ArticleOsteoarthritis and cartilage open2025
Cartilage loss is greater in knees with virtual joint replacement status than in matched controls without.
Article in Osteoarthritis and cartilage open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in cartilage imaging techniques.Nature reviews. Rheumatology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We examined whether the trajectory of femorotibial cartilage loss differs between knees meeting a clinically defined virtual knee replacement (vKR) status based on patient-reported outcomes vs. those with low probability. Design: vKR cases (highest 10 % of probabilities for having surgical KR) were selected using knee pain and quality of life criteria, developed from knees with actual KR. Knees reaching such symptom state at 48 months (M) follow-up (vKR case 60 M) were matched 1:1 with vKR controls (lowest 20 % probability) by sex, age, and baseline radiographic status. Of 65 knees displaying vKR case status at 60 M; 33 maintained or increased pain and QOL levels at 72 M (vKR+/+); 32 did not (vKR+/-). The thickness of medial and lateral tibial and femoral cartilages was determined from MRI, at up to five annual visits prior to 60 M. Results: vKR case knees displayed substantially greater central medial femorotibial compartment cartilage thickness loss 2 years prior to reaching case status (-151 ± 337 [mean ± SD] vs. -38 ± 249 μm; odds ratio [OR] 1.95 (95 % confidence interval: 1.23-3.08). Cartilage loss did not apparently differ between vKR+/+ and vKR +/- knees (p = 0.73). Conclusions: Substantially greater cartilage thickness loss was detected in knees reaching vKR case status defined by patient-reported clinical criteria vs. vKR controls. This was found independently of whether this status was maintained at a later annual visit. The observed association suggests greater knee cartilage loss to be prospectively related to worse clinical outcome. It indicates further that the vKR criterion used here may be useful to explore relationships with other structural (imaging) assessments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.