Radiological glenohumeral osteoarthritis in long-term type 1 diabetes. Prevalence and reliability of three classification systems. The Dialong shoulder study
- 229 Downloads
In the present study, we evaluate the intra- and interrater agreement of radiological glenohumeral OA using three different classification systems and estimate the prevalence of radiological and clinical glenohumeral OA in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM1), for over 45 years and controls (The Dialong study).
Materials and methods
We included 102 patients with DM1 (49% women, mean age, 61.9 years) and 73 controls (57% women, mean age, 62.6 years). Anterior-posterior shoulder radiographs were interpreted by two observers applying the Kellgren–Lawrence (K–L), Samilson–Prieto (S–P) and Samilson–Prieto Allain (S–PA) classifications.
The interrater agreement was moderate (weighted kappa, 0.46 to 0.48) for all classifications and the intrarater agreement mainly substantial (0.48–0.86) for both observers. The agreed prevalence of radiological OA was 26 and 18% (OR 1.6 (0.8 to 3.3), p = 0.22, 44 and 26% (OR 2.2 (1.2 to 4.2), p = 0.02) and 30 and 17% (OR 2.1 (1.0 to 4.5), p = 0.05) for the K–L, S–P and S–PA classifications respectively in the diabetes and control groups. The prevalence of moderate or severe radiological OA was 1 to 6% and clinical OA 1 to 2% with no difference between the groups.
The prevalence of radiological glenohumeral OA was higher in the diabetes group with the Samilson–Prieto classification systems, but not associated with clinical OA. The interrater agreement was moderate. We recommend the Samilson–Prieto Allain classification for glenohumeral OA to avoid interpretation of osteophytes < 1 mm as OA in patient groups with a low pre-test likelihood of glenohumeral OA.
KeywordsShoulder Type 1 diabetes Glenohumeral osteoarthrosis Kellgren–Lawrence classification Samilson–Prieto classification Frozen shoulder HbA1c
The authors would like to acknowledge the staff at the radiological department for all essential help in making this manuscript possible.
Compliance with ethical standards
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- 8.Petersson IF, Boegard T, Saxne T, Silman AJ, Svensson B. Radiographic osteoarthritis of the knee classified by the Ahlback and Kellgren & Lawrence systems for the tibiofemoral joint in people aged 35-54 years with chronic knee pain. Ann Rheum Dis. 1997;56(8):493–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 12.Magnusson K, Bech Holte K, Juel NG, Brox JI, Hagen KB, Haugen IK, et al. Long-term type 1 diabetes is associated with hand pain, disability and stiffness but not with structural hand osteoarthritis features - the Dialong hand study. PLoS One. 2017;12(5):e0177118.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, Bole G, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and therapeutic criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29(8):1039–49.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Bontrager KL, Lampignano J. Bontrager’s handbook of radiographic positioning and techniques. 8th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2013.Google Scholar
- 21.Kiadaliri AA, Lamm CJ, de Verdier MG, Engstrom G, Turkiewicz A, Lohmander LS, et al. Association of knee pain and different definitions of knee osteoarthritis with health-related quality of life: a population-based cohort study in southern Sweden. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2016;14(1):121.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 24.Juel NG, Brox JI, Hellund JC, Holte KB, Berg TJ. The prevalence of radiological glenohumeral osteoarthritis in long-term type 1 diabetes: the Dialong shoulder study. Scand J Rheumatol. 2017:1–6.Google Scholar
- 27.Hayashi D, Xu L, Gusenburg J, Roemer FW, Hunter DJ, Li L, et al. Reliability of semiquantitative assessment of osteophytes and subchondral cysts on tomosynthesis images by radiologists with different levels of expertise. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2014;20(4):353–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar