Hip osteoarthritis – special features of pathogenesis, clinical course and imaging
PDF EN
PDF BG (Български)

Keywords

Hip osteoarthritis, diagnosis, pathogenesis

How to Cite

Sapundzhiev, L., Sapundzhieva, T., & Klinkanov, K. (2021). Hip osteoarthritis – special features of pathogenesis, clinical course and imaging. Rheumatology (Bulgaria), 29(2), 15-39. https://doi.org/10.35465/29.2.2021.pp15-39

Abstract

Hip osteoarthritis - (HOA), is the third prevalent OA location after the knee and hands joints.  НОА trials  are still paying a debt to society. Actually, they have been staying for years far behind the trials on knee osteoarthritis (KOA) , probably because of the higher incidence of KOA and/or of the easier clinical and radiographic examination of the knee, as well as because of its accessibility to clinical interventions. In the present review a detailed analysis is performed , concerning the role and the interactions between systemic and local factors, regarding the aetiology and pathogenesis of НОА, the methods and tools for a clinical and radiographic definition of the disease; the evaluation and follow-up  of the clinical and radiographic disease progression ; formation of the clinical-radiographic subpopulations and figuring out the basics of designing and performing of future studies on HOA.

https://doi.org/10.35465/29.2.2021.pp15-39
PDF EN
PDF BG (Български)

References

  1. Dieppe, P. Developments in Osteoarthritis, - Rheumatology, 20, 2011, №2, 245- 247.
  2. Murphy, L.B. et al. One in four people may develop symptomatic hip osteoarthritis in hisor her lifetime.- Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 18, 2010, № 11,1372–1379.
  3. Yuqing, Z. and J.M. Jordan. Epidemiology of Osteoarthritis.- Clin Geriatr Med, 26, 2010 № 3, 355-369. Doi: 10.1016/j.cger.2010.03.001.
  4. Felson, D.T. et al. Osteoarthritis: new insights. Part 1: the disease and its risk factors.- Ann InternMed,133, 2000, №8, 635–646.
  5. Nicholas, J. et al. Hip Osteoarthritis: Etiopathogenesis and Implications for Management.- Adv Ther, 33, 2016,1921–1946. DOI 10.1007/s12325-016-0409-3.
  6. Klaue, K., C.W. Durnin, R. Ganz . The acetabular rim syndrome. A clinical presentation of dysplasia of the hip.- J Bone Jt Surg Br,73,1991, № 3,423–429.
  7. Sandell, L.J. Etiology of osteoarthritis: genetics andsynovial joint development.- Nat Rev Rheumatol.,8, 2012, №2, 77–89.
  8. Lane, N.E. et al. Association of mild acetabular dysplasia with an increased risk of incident hip osteoarthritis in elderly white women: the study of osteoporotic fractures.- Arthritis Rheum, 43, 2000, №2, 400–404.
  9. Ganz, R. et al. Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip. -Clin Orthop Relat Res, 417, 2003, 112–120.
  10. Ganz, R. Et al. The etiology of osteoarthritis of the hip: an integrated mechanical concept.- Clin Orthop Relat Res, 466, 2008, №2, 264–272
  11. Lequesne, M., J. Malghem, E. Dion. The normal hip joint space: variations in width, shape, and architecture on 223 pelvic radiographs.- Ann Rheum Dis ,2004; 63, 1145–1151. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.018424.
  12. Loureiro, A, P.M. Mills, R.S.Barrett. Muscle weakness in hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review.- Arthritis Care Res,65, 2013 №3, 340–352.
  13. Jiang, L. et al. The relationship between body mass index and hip osteoarthritis: asystematic review and meta-analysis.- Jt Bone Spine, 78, 2011 №2,150–155.
  14. MacGregor, A.J. et al. The genetic contribution to radiographic hip osteoarthritis in women: results of a classic twin study.- Arthritis Rheum, 43, 2000, №11,2410–2416.
  15. Lievense, A.M. et al. Prognostic factors of Progress of Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.- Arthritis & Rheumatism (Arthritis Care & Research), 47, 2002, No. 5, 556–562. DOI 10.1002/art.10660.
  16. Wright, A.A., C. Cook, J.H. Abbot. Variables associated with the progression of hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review. – Arthritis Care Res, 61, 2009, №7, 925-936.
  17. Altman, R et al. American College of Rheumatology subcommittee for osteoarthritis - The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. - Arthritis Rheum, 34, 1991, №5, 505-514.
  18. Lequesne, M. Coxarthrosis and Rapid destructive coxarthrosis –clinical definition.- Rheumatologie, 1970, №22,51-63.
  19. Georg, V. et al. A textbook of Musculoskeletal examination and joint injection techniques. MOSBI ELSEVIER , 2016.
  20. Cibulka, M.T. et al. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Hip Pain and Mobility Deficits.- J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, 39, 2009, №4, 1-47.
  21. Nevitt, M.C et al. Radiographic osteoarthritis of the hip and Bone Mineral Density.- Arthritis Rheum, 38, 1995, №7, 907-916.
  22. Lawrence, JjS., J.M. Bremner, F. Bier. Osteo-arthrosis. Prevalence in the population and relationship between symptoms and X-ray changes.- Ann Rheum Dis, 25, 1966, № 1, 1–24.
  23. Kellgren, J.H., J.S. Lawrence. Radiological assessment of osteoarthrosis. -Ann Rheum Dis, 16, 1957, № 4, 494–502.
  24. Croft, P. et al. D. Defining osteoarthritis of the hip for epidemiologic studies. -Am J Epidemiology, 132, 1990, № 3, 514–22.
  25. Altman, R. D., G. E. Gold. Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis, revised.- Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 2007,15, Suppl.A1-A56. Doi:10.1016/j.joca.2006.11.009.
  26. Singh, M., A.R. Nagrath, P.S. Maini. Changes in trabecular pattern of the upper end of femur as an index of osteoporosis.- J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1970, 53,1063-1067.
  27. Altman, D. A. et al. Measurement of structural progression in osteoarthritis of the hip: Barcelona consensus group. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 12, 2004, №7, 515-524.
  28. Conrozier, T. et al. Quantitative measurement of joint space narrowing progression in hip osteoarthritis: a longitudinal retrospective study of patients treated by total hip arthroplasty. Br J Rheumatol, 37, 1998, №9, 961-968. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/37.9.961
  29. Lanyon, P. et al. Age and sex differences in hip joint space among asymptomatic subjects without structural change: implications for epidemiologic studies.- Arthritis Rheum, 48, 2003, № 4,1041–1046.
  30. Auleley, G.-R et al. Radiographic assessment of hip osteoarthritis progression: impact of reading procedures for longitudinal studies. – Ann Rheum Dis 2000, №59:422-427.
  31. Reijman, M. et al. Validity and reliability of three definitions of hip osteoarthritis: cross sectional and longitudinal approach. –Ann Rheum Dis 2004, № 63:1427-1433. doi:10.1136/ard.2003.016477.
  32. Dougados, M. et al. Radiological progression of hip osteoarthritis: definition, risk factors and correlations with clinical status. – Ann Rheum Dis 1996, № 55, 356-362.
  33. Ledingham, J. et al. Radiographic patterns and associations of osteoarthritis of the hip. – Ann Rheum Dis 1992, № 51,1111-1116.
  34. Ledingham, J. et al. Radiographic progression of hospital referred osteoarthritis of the hip. – Ann Rheum Dis 1993, № 52, 263-267.
  35. A. M. Lievense, S. M. A. Bierma-Zeinstra, A. P Verhagen, J. A. N. Verhaar, B. W. Koes Prognostic factors of Progress of Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.- Arthritis & Rheumatism (Arthritis Care & Research), 47, 2002, № 5, 556–562. DOI 10.1002/art.10660.
  36. Wright, A.A., C. Cook, J.H. Abbot. Variables associated with the progression of hip osteoarthritis: A systematic review. – Arthritis Care Res, 61,2009, №7, 925-936.
  37. Teirlinch, C.H. et al. Prognostic factor of progression of osteoarthritis of the hip: a systematic review. - Arthritis Research & Therapy, 2019, 21, 192-211.
  38. Siebuhr, A.S. et al. Biomarkers of cartilage and surrounding joint tissue.- Biomark Med, 2014, 8(5).https://doi.org./10.2217/bmm.13.144
  39. Arends,R.H.G.P. et al. Identification of serological biomarkerprofiles associated with total joint replacement in osteoarthritis patients.- Osteoarthritis Cartilage,25, 2017, №6, 866-877.
  40. Karsdal,M.A. et al. Serological biomarker profiles of rapidly progressive osteoarthritis in tanezumab-treated patients.- Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 27, 2019, №3, 484-492.
  41. Altman, Roy, et al. Design and conduct of clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis: Recommendations from a task force of the Osteoarthritis Research Society: Results from a workshop.- Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 4,1996, №4, 217-243. doi: 10.1016/s1063-4584(05)80101-3.
  42. Crichton N. Visual analogue scale [VAS].- J Clin Nursр 10, 2001, №5, 697-706.
  43. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument formeasuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of thehip or knee.- J Rheumatol,15,1988, № 12,1833–40.
  44. Stucki, G. et al. Comparison of the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index and aself-report format of the self-administered Lequesne–Algofunctional index in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis.-Osteoarthritis and cartilage, 6, 1998, №2, 79-86.
  45. Lequesne, M.G., Mery, C., Samson, M., et al. Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Validation- value in comparison with other assessment tests. - Scand J Rheumatol Suppl, 1987, Suppl.65, 85-89.
  46. Lequesne, M.G. The algofunctional indices for hip and knee osteoarthritis. - J Rheumatol, 24, 1997, № 4,779-781.
  47. Nilsdotter, A., An Bremander. Measures of Hip Functions and Symptoms.- Arthritis Care & Research, 63, 2011, № S11, Suppl.S200-S207 doi:10.1002/acr.20549
  48. Harris, W.H. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation.- J Bone Joint Surg Am,51, 1969, №4, 737-755.
  49. Hoeksma, H.L.et al. Comparison of the responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score with generic measures for hip function in osteoarthritis of the hip. Ann Rheum Dis, 62 2003, №10,935–938.
  50. Klassbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: an extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol,32, 2003, №1, 46–51.
  51. Patrick,D.L., R.A. Deyo. Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Med Care, 27, 1989, 3Suppl., S217-S232.
  52. Bonnie, B., F.F.James. The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress,and documentation.- The Journal of rheumatology, 30, 2003, №1, 67-178.
  53. Pham, T. et al. OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited.- Osteoarthritis and Cartilage,12, 2004, №5, 389-399. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2004.02.001.
  54. Tubach, F. et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement.- Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 64, 2005, №1, 29-33.
  55. Lequesne, M., J. Malghem, F. Dion. The normal hip joint space: variations in width, shape, and architecture on 223 pelvic radiographs.-Ann Rheum Dis, 2004, 63, 1145-1151.doi:101136/ard.2003018424.
  56. Solomon, L. Patterns of osteoarthritis of the hip.- J Bone Joint Surg Br 58,1976, №2, 176–183. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.58B2.932079.
  57. Bombelli R. Osteoarthritis of the hip: classification and pathogenesis, the role of osteotomy as a consequent therapy, 2nd ed. Berlin, Springer,1983.
  58. Flanagan, J. et al. Intraarticular injection for pain relief in patients awaiting hip replacement.- Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 70, 1988, № 70, 156-157.
  59. Plant, M.J. et al. Radiographic patterns and response to corticosteroid hip injection.- Ann Rheum Dis, 1997, 56, 476-80.
  60. Hochberg,M.C. et al. When is Osteonecrosis Not Osteonecrosis?- Arthritis & Rheumatology, 68, 2016, No.2, 382–391. DOI 10.1002/art.39492.
  61. Conrozier, T. et al. Quantitative measurement of joint space narrowing progression in hip osteoarthritis: a longitudinal retrospective study of patients treated by total hip arthroplasty.- Br J Rheumatol, 37, 1998, №9,961-968. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/37.9.961.
  62. Betancourt, M.C. et al. Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry analysis contributes to the prediction of hip osteoarthritis progression. Arthritis Res Ther,11,2009, R162.
  63. Betancourt, M.C. et al. Bone Parameters Acros Different Types of Hip Osteoarthritis and Their Relationship to Osteoporotic Fracture Risk.- Arthritis & Rhumatism,65, 2013, №3, 693-700.
  64. Bergink,A.P. et al. A Bone Mineral Density and Fractures Related to the Incidence and Progression of Radiographic Osteoarthritis of the Knee, Hip and the Hand in Elderly Men and Women? The Roterdam Study. - Arthritis & Rheumatology,71 2019, №3, 361-369. Doi: 10.1002/art.40735.
  65. Conrozier, T, et al. Epidemiological, clinical, biological and radiological differences between atrophic and hypertrophic patterns ofhip osteoarthritis: a case-control study.- Clin Exp Rheumatol, 22, 2004, №4, 403–408.
  66. Conrozier, T. et al. Differences in biomarkers of type II collagen in atrophic and hypertrophic osteoarthritis of the hip: implications for the differing pathobiologies. Osteoarthritis and Cartilag, 15, 2007, №4, 462-467. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2006.09.002.
  67. Bierma-Zeinstra, S., A. P. Verhagen. Osteoarthritis subpopulation and implication for clinical trial design.- Arthritis Research & Therapy,13, 2011, №, 213-221.
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.