Objective
Studies of previous cohorts have demonstrated an association between a status of overweight/obesity and the presence of knee and hand osteoarthritis (OA). However, no data on the effect of ...these factors on the OA burden are available. The aim of the present study was to analyze the effect of being overweight or obese on the incidence of routinely diagnosed knee, hip, and hand OA.
Methods
The study was conducted in a population‐based cohort using primary care records from the Sistema d'Informació per al Desenvolupament de l'Investigació en Atenció Primària database (>5.5 million subjects, covering >80% of the population of Catalonia, Spain). Participants were subjects ages ≥40 years who were without a diagnosis of OA on January 1, 2006 and had available body mass index (BMI) data. All subjects were followed up from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2010 or to the time of loss to follow‐up or death. Measures included the World Health Organization categories of BMI (exposure), and incident clinical diagnoses of knee, hip, or hand OA according to International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes.
Results
In total, 1,764,061 subjects were observed for a median follow‐up period of 4.45 years (interquartile range 4.19–4.98 years). Incidence rates (per 1,000 person‐years at risk) of knee, hip, and hand OA were 3.7 (99% confidence interval 99% CI 3.6–3.8), 1.7 (99% CI 1.7–1.8), and 2.6 (99% CI 2.5–2.7), respectively, among subjects in the normal weight category, and 19.5 (99% CI 19.1–19.9), 3.8 (99% CI 3.7–4.0), and 4.0 (99% CI 3.9–4.2), respectively, in those with a classification of grade II obesity. Compared to subjects with normal weight, being overweight or obese increased the risk of OA at all 3 joint sites, especially at the knee. A status of overweight, grade I obesity, and grade II obesity increased the risk of knee OA by a factor of 2‐fold, 3.1‐fold, and 4.7‐fold, respectively.
Conclusion
Being overweight or obese increases the risk of hand, hip, and knee OA, with the greatest risk in the knee, and this occurs on a dose‐response gradient of increasing BMI.
Summary Background Total joint replacements for end-stage osteoarthritis of the hip and knee are cost-effective and demonstrate significant clinical improvement. However, robust population based ...lifetime-risk data for implant revision are not available to aid patient decision making, which is a particular problem in young patient groups deciding on best-timing for surgery. Methods We did implant survival analysis on all patients within the Clinical Practice Research Datalink who had undergone total hip replacement or total knee replacement. These data were adjusted for all-cause mortality with data from the Office for National Statistics and used to generate lifetime risks of revision surgery based on increasing age at the time of primary surgery. Findings We identified 63 158 patients who had undergone total hip replacement and 54 276 who had total knee replacement between Jan 1, 1991, and Aug 10, 2011, and followed up these patients to a maximum of 20 years. For total hip replacement, 10-year implant survival rate was 95·6% (95% CI 95·3–95·9) and 20-year rate was 85·0% (83·2–86·6). For total knee replacement, 10-year implant survival rate was 96·1% (95·8–96·4), and 20-year implant survival rate was 89·7% (87·5–91·5). The lifetime risk of requiring revision surgery in patients who had total hip replacement or total knee replacement over the age of 70 years was about 5% with no difference between sexes. For those who had surgery younger than 70 years, however, the lifetime risk of revision increased for younger patients, up to 35% (95% CI 30·9–39·1) for men in their early 50s, with large differences seen between male and female patients (15% lower for women in same age group). The median time to revision for patients who had surgery younger than age 60 was 4·4 years. Interpretation Our study used novel methodology to investigate and offer new insight into the importance of young age and risk of revision after total hip or knee replacement. Our evidence challenges the increasing trend for more total hip replacements and total knee replacements to be done in the younger patient group, and these data should be offered to patients as part of the shared decision making process.
Risks and Benefits of Bisphosphonate Therapies Reyes, Carlen; Hitz, Mette; Prieto-Alhambra, Daniel ...
Journal of cellular biochemistry,
January 2016, Letnik:
117, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Objective
To estimate the risk of developing comorbidities in patients after physician‐diagnosed knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA).
Methods
This was a cohort study using Swedish longitudinal health ...care register data; we studied residents in the Skåne region age ≥35 years on January 1, 2010 who were free from diagnosed hip or knee OA (n = 548,681). We then identified subjects with at least 1 new diagnosis of knee or hip OA (incident OA) between 2010 and 2017 (n = 50,942 considered exposed). Subjects without diagnosed OA were considered unexposed. From January 2010 both unexposed and exposed subjects were observed for the occurrence of 18 different predefined comorbidities until either relocation outside of the region, death, occurrence of the comorbidity, or December 2017, whichever came first. We calculated unadjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and adjusted HRs of comorbidities using Cox models with knee and hip OA as time‐varying exposures.
Results
Subjects with incident knee or hip OA had 7% to 60% higher adjusted HRs (range 1.07–1.60) of depression, cardiovascular diseases, back pain, and osteoporosis than individuals without an OA diagnosis. An increased risk of diabetes mellitus was found only for knee OA (adjusted HR 1.19 95% confidence interval 1.13–1.26). For the rest of the diagnoses, we found either no increased risk or estimates with wide confidence intervals, excluding clear interpretations of the direction or size of effects.
Conclusion
Incident physician‐diagnosed knee and hip OA is associated with an increased risk of depression, cardiovascular diseases, back pain, osteoporosis, and diabetes mellitus. However, the latter was only found for knee OA.
Objective
To estimate the costs of primary hip and knee replacement in individuals with osteoarthritis up to 2 years postsurgery, compare costs before and after the surgery, and identify predictors ...of hospital costs.
Methods
Patients age ≥18 years with primary planned hip or knee replacements and osteoarthritis in England between 2008 and 2016 were identified from the National Joint Registry and linked with Hospital Episode Statistics data containing inpatient episodes. Primary care data linked with hospital outpatient records were also used to identify patients age ≥18 years with primary hip or knee replacements between 2008 and 2016. All health care resource use was valued using 2016/2017 costs, and nonparametric censoring methods were used to estimate total 1‐year and 2‐year costs.
Results
We identified 854,866 individuals undergoing hip or knee replacement. The mean censor‐adjusted 1‐year hospitalization costs for hip and knee replacement were £7,827 (95% confidence interval 95% CI 7,813, 7,842) and £7,805 (95% CI 7,790, 7,818), respectively. Complications and revisions were associated with up to a 3‐fold increase in 1‐year hospitalization costs. The censor‐adjusted 2‐year costs were £9,258 (95% CI 9,233, 9,280) and £9,452 (95% CI 9,430, 9,475) for hip and knee replacement, respectively. Adding primary and outpatient care, the mean total hip and knee replacement 2‐year costs were £11,987 and £12,578, respectively.
Conclusion
There are significant costs following joint replacement. Revisions and complications accounted for considerable costs and there is a significant incentive to identify best approaches to reduce these.
PDF
