disease condition of knee joint. In this work, cartilage is segmented from knee joint MRI, visualized in 3D using Volume of Interest (VOI) approach. Methods: Visualization of cartilage helps in the assessment of cartilage degradation in diseased knee joints. Cartilage thickness and volume were quantified using image processing techniques in OA affected knee joints. Statistical analysis is carried out on processed data set consisting of 110 of knee joints which include male (56) and female (54) of normal (22) and different stages of OA (88). The differences in thickness and volume of cartilage were observed in cartilage in groups based on age, gender and BMI in normal and progressive OA knee joints. Results: The results show that size and volume of cartilage are found to be significantly low in OA as compared to normal knee joints. The cartilage thickness and volume is significantly low for people with age 50 years and above and Body Mass Index (BMI) equal and greater than 25. Cartilage volume correlates with the progression of the disease and can be used for the evaluation of the response to therapies. Conclusion: The developed methods can be used as helping tool in the assessment of cartilage degradation in OA affected knee joint patients and treatment planning.

Download Full-text

The Reliability of Ultrasound in the Assessment of Hyaline Cartilage in Rheumatoid Arthritis and Healthy Metacarpal Heads

Ultraschall in der Medizin - European Journal of Ultrasound ◽

10.1055/a-1285-4602 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Edoardo Cipolletta ◽

Emilio Filippucci ◽

Andrea Di Matteo ◽

Giulia Tesei ◽

Micaela Ana Cosatti ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Rheumatoid Arthritis ◽

Scoring System ◽

Quantitative Assessment ◽

Hyaline Cartilage ◽

Scoring Systems ◽

Thickness Measurement ◽

Cartilage Thickness ◽

Observer Agreement ◽

Very High Frequency ◽

Observer Reliability

Abstract Purpose i) To assess the inter- and intra-observer reliability of ultrasound (US) in the evaluation of the hyaline cartilage (HC) of the metacarpal head (MH) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and in healthy subjects (HS) both qualitatively and quantitatively. ii) To calculate the smallest detectable difference (SDD) of the MH cartilage thickness measurement. iii) To correlate the qualitative scoring system and the quantitative assessment. Materials and Methods US examination was performed on 280 MHs of 20 patients with RA and 15 HS using a very high frequency probe (up to 22 MHz). HC status was evaluated both qualitatively (using a five-grade scoring system) and quantitatively (using the average value of the longitudinal and transverse measures). The HC of MHs from II to V metacarpophalangeal joint of both hands were scanned independently on the same day by two rheumatologists to assess inter-observer reliability. All subjects were re-examined using the same scanning protocol and the same US setting by one sonographer after a week to assess intra-observer reliability. Results The inter-observer agreement and intra-observer agreement were moderate to substantial (k = 0.66 and k = 0.73) for the qualitative scoring system and high (ICC = 0.93 and ICC = 0.94) for the quantitative assessment. The SDD of the MH cartilage thickness measurement was 0.09 mm. A significant correlation between the two scoring systems was found (r = –0.35; p < 0.001). Conclusion The present study describes the main methodological issues of HC assessment. Using a standardized protocol, both the qualitative and the quantitative scoring systems can be reliable.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and safety of sprifermin injection for knee osteoarthritis treatment: a meta-analysis

Arthritis Research & Therapy ◽

10.1186/s13075-021-02488-w ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 23 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Ni Zeng ◽

Xin-Yuan Chen ◽

Zhi-Peng Yan ◽

Jie-Ting Li ◽

Tao Liao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Knee Osteoarthritis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Placebo Treatment ◽

Cartilage Volume ◽

Cartilage Thickness ◽

Random Effects Models ◽

Structural Progression ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Mean Differences

Abstract Objective To perform a meta-analysis comparing the structural progression and clinical symptom outcomes as well as adverse events experienced from intra-articular injections of sprifermin compared to a placebo treatment for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Method We systematically searched the literature for studies that compared long-term outcomes between sprifermin and placebo injections for KOA treatment. Meta-analysis was performed with RevMan5.3 using an inverse variance approach with fixed or random effects models. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. Results Eight studies were included. Overall, there was significantly less improvement of WOMAC total scores in patients receiving sprifermin, compared with the placebo (mean difference (MD) = 3.23, 95% CI 0.76–5.69; I2 = 0%; P = 0.01). Further, sprifermin injection patients gained more, and lost less, cartilage thickness and volume in total femorotibial joint (cartilage thickness: standardized mean differences (SMD) = 0.55, 95% CI 0.26–0.84; I2 = 78%; P = 0.0002; cartilage volume: SMD = 0.39, 95% CI 0.20–0.58; I2 = 49%; P < 0.0001). Changes in the cartilage surface morphology of the medial tibio-femoral joint (MD = −0.30, 95% CI −0.44 to −0.16; I2 = 0%; P < 0.0001) and patello-femoral joint (MD = −0.22; 95% CI −0.37 to −0.07; I2 = 0%; P = 0.004) showed a significant difference between the sprifermin and placebo injections. Moreover, there were no significant differences between sprifermin and the placebo in the risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (OR = 1.05; 95% CI 0.52–2.14; I2 = 48%; P = 0.89). Conclusion The data from the included studies provide strong evidence to determine the effect of intra-articular sprifermin on joint structure in individuals with KOA and show no specific adverse effects. Nevertheless, intra-articular sprifermin did not likely have any positive effect on symptom alleviation.

Download Full-text