File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Imaging of knee osteoarthritis: A review of current evidence and clinical guidelines

TitleImaging of knee osteoarthritis: A review of current evidence and clinical guidelines
Authors
Keywordsclinical guidelines
imaging
knee osteoarthritis
Issue Date2021
Citation
Musculoskeletal Care, 2021, v. 19, n. 3, p. 363-374 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and debilitating degenerative joint diseases worldwide. While radiography is the most commonly used imaging modality, it is associated with drawbacks which newer modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound could overcome. Nevertheless, the role of imaging in clinical practice and research in knee OA has not been clearly defined. Furthermore, guidelines on imaging in knee OA from different authoritative bodies have not been compared in previous studies. Therefore, the present review aims to summarise existing evidence and compare guidelines on the use of different imaging modalities in evaluating knee OA. Methods: This is a narrative review based on a search of published clinical guidelines and the PubMed database for articles published between 1 January 1990 and 31 May 2020. Results: There is no broad consensus on the value of imaging in patients with typical OA presentation. If imaging is required, current evidence and clinical guidelines support the use of radiography and MRI as first- and second-line diagnostic modalities respectively. Since radiographic OA features have limited sensitivity and do not manifest in early stages, MRI is the preferred option for whole-joint evaluation in OA research. Discrepancies exist regarding the use of alternative imaging modalities including ultrasound, computed tomography and nuclear medicine. Conclusion: Radiography and MRI are the imaging modalities of choice. Other modalities have their respective advantages, and more research is warranted for the standardisation of image acquisition and interpretation methodology, in order to evaluate their validity, reliability and responsiveness in OA research.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/309548
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 1.5
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.560
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLee, Lok Sze-
dc.contributor.authorChan, Ping Keung-
dc.contributor.authorFung, Wing Chiu-
dc.contributor.authorChan, Vincent Wai Kwan-
dc.contributor.authorYan, Chun Hoi-
dc.contributor.authorChiu, Kwong Yuen-
dc.date.accessioned2021-12-29T07:02:41Z-
dc.date.available2021-12-29T07:02:41Z-
dc.date.issued2021-
dc.identifier.citationMusculoskeletal Care, 2021, v. 19, n. 3, p. 363-374-
dc.identifier.issn1478-2189-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/309548-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common and debilitating degenerative joint diseases worldwide. While radiography is the most commonly used imaging modality, it is associated with drawbacks which newer modalities such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound could overcome. Nevertheless, the role of imaging in clinical practice and research in knee OA has not been clearly defined. Furthermore, guidelines on imaging in knee OA from different authoritative bodies have not been compared in previous studies. Therefore, the present review aims to summarise existing evidence and compare guidelines on the use of different imaging modalities in evaluating knee OA. Methods: This is a narrative review based on a search of published clinical guidelines and the PubMed database for articles published between 1 January 1990 and 31 May 2020. Results: There is no broad consensus on the value of imaging in patients with typical OA presentation. If imaging is required, current evidence and clinical guidelines support the use of radiography and MRI as first- and second-line diagnostic modalities respectively. Since radiographic OA features have limited sensitivity and do not manifest in early stages, MRI is the preferred option for whole-joint evaluation in OA research. Discrepancies exist regarding the use of alternative imaging modalities including ultrasound, computed tomography and nuclear medicine. Conclusion: Radiography and MRI are the imaging modalities of choice. Other modalities have their respective advantages, and more research is warranted for the standardisation of image acquisition and interpretation methodology, in order to evaluate their validity, reliability and responsiveness in OA research.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofMusculoskeletal Care-
dc.subjectclinical guidelines-
dc.subjectimaging-
dc.subjectknee osteoarthritis-
dc.titleImaging of knee osteoarthritis: A review of current evidence and clinical guidelines-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/msc.1536-
dc.identifier.pmid33387447-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85099222696-
dc.identifier.volume19-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.spage363-
dc.identifier.epage374-
dc.identifier.eissn1557-0681-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000604060700001-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats