» Articles » PMID: 28618871

Five-Year Follow-up of Knee Joint Distraction: Clinical Benefit and Cartilaginous Tissue Repair in an Open Uncontrolled Prospective Study

Overview
Journal Cartilage
Date 2017 Jun 17
PMID 28618871
Citations 33
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective In end-stage knee osteoarthritis, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may finally become inevitable. At a relatively young age, this comes with the risk of future revision surgery. Therefore, in these cases, joint preserving surgery such as knee joint distraction (KJD) is preferred. Here we present 5-year follow-up data of KJD. Design Patients ( n = 20; age <60 years) with conservative therapy resistant tibiofemoral osteoarthritis considered for TKA were treated. Clinical evaluation was performed by questionnaires. Change in cartilage thickness was quantified on radiographs and magnetic resonance images (MRI). The 5-year changes after KJD were evaluated and compared with the natural progression of osteoarthritis using Osteoarthritis Initiative data. Results Five-years posttreatment, patients still reported clinical improvement from baseline: ΔWOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index) +21.1 points (95% CI +8.9 to +33.3; P = 0.002), ΔVAS (visual analogue scale score) pain -27.6 mm (95%CI -13.3 to -42.0; P < 0.001), and minimum radiographic joint space width (JSW) of the most affected compartment (MAC) remained increased as well: Δ +0.43 mm (95% CI +0.02 to +0.84; P = 0.040). Improvement of mean JSW (x-ray) and mean cartilage thickness (MRI) of the MAC, were not statistically different from baseline anymore (Δ +0.26 mm; P = 0.370, and Δ +0.23 mm; P = 0.177). Multivariable linear regression analysis indicated that KJD treatment was associated with significantly less progression in mean and min JSW (x-ray) and mean cartilage thickness (MRI) compared with natural progression (all Ps <0.001). Conclusions KJD treatment results in prolonged clinical benefit, potentially explained by an initial boost of cartilaginous tissue repair that provides a long-term tissue structure benefit as compared to natural progression. Level of evidence, II.

Citing Articles

Sustained increase of pinch strength after traction treatment for symptomatic distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis.

Saito S, Makino A, Morimoto N Heliyon. 2024; 10(12):e32830.

PMID: 38975115 PMC: 11226916. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32830.


Harnessing joint distraction for the treatment of osteoarthritis: a bibliometric and visualized analysis.

Peng L, Li R, Xu S, Ding K, Wu Y, Li H Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2023; 11:1309688.

PMID: 38026890 PMC: 10666289. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2023.1309688.


Joint distraction using a purpose-built device for knee osteoarthritis: a prospective 2-year follow-up.

Struik T, Mastbergen S, Brouwer R, Custers R, van Geenen R, Heusdens C RMD Open. 2023; 9(2).

PMID: 37290929 PMC: 10255034. DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2023-003074.


Repair of joint damage in patients with rheumatoid arthritis does not relate to previous suppression of inflammation: a subanalysis after 8 years treat-to-target in the BeSt-trial.

van der Pol J, Akdemir G, van den Broek M, Dirven L, Kerstens P, Lems W RMD Open. 2023; 9(2).

PMID: 37185308 PMC: 10152004. DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2023-002995.


Implantable Shock Absorber Provides Superior Pain Relief and Functional Improvement Compared With High Tibial Osteotomy in Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Medial Knee Osteoarthritis: A 2-Year Report.

Diduch D, Crawford D, Ranawat A, Victor J, Flanigan D Cartilage. 2023; 14(2):152-163.

PMID: 36823955 PMC: 10416201. DOI: 10.1177/19476035231157335.


References
1.
Eckstein F, Buck R, Burstein D, Charles H, Crim J, Hudelmaier M . Precision of 3.0 Tesla quantitative magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage morphology in a multicentre clinical trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008; 67(12):1683-8. DOI: 10.1136/ard.2007.076919. View

2.
Losina E, Walensky R, Reichmann W, Holt H, Gerlovin H, Solomon D . Impact of obesity and knee osteoarthritis on morbidity and mortality in older Americans. Ann Intern Med. 2011; 154(4):217-26. PMC: 3260464. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-4-201102150-00001. View

3.
Feeley B, Gallo R, Sherman S, Williams R . Management of osteoarthritis of the knee in the active patient. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010; 18(7):406-16. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-201007000-00003. View

4.
Burgkart R, Glaser C, Hyhlik-Durr A, Englmeier K, Reiser M, Eckstein F . Magnetic resonance imaging-based assessment of cartilage loss in severe osteoarthritis: accuracy, precision, and diagnostic value. Arthritis Rheum. 2001; 44(9):2072-7. DOI: 10.1002/1529-0131(200109)44:9<2072::AID-ART357>3.0.CO;2-3. View

5.
Ploegmakers J, Van Roermund P, van Melkebeek J, Lammens J, Bijlsma J, Lafeber F . Prolonged clinical benefit from joint distraction in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005; 13(7):582-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2005.03.002. View