KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Erciyes Medical Journal / 2020 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2

The Calculation of the Femoral Condyle Cartilage Volume and Surface Area in Patients with Osteoarthritis

Demet ÜNALMIŞ
Niyazı ACER
Seher YILMAZ
Adem TOKPINAR
Serap DOĞAN
Hüseyin DEMİR
Sayfa
178–184
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Conclusion: When compared with the literature, it is concluded that our method may be used as a valid method because the survey results are close to each other and the average values.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: Osteoarthritis is non-inflammatory, degenerative, and chronic disease observed, especially as progressive in loadbearing joints.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Materials and Methods: Our study population consisted of 25 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Conclusion: When compared with the literature, it is concluded that our method may be used as a valid method because the survey results are close to each other and the average values.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objective: Osteoarthritis is non-inflammatory, degenerative, and chronic disease observed, especially as progressive in loadbearing joints. There are several studies that measure the volume and surface area of the knee joint cartilage in osteoarthritis patients. However, different methods were used in these studies. Materials and Methods: Our study population consisted of 25 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Twenty-five healthy individuals were included in this study as a control group. In our study, planimetry and quadratic ruler method, which are among stereological methods, were used over magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to measure the femoral condyle cartilage volume and surface area. Results: The average cartilage volume measurement 6.54 cm3 in the female patient group and 13.51 cm3 in the female control group. In this measurement, 7.49 cm3 in male patients was measured in the control group 15.71 cm3. In the statistical comparison between the groups, it was determined that the values in the patient group decreased significantly compared with the control group (p<0.001). Conclusion: When compared with the literature, it is concluded that our method may be used as a valid method because the survey results are close to each other and the average values.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ÜNALMIŞ, D., ACER, N., YILMAZ, S., TOKPINAR, A., DOĞAN, S., DEMİR, H. (2020). The Calculation of the Femoral Condyle Cartilage Volume and Surface Area in Patients with Osteoarthritis. Erciyes Medical Journal, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 2, 178–184. https://ajindex.com/articles/160319

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (11)

  1. Heidari B. Knee osteoarthritis prevalence, risk factors, pathogenesis and features: Part I. Caspian J Intern Med 2011; 2(2): 205–12
  2. Harada Y, Tokuda O, Fukuda K, Shiraishi G, Motomura T, Kimura M, et al. Relationship between cartilage volume using MRI and KellgrenLawrence radiographic score in knee osteoarthritis with and without meniscal tears. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011; 196(3): W298–304
  3. Faber SC, Eckstein F, Lukasz S, Mühlbauer R, Hohe J, Englmeier KH, et al. Gender differences in knee joint cartilage thickness, volume and articular surface areas: assessment with quantitative three-dimensional MR imaging. Skeletal Radiol 2001; 30(3): 144–50
  4. Eckstein F, Winzheimer M, Hohe J, Englmeier KH, Reiser M. Interindividual variability and correlation among morphological parameters of knee joint cartilage plates: analysis with three-dimensional MR imaging. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001; 9(2): 101–11
  5. Raynauld JP, Kauffmann C, Beaudoin G, Berthiaume MJ, de Guise JA, Bloch DA, et al. Reliability of a quantification imaging system using magnetic resonance images to measure cartilage thickness and volume in human normal and osteoarthritic knees. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2003; 11(5): 351–60
  6. Hudelmaier M, Glaser C, Englmeier KH, Reiser M, Putz R, Eckstein F. Correlation of knee-joint cartilage morphology with muscle cross-sectional areas vs. anthropometric variables. Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol 2003; 270(2): 175–84
  7. Garten CT Jr. A review of parameter values used to assess the transport of plutonium, uranium, and thorium in terrestrial food chains. Environ Res 1978; 17(3): 437–52
  8. Eckstein F, Cotofana S, Wirth W, Nevitt M, John MR, Dreher D, et al; Osteoarthritis Initiative Investigators Group. Greater rates of cartilage loss in painful knees than in pain-free knees after adjustment for radiographic disease stage: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Arthritis Rheum 2011; 63(8): 2257–67
  9. Martel-Pelletier J, Tardif G, Rousseau Trépanier J, Abram F, Dorais M, et al. The ratio adipsin/MCP-1 is strongly associated with structural changes and CRP/MCP-1 with symptoms in obese knee osteoarthritis subjects: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2019; 27(8): 1163–73
  10. Morgan SR, Waterton JC, Maciewicz RA, Leadbetter JE, Gandy SJ, Moots RJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging measurement of knee cartilage volume in a multicentre study. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004; 43(1): 19–21
  11. Ding C, Cicuttini F, Scott F,