4.6 Review

Osteoarthritis Bone Marrow Lesions

期刊

OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE
卷 31, 期 1, 页码 11-17

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2022.09.007

关键词

Bone-marrow-lesion; Magnetic-resonance-imaging; Pain; Disease-modifying-osteoarthritis-drugs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Assessment and treatment of Bone Marrow Lesions (BMLs) have the potential to significantly improve the lives of people with osteoarthritis (OA). This review examines the characteristics of OA-BMLs, their diagnosis and measurement, and their associations with pain and OA structural progression. The article discusses the factors contributing to BML pathogenesis and the potential of interventions targeting BMLs to reduce pain and slow down OA progression. The evaluation methods for BMLs and their usefulness in identifying individuals at risk and evaluating treatment responses are critically appraised.
Assessment and treatment of Bone Marrow Lesions (BMLs) could ultimately make step changes to the lives of people with osteoarthritis (OA). We here review the imaging and pathological characteristics of OA-BMLs, their differential diagnosis and measurement, and cross-sectional and longitudinal associa-tions with pain and OA structural progression. We discuss how biomechanical and cellular factors may contribute to BML pathogenesis, and how pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions that target BMLs might reduce pain and OA structural progression. We critically appraise semiquantitative and quantitative methods for assessing BMLs, and their potential utilities for identifying people at risk of symptomatic and structural OA progression, and evaluating treatment responses. New interventions that target OA-BMLs should both confirm their importance, and reduce the unacceptable burden of OA. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Osteoarthritis Research Society International. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据