Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Can bone scintigraphy reflect the progression of osteoarthritis after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty?

  • Sumin Lim,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

    ⨯
  • Tae Hun Kim,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Validation

    Affiliation Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

    ⨯
  • Do Young Park,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Validation

    Affiliations Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea, Cell Therapy Center, Ajou University Medical Center, Suwon, Korea

    ⨯
  • Jong Min Lee,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Resources, Validation

    Affiliation Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

    ⨯
  • Jun Young Chung

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing

    junyoungchung@gmail.com

    Affiliation Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea

    ⨯

Abstract

Background

Bone scintigraphy (BS) has been reported to be a useful predictor of osteoarthritis (OA) progression in primary knee OA. However, no previous studies have explored the relationship between BS and OA progression in the retained compartments after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Thus, we evaluated whether OA progresses to other compartments in patients who undergo UKA and if increased uptake on BS is associated with OA progression in other compartments after UKA.

Methods

A total of 41 patients with knee BS at least five years after UKA were included. Radiographic OA progression in other compartments was assessed by grading and comparing OA severity in each patient using the Kellgren–Lawrence grading system (K-L grade) and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas score. After UKA, the correlation between BS uptake and radiographic OA progression was analyzed in each retained compartment. A correlation analysis was also performed to evaluate the association between BS uptake and OA progression grades.

Results

A significant progression of OA was observed in both contralateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral compartments after UKA at 98.5 ± 26.0 months of follow-up (all p<0.001). No correlation was found between BS uptake and radiographic OA progression nor between BS uptake and radiographic OA progression grade in the contralateral and patellofemoral compartments.

Conclusions

Following UKA, OA progresses in the retained contralateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral compartments over a minimum five-year follow-up period. Thus, BS is ineffective in assessing the progression of OA in these compartments.

Citation: Lim S, Kim TH, Park DY, Lee JM, Chung JY (2023) Can bone scintigraphy reflect the progression of osteoarthritis after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty? PLoS ONE 18(11): e0288616. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616

Editor: Amit Joshi, AKB Center for Arthroscopy, NEPAL

Received: April 20, 2023; Accepted: June 29, 2023; Published: November 8, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Lim et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a widely accepted surgical treatment option for isolated medial or lateral compartment osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. The use of UKA continues to increase, and long-term survival rates have been reported to be highly favorable, with 10-year survival rates of approximately 95% and 20-year survival rates of >90% [1–4]. However, there is a concern about the progression of OA after UKA as it preserves two additional compartments (the contralateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral) after surgery, unlike total knee arthroplasty. Thus, evaluating OA progression in other compartments during the postoperative follow-up period is crucial. The primary causes of UKA failure are aseptic loosening and OA progression [5–9]. The imaging modality options for detecting such complications are narrow as lateral radiographs may show obscuration caused by the implant. Furthermore, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography arthrography are limited by prosthetic interference [10–12].

Bone scintigraphy (BS) reflects alterations in the metabolic activity of the bone and has a unique capability of simultaneously demonstrating metabolically active joints throughout the body, and not just localized joint disease [13, 14]. The progression of OA is associated with high bone turnover, which in turn increases the potential for 99mTechnetium-labelled methylene diphosphonate (99mTc-MDP) binding. Previously, BS was proven to be a predictor of knee OA progression [15–17]. However, the use of BS in patients who have undergone arthroplasty has usually been limited to assessing painful knee arthroplasty due to aseptic loosening or infection [18–21]. Since the knee joint after UKA contains two un-operated compartments, increased uptake on BS confined to un-operated compartments may not be explained solely by such painful complications.

Furthermore, an increased uptake on BS may reflect degenerative changes in the knee [16, 22, 23]; thus, it seems plausible to interpret the uptake in other compartments as a predictor of OA progression after UKA. To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has assessed the relationship between BS and OA progression in other compartments after UKA. Thus, we aimed to evaluate whether OA progresses in other compartments in patients undergoing UKA and whether increased uptake on BS is associated with OA progression in other compartments after UKA. We hypothesized that OA would progress with time and BS would be correlated with the radiographic progression of OA in other compartments after UKA.

Materials and methods

Study design

This was a single-center, retrospective study. All data acquisition and analyses were performed with the approval of our institutional review board (AJOUIRB-DB-2023-073). The data were collected and analyzed in March 2023 after the approval of our institutional review board. Among the patients who received primary UKA at our institution between March 2002 and March 2012, patients who had knee BS at least five years after UKA were included. Patients with inflammatory arthropathy, post-traumatic OA, a history of previous knee operations, and ligament deficiencies were excluded (Fig 1). A single senior surgeon performed all surgeries. BS results of the knee joints were analyzed with the progression of OA on radiograph images evaluated using the Kellgren–Lawrence grade (K-L grade) and Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas score.

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. Flow diagram shows the included patients that met the study criteria.

UKA, unicompartmental knee arthroplasty; BS, bone scintigraphy; OA, osteoarthritis.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.g001

Assessment of radiographic progression of OA in contralateral and patellofemoral compartments.

From our institution’s picture archiving and communication system, plain radiographs taken at the first outpatient visit (usually between four and eight weeks) after surgery and those taken within two months of the BS were chosen for assessment. Radiographs taken for evaluating immediate postoperative status were not used for assessment due to the potential chance that foreign bodies such as dressing materials, staples, and drains could hamper the precise interpretation of OA severity in other compartments. Plain radiographs at follow-up routinely included weight-bearing knee anteroposterior, lateral, and Merchant radiographs used to assess OA severity in the contralateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral compartments. The severity of OA was assessed using the K-L grade (scale ranging from zero to four) [24] and OARSI atlas score (ranging from zero to six) [25]. K-L grade one was defined as doubtful narrowing of joint space and possible osteophytic lipping; grade two, as definite osteophytes and possible narrowing of joint space; grade three, as moderate multiple osteophytes, definite narrowing of joint space, and some sclerosis and possible deformity of bone ends; and grade four, as large osteophytes, marked narrowing of joint space, severe sclerosis, and definite deformity of bone ends [24]. The OARSI atlas score assessed joint space and osteophyte formation independently and scored each between zero to three (zero = none; one = mild; two = moderate; and three = severe), giving a total summary score out of six [26]. OA progression was defined as a K-L grade of one or higher and an OARSI atlas score of two or higher and was classified as "definitely progressed" (when the K-L grade was greater than one and the OARSI atlas score was greater than two), "possibly progressed" (when the K-L grade was equal to one and the OARSI atlas score was equal to two), or “not progressed” (when the K-L grade was lesser than one and the OARSI atlas score was lesser than two) [27, 28].

BS for both knee joints.

Bone scan images of both knees (anteroposterior, posteroanterior, and lateral views) were obtained on a gamma camera (ORBITER, Siemens, Germany) 4 h after injection of 99mTechnetium-labelled 2,3-di carboxy propane-1, 1-diphosphonate (99mTc-DPD) (20mCi). Positive BS uptake was defined as uptake on either the femoral or tibial side of the contralateral compartment or the patellar or trochlear side of the patellofemoral compartment. BS uptake was graded according to the intensity of bone scintigraphic radiolabel retention (zero to two: zero = normal; one = mild; and two = intense) [29].

Statistical analysis.

Statistical analysis was performed using R, version 3.6.3. Spearman correlation analysis was used to assess the relationship between BS uptake and radiographic OA progression. Using Spearman correlation analysis, we also assessed the relationship between the BS uptake grade and radiographic OA progression grade. The level of significance was considered as a value of p<0.05. Each BS image and radiograph were examined by two observers (SL, JML) in a blinded fashion, and intra-observer and inter-observer errors were evaluated using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). Reliability was considered poor when the ICC was < 0.40, fair when the ICC was 0.41–0.59, good when the ICC was 0.60–0.74, and excellent when the ICC was greater than 0.75 [30].

Results

Forty-one patients with a knee joint BS evaluated at least five years after UKA were included (Table 1) in this study. In the contralateral compartment, OA progressed in 21 patients according to the K-L grade and in 15 patients according to the OARSI atlas score. In the patellofemoral compartment, 14 patients showed progression using the K-L grade, while 13 showed OA progression using the OARSI atlas score (Table 2). BS was performed at 98.5 ± 26.0 months after UKA, and uptake was observed in 16 patients in the contralateral and 26 in the patellofemoral compartments (Table 3).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Demographic details of the patients.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.t001

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Changes in radiographic appearance of the contralateral tibiofemoral compartment and patellofemoral joint according to the K-L grade and OARSI score.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.t002

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. Results of bone scan uptake grade in bone scintigraphy after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.t003

Correlation analysis results showed no correlation between BS uptake and radiographic OA progression assessed by the K-L grade and OARSI atlas score in the contralateral (p = 0.457, 0.582) and patellofemoral compartments (p = 0.762, 0.399) (Table 4). Moreover, after analyzing the correlation between radiographic OA progression and BS uptake grade, statistical significance was not found in the contralateral (p = 0.426, 0.639) and patellofemoral compartments (p = 0.948, 0.607) (Table 5).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 4. Correlation analysis between bone scan uptakes and OA progression.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.t004

thumbnail
Download:
Table 5. Correlation analysis between bone scan uptake grades and OA progression grades.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.t005

K-L grade and OARSI atlas score were significantly correlated with each other in both contralateral (rho = 0.600, p<0.001) and patellofemoral compartments (rho = 0.574, p<0.001), indicating OA progression. When the contralateral compartment and patellofemoral joint were analyzed for correlation, the K-L grade and OARSI atlas score showed a significant correlation between OA progression in the contralateral (rho = 0.443, p = 0.004) and patellofemoral compartments (rho = 0.414, p = 0.007). However, BS uptake in the contralateral compartment was not significantly correlated with uptake in the patellofemoral compartment (p = 0.077).

The study results indicated good to excellent consistency in the measurements taken, as the ICC for measurement was in the range of 0.870–0.983 for intra-observer reliability and 0.708–0.829 for inter-observer reliability (Table 6).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 6. Intra-observer and inter-observer ICCs of variable measurement.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0288616.t006

Discussion

In this study, we evaluated whether OA progresses to other compartments in patients who undergo UKA and if increased uptake on BS is associated with OA progression in other compartments after UKA. Our results showed radiographic progression of OA after UKA in 15–21 patients (36.6–51.2%) in the contralateral compartment and 13–14 patients (31.7–34.1%) in the patellofemoral compartment over a minimum follow-up period of five years. There was no significant correlation between radiographic OA progression and BS uptake, nor between radiographic OA progression grade and BS uptake grade.

Several results have been reported regarding OA progression after UKA; Berger et al. [31] concluded that radiographic OA progression was observed in approximately 50% of the patellofemoral and 57% of the contralateral compartments during more than 10 years. Walton et al. [32] reported that definite OA progression was seen in 18–34% of the retained compartments after reviewing 32 lateral UKA cases assessed at five years. According to Misir et al. [27], after an average of 7.41 years of observation following medial UKA, OA progression was observed in 34.9% of the lateral and 45.2% of the patellofemoral compartments andfound no correlation between patellofemoral OA progression and outcome, but lateral OA progression did affect clinical outcomes. Similarly, several studies have reported that mild-to-moderate patellofemoral OA does not affect UKA outcomes, and the indications for UKA have been expanded to include cases with OA and malalignment of the patellofemoral joint [33–36]. The radiographic evaluation in our study showed OA progression of 36.6–51.2% in the contralateral and 31.7–34.1% in the patellofemoral compartments during a mean follow-up of 98.5 ± 26.0 months, similar to previous results. Additionally, Misir et al. [27] reported no correlation between patellofemoral and contralateral OA progression after UKA. However, our study found a significant correlation between the two as measured by radiography in both grading systems, but no correlation with BS uptake was observed. It is known that several factors are associated with the progression of OA after UKA [2, 27, 37, 38]. But there have been few reports regarding relationship OA progression between contralateral and patellofemoral compartment [27]. This study only included patients who had BS after UKA surgery, and the small number of patients may have contributed to the differing results compared to the previous study by Misir et al. Nevertheless, in the future, it is believed that this study can serve as a reference for understanding the relationship of OA progression in the remaining two compartments after UKA.

Most BS in previous studies has been obtained with 99mTc-MDP [16, 17, 21, 39–43], but our institution uses 99mTc-DPD for BS for both knee joints. There was no established superiority between the two agents when comparing bone imaging using each of the agents. Previous studies have shown comparable performance in favor of 99mTc-MDP in various pathologic conditions, including metastasis, rheumatoid arthritis, metabolic diseases, and bone fractures [44, 45]. On the other hand, Buell et al. argued superior bone-to-soft tissue ratios of 99mTc-DPD over 99mTc-MDP for both high- and low-uptake bone [46]. Concerning bone imaging in osteoarthritic conditions, Lee et al. designed an animal (beagle dog) OA model to compare the effect of both agents on BS image quality and time; their results demonstrated that both agents showed similar effects on radioactive uptake ratio and image quality; furthermore, 99mTc-DPD was more efficient than 99mTc-MDP in reducing the overall time of scintigraphy [47].

Furthermore, several studies have shown that BS can provide valuable insights into the disease process of OA. McCrae et al. [17] first reported that BS could detect different scintigraphic abnormalities reflecting various aspects of OA. Some studies have found that BS can help identify early changes in OA and correlate them with its severity [16, 22, 23]. Park et al. [23] showed that BS uptake correlated with articular cartilage degeneration in a histologic study. From a biochemical perspective, OA-related biomarkers such as serum and synovial fluid, cartilage oligomeric matrix protein, and bone sialoprotein have shown a certain correlation with bone scintigraphic findings [13, 48]. In a comparison study using MRI, increased uptake on BS showed good agreement with MRI-detected subchondral lesions [39, 42]. Additionally, there is evidence that BS can predict OA progression [15, 40, 43]; however, some studies have shown that the K-L grading system is better at predicting OA progression compared to BS [40, 43].

But few studies have investigated BS results after UKA. According to Mandegaran et al. [49], BS had low sensitivity and specificity in evaluating aseptic loosening and infections compared to single-photon emission computed tomography. Wong et al. [41] reported that BS was not significantly helpful in identifying loosening or infection in painful mobile-bearing UKA, but it could identify changes in the contralateral and patellofemoral compartments after UKA. In knee OA, the compartment-specific localization and intensity of BS retention are also associated with the localization and severity of radiographic OA [16]. In patients who have undergone UKA surgery, X-ray grading may be limited by post-operative implant interference, but BS uptake can be measured without interference from the implant, thereby having a superior diagnostic ability in post-operative conditions. However, the results of this study showed that there was no correlation between the presence or grading of BS uptake and OA progression, contrary to our hypothesis.

This study had several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, it was retrospectively designed with a relatively small patient group (41 patients), and only mid-term follow-up results could be obtained. Second, OA progression after UKA is affected by the position and alignment of the implant, but this was not evaluated in the study. Third, patient-reported outcomes were not assessed in our study, as the operated compartment primarily has the greatest impact on patient-reported outcomes. Fourth, we included medial and lateral compartment UKA in the study regardless of bearing type, which may cause selection bias. However, to the best of our knowledge, this study was the first to evaluate the value of BS in OA progression in the retained compartments after UKA. Our analysis showed a correlation in OA progression between contralateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral compartments after UKA, which has not been fully explored in the literature. A large-scale, well-designed prospective study may provide more solid evidence on these topics.

Conclusion

Following UKA, OA progresses in the retained contralateral tibiofemoral and patellofemoral compartments over a minimum five-year follow-up period. BS is ineffective in assessing the progression of OA in these compartments.

References

  1. 1. Kim KT, Lee S, Kim JH, Hong SW, Jung WS, Shin WS. The Survivorship and Clinical Results of Minimally Invasive Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty at 10-Year Follow-up. Clin Orthop Surg. 2015;7(2):199–206. pmid:26217466
  2. 2. Vasso M, Antoniadis A, Helmy N. Update on unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: Current indications and failure modes. EFORT Open Rev. 2018;3(8):442–8. Epub 20180801. pmid:30237902; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6134885.
  3. 3. Vasso M, Del Regno C, Perisano C, D’Amelio A, Corona K, Schiavone Panni A. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty is effective: ten year results. Int Orthop. 2015;39(12):2341–6. Epub 20150702. pmid:26130277.
  4. 4. Yoshida K, Tada M, Yoshida H, Takei S, Fukuoka S, Nakamura H. Oxford phase 3 unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in Japan—clinical results in greater than one thousand cases over ten years. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(9 Suppl):168–71. pmid:24099572.
  5. 5. Tay ML, McGlashan SR, Monk AP, Young SW. Revision indications for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2022;142(2):301–14. Epub 20210225. pmid:33630155.
  6. 6. Nassiri M, Quinlan JF, O’Byrne JM. Analysis of 13 early failures of the mobile bearing Oxford phase III unicompartmental knee prosthesis. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology. 2010;20(4):303–7.
  7. 7. Lewold S, Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lidgren L. Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: outcome in 1,135 cases from the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty study. Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica. 1998;69(5):469–74. Epub 1998/12/17. pmid:9855226.
  8. 8. Ko YB, Gujarathi MR, Oh KJ. Outcome of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies between Fixed and Mobile Bearings Focusing on Complications. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2015;27(3):141–8. Epub 20150901. pmid:26389066; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4570948.
  9. 9. Epinette JA, Brunschweiler B, Mertl P, Mole D, Cazenave A, French Society for H, et al. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty modes of failure: wear is not the main reason for failure: a multicentre study of 418 failed knees. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012;98(6 Suppl):S124–30. Epub 20120824. pmid:22926294.
  10. 10. Ho KC, Saevarsson SK, Ramm H, Lieck R, Zachow S, Sharma GB, et al. Computed tomography analysis of knee pose and geometry before and after total knee arthroplasty. J Biomech. 2012;45(13):2215–21. Epub 20120713. pmid:22796002.
  11. 11. Sofka CM, Potter HG. MR imaging of joint arthroplasty. Seminars in Musculoskeletal Radiology. 2002;6(1):79–85. pmid:11917273
  12. 12. Sutter R, Hodek R, Fucentese SF, Nittka M, Pfirrmann CW. Total knee arthroplasty MRI featuring slice-encoding for metal artifact correction: reduction of artifacts for STIR and proton density-weighted sequences. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201(6):1315–24. pmid:24261373.
  13. 13. Addison S, Coleman RE, Feng S, McDaniel G, Kraus VB. Whole-body bone scintigraphy provides a measure of the total-body burden of osteoarthritis for the purpose of systemic biomarker validation. Arthritis and rheumatism. 2009;60(11):3366–73. Epub 2009/10/31. pmid:19877068; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3692562.
  14. 14. Jonsson H, Eliasson GJ, Petursson E. Scintigraphic hand osteoarthritis (OA)—prevalence, joint distribution, and association with OA at other sites. The Journal of rheumatology. 1999;26(7):1550–6. Epub 1999/07/16. pmid:10405944.
  15. 15. Dieppe P, Cushnaghan J, Young P, Kirwan J. Prediction of the progression of joint space narrowing in osteoarthritis of the knee by bone scintigraphy. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 1993;52(8):557–63. Epub 1993/08/01. pmid:8215615; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1005110.
  16. 16. Kraus VB, McDaniel G, Worrell TW, Feng S, Vail TP, Varju G, et al. Association of bone scintigraphic abnormalities with knee malalignment and pain. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 2009;68(11):1673–9. Epub 20081103. pmid:18981032; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3684623.
  17. 17. McCrae F, Shouls J, Dieppe P, Watt I. Scintigraphic assessment of osteoarthritis of the knee joint. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 1992;51(8):938–42. Epub 1992/08/01. pmid:1417117; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1004798.
  18. 18. Claassen L, Ettinger M, Plaass C, Daniilidis K, Calliess T, Ezechieli M. Diagnostic value of bone scintigraphy for aseptic loosening after total knee arthroplasty. Technol Health Care. 2014;22(5):767–73. pmid:25134961.
  19. 19. Klett R, Steiner D, Laurich S, Bauer R, Kordelle J. Evaluation of aseptic loosening of knee prostheses by quantitative bone scintigraphy. Nuklearmedizin. 2008;47(4):163–6. pmid:18690376.
  20. 20. Niccoli G, Mercurio D, Cortese F. Bone scan in painful knee arthroplasty: obsolete or actual examination? Acta Biomed. 2017;88(2S):68–77. Epub 20170607. pmid:28657567; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6179002.
  21. 21. Smith SL, Wastie ML, Forster I. Radionuclide bone scintigraphy in the detection of significant complications after total knee joint replacement. Clinical radiology. 2001;56(3):221–4. Epub 2001/03/15. pmid:11247700.
  22. 22. Buckland-Wright JC, Macfarlane DG, Lynch JA. Sensitivity of radiographic features and specificity of scintigraphic imaging in hand osteoarthritis. Revue du rhumatisme (English ed). 1995;62(6 Suppl 1):14S–26S. Epub 1995/06/01. pmid:7583178.
  23. 23. Park DY, Jin LH, Min BH, Kwack KS, An YS, Kim YJ. Subchondral bone scan uptake correlates with articular cartilage degeneration in osteoarthritic knees. Int J Rheum Dis. 2017;20(10):1393–402. Epub 20160725. pmid:27454909.
  24. 24. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 1957;16(4):494–502. pmid:13498604; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1006995.
  25. 25. Altman RD, Gold GE. Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis, revised. Osteoarthritis and cartilage / OARS, Osteoarthritis Research Society. 2007;15 Suppl A:A1–56. Epub 2007/02/27. pmid:17320422.
  26. 26. Klara K, Collins JE, Gurary E, Elman SA, Stenquist DS, Losina E, et al. Reliability and Accuracy of Cross-sectional Radiographic Assessment of Severe Knee Osteoarthritis: Role of Training and Experience. The Journal of rheumatology. 2016;43(7):1421–6. Epub 20160415. pmid:27084912; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4930693.
  27. 27. Misir A, Uzun E, Kizkapan TB, Gunay AE, Ozcamdalli M, Husrevoglu K. Lateral and patellofemoral compartment osteoarthritis progression after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A five- to 10-year follow-up study. The Knee. 2020;27(4):1135–42. Epub 20200625. pmid:32711874.
  28. 28. Bevers K, Vriezekolk JE, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, den Broeder AA. Ultrasonographic predictors for clinical and radiological progression in knee osteoarthritis after 2 years of follow-up. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2015;54(11):2000–3. Epub 20150623. pmid:26106210.
  29. 29. An YS, Park DY, Min BH, Lee SJ, Yoon JK. Comparison of bone single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT and bone scintigraphy in assessing knee joints. BMC Med Imaging. 2021;21(1):60. Epub 20210326. pmid:33771130; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8004469.
  30. 30. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86(2):420–8. pmid:18839484.
  31. 31. Berger RA, Meneghini RM, Sheinkop MB, Della Valle CJ, Jacobs JJ, Rosenberg AG, et al. The progression of patellofemoral arthrosis after medial unicompartmental replacement: results at 11 to 15 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(428):92–9. pmid:15534526.
  32. 32. Walton MJ, Weale AE, Newman JH. The progression of arthritis following lateral unicompartmental knee replacement. The Knee. 2006;13(5):374–7. Epub 20060728. pmid:16876420.
  33. 33. Berger Y, Ftaita S, Thienpont E. Does Medial Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis Influence Outcome Scores and Risk of Revision After Fixed-bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2019;477(9):2041–7. Epub 2019/05/30. pmid:31140980; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7000094.
  34. 34. Burger JA, Kleeblad LJ, Laas N, Pearle AD. The Influence of Preoperative Radiographic Patellofemoral Degenerative Changes and Malalignment on Patellofemoral-Specific Outcome Scores Following Fixed-Bearing Medial Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019;101(18):1662–9. Epub 2019/10/01. pmid:31567803.
  35. 35. Lim JW, Chen JY, Chong HC, Pang HN, Tay DKJ, Chia SL, et al. Pre-existing patellofemoral disease does not affect 10-year survivorship in fixed bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(6):2030–6. Epub 20181004. pmid:30288570.
  36. 36. Deckard ER, Jansen K, Ziemba-Davis M, Sonn KA, Meneghini RM. Does Patellofemoral Disease Affect Outcomes in Contemporary Medial Fixed-Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty? J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(8):2009–15. Epub 20200307. pmid:32234327.
  37. 37. Pandit H, Spiegelberg B, Clavé A, McGrath C, Liddle AD, Murray DW. Aetiology of lateral progression of arthritis following Oxford medial unicompartmental knee replacement: a case-control study. Musculoskelet Surg. 2016;100(2):97–102. Epub 20160125. pmid:26810974; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4971035.
  38. 38. Murray DW, Goodfellow JW, O’Connor JJ. The Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty: a ten-year survival study. The Journal of bone and joint surgery British volume. 1998;80(6):983–9. Epub 1998/12/16. pmid:9853489.
  39. 39. Boegard T, Rudling O, Dahlstrom J, Dirksen H, Petersson IF, Jonsson K. Bone scintigraphy in chronic knee pain: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Annals of the rheumatic diseases. 1999;58(1):20–6. Epub 1999/05/27. pmid:10343536; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC1752758.
  40. 40. Mazzuca SA, Brandt KD, Schauwecker DS, Buckwalter KA, Katz BP, Meyer JM, et al. Bone scintigraphy is not a better predictor of progression of knee osteoarthritis than Kellgren and Lawrence grade. The Journal of rheumatology. 2004;31(2):329–32. pmid:14760805.
  41. 41. Wong MY, Beadsmoore C, Toms A, Smith T, Donell S. Does 99mTc-MDP bone scintigraphy add to the investigation of patients with symptomatic unicompartmental knee replacement? The Knee. 2012;19(5):592–6. pmid:22004836
  42. 42. Boegard T. Radiography and bone scintigraphy in osteoarthritis of the knee—comparison with MR imaging. Acta radiologica Supplementum. 1998;418:7–37. Epub 1998/10/06. pmid:9759121.
  43. 43. Mazzuca SA, Brandt KD, Schauwecker DS, Katz BP, Meyer JM, Lane KA, et al. Severity of joint pain and Kellgren-Lawrence grade at baseline are better predictors of joint space narrowing than bone scintigraphy in obese women with knee osteoarthritis. The Journal of rheumatology. 2005;32(8):1540–6. pmid:16078332.
  44. 44. Godart G, Durez M, Bevilacqua M, Abramovici J, Robience Y. Technetium-99m MDP vs technetium-99m dicarboxypropane diphosphonate. A clinical comparison in various pathologic conditions. Clinical nuclear medicine. 1986;11(2):92–7. Epub 1986/02/01. pmid:3769350.
  45. 45. Mele M, Conte E, Fratello A, Pasculli D, Pieralice M, D’Addabbo A. Computer analysis of Tc-99m DPD and Tc-99m MDP kinetics in humans: concise communication. Journal Name: J Nucl Med; (United States); Journal Volume: 24:4. 1983:Medium: X; Size: Pages: 334–8. OSTI ID: 5764405. pmid:6834136
  46. 46. Buell U, Kleinhans E, Zorn-Bopp E, Reuschel W, Muenzing W, Moser EA, et al. A comparison of bone imaging with Tc-99m DPD and Tc-99m MDP: concise communication. Journal of nuclear medicine: official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine. 1982;23(3):214–7. Epub 1982/03/01. pmid:6460854.
  47. 47. Lee JY, Lee WG, Kim JH, Kang SS, Bae CS, Koong SS, et al. Comparison of the effect of 99mTc-DPD and 99mTc-MDP on experimentally-induced osteoarthritis in the stifle joint of the dog. In vivo (Athens, Greece). 2005;19(4):781–5. Epub 2005/07/08. pmid:15999549.
  48. 48. Petersson IF, Boegard T, Dahlstrom J, Svensson B, Heinegard D, Saxne T. Bone scan and serum markers of bone and cartilage in patients with knee pain and osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis and cartilage / OARS, Osteoarthritis Research Society. 1998;6(1):33–9. Epub 1998/06/09. pmid:9616437.
  49. 49. Mandegaran R, Agrawal K, Vijayanathan S, Gnanasegaran G. The value of 99mTc-MDP bone SPECT/CT in evaluation of patients with painful knee prosthesis. Nucl Med Commun. 2018;39(5):397–404. pmid:29553970.