ライフサイエンスコーパス: joint space

1 r transformation directly from work space to joint space.

2 mputations due to sarcomas not involving the joint space.

3 oglobulin (beta2m) as amyloid plaques in the joint space.

4 obulin (beta2m) as amyloid fibers within the joint space.

5 n and white blood cell infiltration into the joint space.

6 absence of infection of the epiphysis or the joint space.

7 cartilaginous metaplasia was observed in the joint space.

8 ction introduce the needle directly into the joint space.

9 ontributed substantially to narrowing of the joint space.

10 ture articular surface but not in the future joint space.

11 ny outgrowths or osteophyte formation within joint space.

12 of calcium pyrophosphate dihydrate in their joint spaces.

13 se in AP laxity had a greater loss of medial joint space (0.22 mm greater, after adjusting for age, s

14 d 15 by > or =2-mm reduction in tibiofemoral joint space), 13 lost cartilage during the first 2 years

15 PB-145 or saline was injected into the joint space 3 times per week for 3 weeks.

16 Consequently, we injected into the articular joint space a defective feline immunodeficiency virus ca

17 neutrophil and monocyte infiltration of the joint space and surrounding musculoskeletal tissue.

18 nitions of progression were based on minimum joint space and total osteophyte score.

19 based methods for measuring finger and wrist joint spaces and estimating erosion volume in patients w

20 le, fat, ligaments and/or tendons, cartilage joint space, and bone.

21 his molecular reversal eliminates phalangeal joint spaces, and consequently, Short digits (Dsh) heter

22 es, particularly in large bones close to the joint spaces, and in synovial membranes and carpal tunne

23 ion, scanning direction, spatial resolution, joint spacing, and tube current, with known measurements

24 t minimal joint space width (JSW) and medial joint space area (JSA), and by medial tibial and femoral

25 The inclusion of a joint space asymmetry measure was associated with knee O

26 al and medial knee JSW was used to determine joint space asymmetry.

27 ntimal cells in the synovium surrounding the joint space became hyperplastic, which further contribut

28 For change in medial joint space, both change in meniscal position and change

29 ownregulated in regions that will become the joint space, but in Dsh/+ mice, Shh bypasses this regula

30 OA, defined as narrowing of the tibiofemoral joint space by 1 grade (semiquantitative scale 0-3) on r

31 t space loss was defined as narrowing of the joint space by 1 grade.

32 appear to be prevented from mineralizing the joint space by IHH-driven surface chondrocyte proliferat

33 the residence time of the polypeptide in the joint space by reducing its clearance.

34 To test whether factor IX within the joint space can protect joints from hemophilic synovitis

35 A patients, varus-valgus laxity increased as joint space decreased (slope -0.34; 95% CI -0.48, -0.19;

36 moment, after excluding knees with the worst joint space grade at baseline (which could not progress)

37 h progression defined as worsening of medial joint space grade); self-reported and performance-based

38 These sex differences in joint space have significant implications in terms of th

39 either injected through the needle into the joint space (intraarticularly) or immediately delivered

40 s correlated with greater subsequent lateral joint space loss (R = 0.35; 95% CI, 0.21-0.47 in dominan

41 Joint space loss and its standardized response mean incr

42 ow lesions (BMLs) are powerful predictors of joint space loss as visualized on radiographs, the natur

43 Although it is not clear whether joint space loss at the hip is a feature of normal aging

44 ression was measured as the amount of medial joint space loss between baseline and followup, using li

45 rity of varus correlated with greater medial joint space loss during the subsequent 18 months (R = 0.

46 The mean +/- SD joint space loss for all knees over 3 years was 0.24 +/-

47 ew provides a sensitive and valid measure of joint space loss in multiyear longitudinal studies of kn

48 , we defined radiographic worsening based on joint space loss in the tibiofemoral joint on either AP/

49 lly guided radiography of the knee to assess joint space loss is an important issue in studies of pro

50 c knee osteoarthritis and the progression of joint space loss is in part a biomechanical process.

51 ing a dichotomous definition of progression (joint space loss of >or=0.6 mm).

52 n knees with OA at baseline, the mean +/- SD joint space loss over 3 years was 0.43 +/- 0.66 mm (P <

53 -flexion radiography protocol to detect knee joint space loss over 3 years.

54 in which AP laxity decreased had less medial joint space loss than did knees without a decrease in AP

55 23-47 months) apart, and the relationship of joint space loss to radiographic and magnetic resonance

56 idth (JSW), the sensitivity for detection of joint space loss using serial films obtained a median of

57 nees with joint space narrowing at baseline, joint space loss was 0.50 +/- 0.67 mm (P < 0.001).

58 Joint space loss was also unaffected by activity.

59 re scored on a 0-3 scale, and progression of joint space loss was defined as narrowing of the joint s

60 Compared with knees without joint space loss, knees with medial compartment loss on

61 In the assessment of TF joint space loss, lateral view radiographs are reliable,

62 steopenia, soft-tissue swelling, and uniform joint space loss.

63 graphic OA, symptomatic OA, and tibiofemoral joint space loss.

64 All definitions except minimum joint space < or =2.5 mm displayed consistent predictive

65 Joint space measurements and scoring of joint space narr

66 s of RHOA: summary OA grade > or =2, minimum joint space (MJS) < or =1.5 mm, definite femoral or acet

67 r; however, error increased substantially at joint spaces narrower than 0.5 mm.

68 ) (beta=-0.22), and the diseased compartment joint space narrowing (dcJSN) score (beta=0.53) were eac

69 tients was defined by the presence of severe joint space narrowing (JSN) (feature grade>or=3), a summ

70 nt reduction in the score for progression of joint space narrowing (JSN) and the total score (a combi

71 ared with ROM, ST decreased the mean rate of joint space narrowing (JSN) in osteoarthritic knees by 2

72 lyze the mechanism underlying the slowing of joint space narrowing (JSN) in patients with knee osteoa

73 The primary outcome measure was joint space narrowing (JSN) in the medial tibiofemoral c

74 ve yielded variable estimates of the rate of joint space narrowing (JSN) in the standing anteroposter

75 The dependent variable was joint space narrowing (JSN) on the plain radiograph (pos

76 OA progression was defined as a change in joint space narrowing (JSN) or osteophyte formation of 1

77 day, the sensitivity of these techniques to joint space narrowing (JSN) over time in subjects with k

78 valence ratios (PRs) of OA, osteophytes, and joint space narrowing (JSN) per quartile of plasma phyll

79 pose To investigate the risk of radiographic joint space narrowing (JSN) progression evaluated in sub

80 adiographic damage score, erosion score, and joint space narrowing (JSN) score for 751 serial films o

81 1 of the following criteria in either hip: a joint space narrowing (JSN) score of >/=3, a Croft summa

82 scores (median 0.84 versus 0.48 units/year), joint space narrowing (JSN) scores (0.42 versus 0.04), a

83 ords greater sensitivity in the detection of joint space narrowing (JSN) than that achieved by conven

84 Osteophytes (OPH) and joint space narrowing (JSN) were also examined separatel

85 The rates of erosion progression and joint space narrowing (JSN) were analyzed using multivar

86 ne reader for Kellgren/Lawrence (K/L) grade, joint space narrowing (JSN), and osteophytes.

87 eproducibility of scoring of erosions (ERO), joint space narrowing (JSN), and their combination (ERO

88 etabular osteophytes, definite superolateral joint space narrowing (JSN), or moderate or worse supero

89 hips free of these findings at baseline: 1) joint space narrowing (JSN), which consisted of either a

90 luated for global OA grade, osteophytes, and joint space narrowing (JSN).

91 n the presence or absence of osteophytes and joint space narrowing (JSN).

92 formation and for 446 knees without baseline joint space narrowing (JSN).

93 ad for Kellgren and Lawrence (K/L) grade and joint space narrowing (JSN; 0-3 scale) in each compartme

94 al progression was defined as an increase in joint space narrowing (on a semiquantitative scale) in k

95 wup, total Sharp scores (TSS), RA-associated joint space narrowing (RA-JSN), and erosions were determ

96 the knee (with weight-bearing) were read for joint space narrowing (scale 0-3), with progression defi

97 s were defined as composite (osteophytes and joint space narrowing [JSN]), atrophic (JSN without oste

98 A susceptibility traits (presence/absence of joint space narrowing [JSN], presence/absence of osteoph

99 ophytes and those using definitions based on joint space narrowing alone.

100 e 0-43), and their average Sharp's score for joint space narrowing and erosions combined was 106 (ran

101 Radiographic scores for joint space narrowing and osteophyte formation in the kn

102 Significant inhibition of joint space narrowing and osteophyte formation was achie

103 extrusion, and of radiographic assessment of joint space narrowing and osteophytes, using MRI as a re

104 efinition of OA included radiologic changes (joint space narrowing and osteophytosis) in the hip join

105 mean increased with the severity of baseline joint space narrowing and with the presence of cartilage

106 3 +/- 0.66 mm (P < 0.001), and in knees with joint space narrowing at baseline, joint space loss was

107 Joint space measurements and scoring of joint space narrowing both demonstrated a difference bet

108 ociated with both radiographic features (any joint space narrowing grade >/= 1) (odds ratio 3.20 [95%

109 Compartments of the knee joint without joint space narrowing had a higher dGEMRIC index than th

110 plications in terms of the major emphasis on joint space narrowing in definitions of hip OA.

111 suprapatellar fullness in 78% of the knees, joint space narrowing in one knee, and no bone abnormali

112 pain and compartment-specific progression of joint space narrowing in patients with knee osteoarthrit

113 attern of, and risk factors for, progressive joint space narrowing in the contralateral hip after THA

114 The rate of progressive joint space narrowing in the contralateral hip after tot

115 risk factors for accelerated progression of joint space narrowing included age, sex, side of surgery

116 al evidence that radiographic progression of joint space narrowing is predictive of cartilage loss as

117 ributable to genetic factors was evident for joint space narrowing of <2.5 mm.

118 were at least 50 years of age and had medial joint space narrowing on posteroanterior semiflexed radi

119 ined the relationship between progression of joint space narrowing on radiographic images and cartila

120 ne and 18 months in the grade of severity of joint space narrowing on radiographs of semiflexed knees

121 3), progression was defined as tibiofemoral joint space narrowing on the 30-month radiograph.

122 was no evidence of an effect of denosumab on joint space narrowing or on measures of RA disease activ

123 t 1 month) and who had no evidence of either joint space narrowing or osteophyte (grade 0, no structu

124 e loss or osteophyte growth if their maximal joint space narrowing or osteophyte growth score increas

125 Classifying disease by the presence of joint space narrowing or osteophytes alone produced simi

126 Our finding of different joint space narrowing prevalence by the 2 IRF grading sc

127 h may predispose patients to more aggressive joint space narrowing remain undefined.

128 or =2 at the tibiofemoral joint and a medial joint space narrowing score of > or =1, and lateral dise

129 P = 0.05), tender joint count (P = 0.02) and joint space narrowing scores (P = 0.05) among patients w

130 ip OA defined as the development of definite joint space narrowing was increased for subjects who wer

131 nt when grade >/=1 osteophytes or grade >/=1 joint space narrowing was observed on skyline views of t

132 tes (in particular, femoral osteophytes) and joint space narrowing would be recommended for most epid

133 either by the presence of osteophytes or by joint space narrowing) and those with osteoporosis or be

134 iographic features (osteophyte formation and joint space narrowing) supported differences in risk fac

135 re and for individual features (osteophytes, joint space narrowing, and subchondral bone sclerosis) i

136 increase over follow-up in medial or lateral joint space narrowing, based on a semi-quantitative grad

137 In the presence of joint space narrowing, it is important to differentiate

138 e of < or = 1.5 mm, definite osteophytes and joint space narrowing, or > or = 3 radiographic features

139 s of the hind limbs were visually scored for joint space narrowing, osteophyte formation, and calcifi

140 ermine the presence of marginal osteophytes, joint space narrowing, subchondral sclerosis, and subcho

141 Joint space narrowing, subchondral sclerosis, and subcho

142 The sensitivity of marginal osteophytes, joint space narrowing, subchondral sclerosis, and subcho

143 The specificity of marginal osteophytes, joint space narrowing, subchondral sclerosis, and subcho

144 diographic features, such as osteophytes and joint space narrowing, were scored from 0 to 3.

145 he Kellgren/Lawrence score, osteophytes, and joint space narrowing.

146 ely influence osteophyte formation more than joint space narrowing.

147 ritability of 58% for OA overall and 64% for joint space narrowing.

148 d treatment and were scored for erosions and joint space narrowing.

149 ults of radiographic scoring of erosions and joint space narrowing.

150 nges of radiographic hip OA characterized by joint space narrowing.

151 e found for the prevalence of grade > or = 2 joint space narrowing.

152 symptoms, comorbidity, body mass index, and joint space narrowing.

153 definitions based on stringent criteria for joint space narrowing.

154 ompartments and were scored for tibiofemoral joint space narrowing.

155 defined as worsening of the grade of medial joint space narrowing.

156 4), and for the presence of osteophytes and joint-space narrowing (range, 0 to 3).

157 Bone erosion and joint-space narrowing were measured radiographically and

158 ed loss of cartilage, as assessed by loss of joint space (odds ratio, 2.3 [Cl, 0.9 to 5.5]) and osteo

159 following 3 findings in either hip: minimum joint space of < or = 1.5 mm, definite osteophytes and j

160 loys Markov chain Monte Carlo to explore the joint space of alignment and phylogeny given molecular s

161 thyleneimine, was injected into the superior joint space of the TMJ in rats.

162 g the 'structural alignment' space, i.e. the joint space of their alignments and common secondary str

163 vitamin D status is unrelated to the risk of joint space or cartilage loss in knee OA.

164 expanded chondrification in the presumptive joint space, suggesting a crucial role for FGF signaling

165 femoral shaft), and cone-beam artifacts (at joint space surfaces oriented along the scanning plane--

166 Test-retest reliability of the TF joint space using the lateral view had a root mean squar

167 ere examined, only leukocyte influx into the joint space was inhibited, and this effect declined with

168 tures (IRFs) of OA were assessed and minimal joint space was measured on paired films.

169 > or =2 mm of narrowing of the tibiofemoral joint space were analyzed by logistic regression models.

170 nterior band of the UCL and the width of the joint space were compared for pitching and nonpitching a

171 verity (beta=0.78), the diseased compartment joint space width (dcJSW) (beta=-0.22), and the diseased

172 s in radiographic medial compartment minimal joint space width (JSW) and medial joint space area (JSA

173 celecoxib and placebo on progressive loss of joint space width (JSW) in patients with knee OA.

174 ic alignment of the joint and measurement of joint space width (JSW) in repeat radiographs acquired o

175 e pain of varying magnitudes on radiographic joint space width (JSW) in the weight-bearing extended a

176 The radiographic joint space width (JSW) of each contralateral hip joint

177 Computerized measurement of changes in joint space width (JSW) on serial radiographs of the kne

178 Minimum joint space width (JSW) was measured at the hip and knee

179 Minimum joint space width (JSW) was measured by metered caliper

180 ith medial compartment knee OA and 2-4 mm of joint space width (JSW), as determined using fluoroscopi

181 /Lawrence (K/L) score, from 5.9% to 9.2% for joint space width (JSW), from 6.6% to 10.8% for sclerosi

182 test-retest precision for measuring minimum joint space width (JSW), the sensitivity for detection o

183 e measured, HA levels correlated with medial joint space width (r = -0.55), but not with the adductio

184 ng computer programs to measure radiographic joint space width and estimate erosion volume in the han

185 ignificantly decrease the rate of decline in joint space width as well as improve pain scores compare

186 hy, including advances in the technology for joint space width assessment, will be discussed.

187 nee pain), general bone mineral content, and joint space width at baseline were no more effective tha

188 The joint space width at rest was 2.8 mm +/- 1.0 in the pitc

189 Serum HA levels correlate with joint space width but not with the adduction moment.

190 ed as either a reduction in the tibiofemoral joint space width by at least 2 mm or total knee replace

191 ized, magnification-corrected measurement of joint space width greatly improves the feasibility of di

192 To measure the joint space width in the finger and wrist joints of RA p

193 months of treatment, the mean +/- SD loss of joint space width in the index knee in the doxycycline g

194 = 0.68 and r = 0.60, respectively), and with joint space width in the left and right knees (r = -0.45

195 Standardized techniques for measuring joint space width in the medial tibiofemoral compartment

196 The computer-based method for measuring joint space width is more discriminant than the semiquan

197 was evaluated using repeat radiographs, with joint space width measured using electronic calipers.

198 is study was to determine whether changes in joint space width occur with age, and whether there are

199 In 3 sets of duplicate measurements of joint space width on 79, 48, and 48 finger and wrist joi

200 was assessed by measurement of the narrowest joint space width on radiographs of knees in a fluorosco

201 Decreasing the simulated joint space width to 0.5 mm caused slight increases in e

202 The minimum medial joint space width was also measured manually (standard e

203 Hand joint space width was measured using an automated, compu

204 When stress was applied, however, the joint space width was significantly greater in the pitch

205 Finally, changes in joint space width were not different between the groups.

206 d to computerize measurement of tibiofemoral joint space width will introduce significant (and probab

207 croiliitis, such as sclerosis, change in the joint space width, erosions and ankylosis.

208 o choosing the contrast agent concentration, joint space width, scanning direction, and spatial resol

209 of quantitative measurements of tibiofemoral joint space width, the surrogate for thickness of articu

210 kness, bone marrow lesions, and radiographic joint space width.

211 b time, WOMAC pain and stiffness scores, and joint space width.

212 tion moment, there was a 0.63-mm decrease in joint space width.

213 the Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade and medial joint space width.

214 we here focused on radiographically measured joint-space width (JSW), a proxy for cartilage thickness

215 rying simulated cartilage thicknesses and 10 joint space widths were assessed.

216 so have a significant progressive decline in joint space with age that is not seen in men.

217 periarticular soft tissues, bone structures, joint space, with special attention to articular bone su