Comparative distribution of ultrasound-detectable forefoot bursae in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis
Comparative distribution of ultrasound-detectable forefoot bursae in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis
Objective: To investigate the prevalence and distribution of forefoot bursae (FFB) in individuals with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and healthy controls (HC). Additionally, we sought to identify mechanical or inflammatory factors predicting FFB count.
Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study was completed in three cohorts; 1. OA (n=50), 2. RA (n=56), 3. HC (n=50). FFB were recorded as present if detectable in two ultrasound (US) scanning planes. The comparative probabilities of FFB presence between groups was expressed as odds ratios. Mechanical factors, including joint deformity, range of motion and foot posture, were determined for both patient groups. Inflammatory factors, including serology, DAS28 and US-detected metatarsophalangeal joint hypertrophy and metatarsal head erosion, were determined for RA patients. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to determine factors related to FFB count in patient groups.
Results: FFB were highly prevalent in both OA and RA groups (OA: 94 per 100 patients; RA: 88 per 100 patients), compared to HC (56 per 100 participants). FFB distribution significantly differed between patient groups (RA-OA: X2=15.64, p?0.001). In OA patients FFB were commonly located in the medial/lateral forefoot region but across all regions for RA patients. In OA patients reduced ankle joint range of motion predicted FFB count (R2=0.030, p=0.037). In RA patients erosion presence was related to FFB count (R2=0.42, p?0.001).
Conclusion: FFB are highly prevalent in patients with OA and RA. FFB distribution significantly differs between patient groups. FFB in patients with OA may be related to mechanical factors.
869-877
Hooper, Lindsey
95256156-ce8c-4e7c-b04d-b6e459232441
Bowen, Catherine J.
fd85c3c5-96d9-49b8-86c6-caa94e1a222b
Gates, Lucy
bc67b8b8-110b-4358-8e1b-6f1d345bd503
Culliford, David
25511573-74d3-422a-b0ee-dfe60f80df87
Arden, Nigel K.
23af958d-835c-4d79-be54-4bbe4c68077f
Edwards, Christopher J.
dcb27fec-75ea-4575-a844-3588bcf14106
June 2014
Hooper, Lindsey
95256156-ce8c-4e7c-b04d-b6e459232441
Bowen, Catherine J.
fd85c3c5-96d9-49b8-86c6-caa94e1a222b
Gates, Lucy
bc67b8b8-110b-4358-8e1b-6f1d345bd503
Culliford, David
25511573-74d3-422a-b0ee-dfe60f80df87
Arden, Nigel K.
23af958d-835c-4d79-be54-4bbe4c68077f
Edwards, Christopher J.
dcb27fec-75ea-4575-a844-3588bcf14106
Hooper, Lindsey, Bowen, Catherine J., Gates, Lucy, Culliford, David, Arden, Nigel K. and Edwards, Christopher J.
(2014)
Comparative distribution of ultrasound-detectable forefoot bursae in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.
Arthritis & Rheumatism, 66 (6), .
(doi:10.1002/acr.22217).
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the prevalence and distribution of forefoot bursae (FFB) in individuals with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and healthy controls (HC). Additionally, we sought to identify mechanical or inflammatory factors predicting FFB count.
Methods: A cross-sectional, observational study was completed in three cohorts; 1. OA (n=50), 2. RA (n=56), 3. HC (n=50). FFB were recorded as present if detectable in two ultrasound (US) scanning planes. The comparative probabilities of FFB presence between groups was expressed as odds ratios. Mechanical factors, including joint deformity, range of motion and foot posture, were determined for both patient groups. Inflammatory factors, including serology, DAS28 and US-detected metatarsophalangeal joint hypertrophy and metatarsal head erosion, were determined for RA patients. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to determine factors related to FFB count in patient groups.
Results: FFB were highly prevalent in both OA and RA groups (OA: 94 per 100 patients; RA: 88 per 100 patients), compared to HC (56 per 100 participants). FFB distribution significantly differed between patient groups (RA-OA: X2=15.64, p?0.001). In OA patients FFB were commonly located in the medial/lateral forefoot region but across all regions for RA patients. In OA patients reduced ankle joint range of motion predicted FFB count (R2=0.030, p=0.037). In RA patients erosion presence was related to FFB count (R2=0.42, p?0.001).
Conclusion: FFB are highly prevalent in patients with OA and RA. FFB distribution significantly differs between patient groups. FFB in patients with OA may be related to mechanical factors.
Text
comparative distribution of ultrasound detectable forefoot bursae in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.pdf
- Accepted Manuscript
Text
ACR_FFB_paper_revision_clean.doc
- Other
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 15 October 2013
e-pub ahead of print date: 21 October 2013
Published date: June 2014
Organisations:
Faculty of Health Sciences, Primary Care & Population Sciences
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 359286
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/359286
ISSN: 0004-3591
PURE UUID: 14944e52-4b3d-47fc-a47e-202d70616c11
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 25 Oct 2013 12:18
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:37
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
David Culliford
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics