Validity of the sonographic longitudinal sagittal image for assessment of the cartilage thickness in the knee osteoarthritis

Clinical Rheumatology

Volumn 27, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1507-1516

  Yoon, Chong Hyeon ^a   Kim, Hyun Sook ^b   Ju, Ji Hyeon ^a   Jee, Won Hee ^a   Park, Sung Hwan ^a   Kim, Ho Youn ^a,b  

^a The Catholic University of Korea   (South Korea)

^b Chosun University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Cartilage; Knee osteoarthritis; MRI; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CARTILAGE THICKNESS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FEMUR CONDYLE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KNEE OSTEOARTHRITIS; KNEE RADIOGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MUSCULOSKELETAL SYSTEM PARAMETERS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; VALIDATION PROCESS; WEIGHT BEARING;

AGED; CARTILAGE, ARTICULAR; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; PAIN MEASUREMENT;

EID: 56349171149     PISSN: 07703198     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10067-008-0956-3     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Harris ED Jr (2001) The bone and joint decade: A catalyst for progress. Arthritis Rheum 44:1969-1970
2. March LM, Bachmeier CJ (1997) Economics of osteoarthritis: A global perspective. Bailliere's Clin Rheumatol 11:817-834
3. Eckstein F, Glaser C (2004) Measuring cartilage morphology with quantitative magnetic resonance imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 8:329-353
4. Cicuttini FM, Wluka AE, Wang Y et al (2004) Longitudinal study of changes in tibial and femoral cartilage in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 50:94-97
5. Peterfy CG (2002) Imaging of the disease process. Curr Opin Rheumatol 14:590-596
6. Graichen H, von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Vogl T et al (2004) Quantitative assessment of cartilage status in osteoarthritis by quantitative magnetic resonance imaging: Technical validation for use in analysis of cartilage volume and further morphologic parameters. Arthritis Rheum 50:811-816
7. Dieppe PA, Cushnaghan J, Shepstone L (1997) The Bristol 'OA500' study: progression of osteoarthritis (OA) over 3 years and the relationship between clinical and radiographic changes at the knee joint. Osteoarthr Cartil 5:87-97
8. Winalski CS, Gupta KB (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging of focal articular cartilage lesions. Top Magn Reson Imaging 14:131-144
9. Disler DG, McCauley TR, Wirth CR et al (1995) Detection of knee hyaline cartilage defects using fat-suppressed three-dimensional spoiled gradient-echo MR imaging: Comparison with standard MR imaging and correlation with arthroscopy. Am J Roentgenol 165:377-382
10. Grassi W, Lamanna G, Farina A et al (1999) Sonographic imaging of normal and osteoarthritic cartilage. Semin Arthritis Rheum 28:398-403
11. Tarhan S, Unlu Z (2003) Magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonographic evaluation of the patients with knee osteoarthritis: A comparative study. Clin Rheumatol 22:181-188
12. Filippucci E, Iagnocco A, Meenagh G et al (2006) Ultrasound imaging for the rheumatologist. Clin Exp Rheumatol 24:1-5
13. Boutry N, Morel M, Flipo RM et al (2007) Early rheumatoid arthritis: A review of MRI and sonographic findings. Am J Roentgenol 189:1502-1509
14. Khoury V, Cardinal E, Bureau NJ (2007) Musculoskeletal sonography: A dynamic tool for usual and unusual disorders. Am J Roentgenol 188:W63-W73
15. Iagnocco A, Perella C, Naredo E et al (2008) Etanercept in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: Clinical follow-up over one year by ultrasonography. Clin Rheumatol 27:491-496
16. Wakefield RJ, Gibbon WW, Conaghan PG et al (2000) The value of sonography in the detection of bone erosions in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A comparison with conventional radiography. Arthritis Rheum 43:2762-2770
17. Schmidt WA, Schmidt H, Schicke B et al (2004) Standard reference values for musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Ann Rheum Dis 63:988-994
18. Friedman L, Finlay K, Jurriaans E (2001) Ultrasound of the knee. Skeletal Radiol 30:361-377
19. Backhaus M, Burmester G-R, Gerber T et al (2001) Guidelines for musculoskeletal ultrasound in rheumatology. Ann Rheum Dis 60:641-649
20. Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D et al (1986) Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum 29:1039-1049
21. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH et al (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833-1840
22. Bae SC, Lee HS, Yun HR et al (2001) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Korean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) and Lequesne osteoarthritis indices for clinical research. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 9:746-750
23. Ahlback S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee. A radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 277(Suppl):7-72
24. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16:494-502
25. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307-310
26. Dewitte K, Fierens C, Stockl D et al (2002) Application of the Bland-Altman plot for interpretation of method-comparison studies: A critical investigation of its practice. Clin Chem 48:799-801
27. Kramer M, Feinstein A (1981) Clinical biostatistics LIV; the biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther 29:111-123
28. Eckstein F, Charles HC, Buck RJ et al (2005) Accuracy and precision of quantitative assessment of cartilage morphology by magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0T. Arthritis Rheum 52:3132-3136
29. Tsai CY, Lee CL, Chai CY et al (2007) The validity of in vitro ultrasonographic grading of osteoarthritic femoral condylar cartilage - a comparison with histologic grading. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 15:245-250