Radiographic predictability of cartilage damage in medial ankle osteoarthritis.

摘要

BACKGROUND: Radiographic grading has been used to assess and select between treatment options for ankle osteoarthritis. To use radiographic grading systems in clinical practice and scientific studies one must have reliable systems that predict the fate of the cartilage. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked whether (1) radiographic grading of ankle osteoarthritis is reliable and (2) grading reflects cartilage damage observed during arthroscopy. We then (3) determined the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the radiographic findings. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined 74 ankles with medial osteoarthritis and 24 with normal articular cartilage based on arthroscopy. Arthroscopic findings were graded according to the modified Outerbridge grades and all radiographs were graded using the modified Kellgren-Lawrence, Takakura et al., and van Dijk et al. grading systems. The reliability of each radiographic grading system was evaluated. We correlated the radiographic grades and severity of cartilage damage for each radiographic grading system. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of spurs and joint space narrowing with or without talar tilting then were determined. RESULTS: The interobserver weighted kappa ranged from 0.58 to 0.89 and the intraobserver weighted kappa from 0.51 to 0.85. The correlation coefficients for the Kellgren-Lawrence, Takakura et al., and van Dijk et al. grades were 0.53, 0.42, and 0.42, respectively. Ankles with medial joint space narrowing (Stage 2 of Takakura et al. and van Dijk et al. grades) showed varying severity of cartilage damage. The positive predictive value of cartilage damage increased from 77% for medial joint space narrowing regardless of the presence of talar tilting to 98% for medial joint space narrowing with talar tilting. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest the inclusion of talar tilting in grading schemes enhances the assessment of cartilage damage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, diagnostic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of level of evidence.