4.5 Article

Coronary heart disease is associated with a worse clinical outcome of hand osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study

期刊

RMD OPEN
卷 3, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2016-000344

关键词

-

资金

  1. Servier Laboratories

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine whether cardiometabolic factors are associated with hand osteoarthritis (HOA) symptoms, radiographic severity and progression in a post hoc analysis of the phase III Strontium ranelate Efficacy in Knee OsteoarthrItis triAl (SEKOIA) trial, designed to determine the effect of strontium ranelate on knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: Among the 1683 patients randomised in the SEKOIA study, 869 with radiographic HOA at baseline (rHOA >= 2 joints with Kellgren-Lawrence grade >= 2) were included in a cross-sectional analysis. For longitudinal study, we included only the 307 patients with rHOA at baseline from the placebo group. We evaluated whether baseline symptomatic HOA, radiographic severity and clinical and rHOA progression were associated with coronary heart disease and/or metabolic diseases (obesity, diabetes and hypertension, dyslipidaemia) by multivariate regression analysis. Results: At baseline, 869 patients (72% women) were included in the cross-sectional analysis; 26% were symptomatic. On multivariate analysis, symptomatic HOA was associated with coronary heart disease (OR 3.59, 95% CI (1.78 to 7.26)) but not metabolic diseases. After a mean follow-up of 2.6 years, for the 307 participants in the placebo group, on multivariate analysis, worse clinical HOA outcome was associated with coronary heart disease (OR 2.91, 95% CI (1.02 to 8.26)). The slow radiographic progression did not allow for revealing any associated factors. Conclusions: Symptomatic HOA and worse HOA clinical course are associated with coronary heart disease. These results strengthen the systemic component of HOA and the association between OA pain and cardiac events. Trial registration number: ISRCTN41323372.

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

4.5
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