Explore the vast range of titles available.

Total joint replacements for end-stage osteoarthritis of the hip and knee are cost-effective and demonstrate significant clinical improvement. However, robust population based lifetime-risk data for implant revision are not available to aid patient decision making, which is a particular problem in young patient groups deciding on best-timing for surgery. We did implant survival analysis on all patients within the Clinical Practice Research Datalink who had undergone total hip replacement or total knee replacement. These data were adjusted for all-cause mortality with data from the Office for National Statistics and used to generate lifetime risks of revision surgery based on increasing age at the time of primary surgery. We identified 63 158 patients who had undergone total hip replacement and 54 276 who had total knee replacement between Jan 1, 1991, and Aug 10, 2011, and followed up these patients to a maximum of 20 years. For total hip replacement, 10-year implant survival rate was 95·6% (95% CI 95·3–95·9) and 20-year rate was 85·0% (83·2–86·6). For total knee replacement, 10-year implant survival rate was 96·1% (95·8–96·4), and 20-year implant survival rate was 89·7% (87·5–91·5). The lifetime risk of requiring revision surgery in patients who had total hip replacement or total knee replacement over the age of 70 years was about 5% with no difference between sexes. For those who had surgery younger than 70 years, however, the lifetime risk of revision increased for younger patients, up to 35% (95% CI 30·9–39·1) for men in their early 50s, with large differences seen between male and female patients (15% lower for women in same age group). The median time to revision for patients who had surgery younger than age 60 was 4·4 years. Our study used novel methodology to investigate and offer new insight into the importance of young age and risk of revision after total hip or knee replacement. Our evidence challenges the increasing trend for more total hip replacements and total knee replacements to be done in the younger patient group, and these data should be offered to patients as part of the shared decision making process. Oxford Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, National Institute for Health Research.

The increasing recognition of sarcopenia, the age-related loss of skeletal muscle mass and function (muscle strength and physical performance), as a determinant of poor health in older age, has emphasized the importance of understanding more about its aetiology to inform strategies both for preventing and treating this condition. There is growing interest in the effects of modifiable factors such as diet; some nutrients have been studied but less is known about the influence of overall diet quality on sarcopenia. We conducted a systematic review of the literature examining the relationship between diet quality and the individual components of sarcopenia, i.e., muscle mass, muscle strength and physical performance, and the overall risk of sarcopenia, among older adults. We identified 23 studies that met review inclusion criteria. The studies were diverse in terms of the design, setting, measures of diet quality, and outcome measurements. A small body of evidence suggested a relationship between “healthier” diets and better muscle mass outcomes. There was limited and inconsistent evidence for a link between “healthier” diets and lower risk of declines in muscle strength. There was strong and consistent observational evidence for a link between “healthier” diets and lower risk of declines in physical performance. There was a small body of cross-sectional evidence showing an association between “healthier” diets and lower risk of sarcopenia. This review provides observational evidence to support the benefits of diets of higher quality for physical performance among older adults. Findings for the other outcomes considered suggest some benefits, although the evidence is either limited in its extent (sarcopenia) or inconsistent/weak in its nature (muscle mass, muscle strength). Further studies are needed to assess the potential of whole-diet interventions for the prevention and management of sarcopenia.

SummaryThis report provides an overview and a comparison of the burden and management of fragility fractures in the largest five countries of the European Union plus Sweden (EU6). In 2017, new fragility fractures in the EU6 are estimated at 2.7 million with an associated annual cost of €37.5 billion and a loss of 1.0 million quality-adjusted life years.IntroductionOsteoporosis is characterized by reduced bone mass and strength, which increases the risk of fragility fractures, which in turn, represent the main consequence of the disease. This report provides an overview and a comparison of the burden and management of fragility fractures in the largest five EU countries and Sweden (designated the EU6).MethodsA series of metrics describing the burden and management of fragility fractures were defined by a scientific steering committee. A working group performed the data collection and analysis. Data were collected from current literature, available retrospective data and public sources. Different methods were applied (e.g. standard statistics and health economic modelling), where appropriate, to perform the analysis for each metric.ResultsTotal fragility fractures in the EU6 are estimated to increase from 2.7 million in 2017 to 3.3 million in 2030; a 23% increase. The resulting annual fracture-related costs (€37.5 billion in 2017) are expected to increase by 27%. An estimated 1.0 million quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were lost in 2017 due to fragility fractures. The current disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 1000 individuals age 50 years or more were estimated at 21 years, which is higher than the estimates for stroke or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The treatment gap (percentage of eligible individuals not receiving treatment with osteoporosis drugs) in the EU6 is estimated to be 73% for women and 63% for men; an increase of 17% since 2010. If all patients who fracture in the EU6 were enrolled into fracture liaison services, at least 19,000 fractures every year might be avoided.ConclusionsFracture-related burden is expected to increase over the coming decades. Given the substantial treatment gap and proven cost-effectiveness of fracture prevention schemes such as fracture liaison services, urgent action is needed to ensure that all individuals at high risk of fragility fracture are appropriately assessed and treated.

Objectives Data on the incidence of symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA) are scarce. We estimated incidence of clinical hip, knee and hand OA, and studied the effect of prevalent OA on joint-specific incident OA. Methods SIDIAP contains primary care records for>5 million people from Catalonia (Spain). Participants aged ≥40 years with an incident diagnosis of knee, hip or hand OA between 2006 and 2010 were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes. Incidence rates and female-to-male rate ratios (RRs) for each joint site were calculated. Age, gender and body mass index-adjusted HR for future joint-specific OA according to prevalent OA at other sites were estimated using Cox regression. Results 3 266 826 participants were studied for a median of 4.45 years. Knee and hip OA rates increased continuously with age, and female-to-male RRs were highest at age 70–75 years. In contrast, female hand OA risk peaked at age 60–64 years, and corresponding female-to-male RR was highest at age 50–55 years. Adjusted HR for prevalent knee OA on risk of hip OA was 1.35 (99% CI 1.28 to 1.43); prevalent hip OA on incident knee OA: HR 1.15 (1.08 to 1.23). Prevalent hand OA predicted incident knee and hip OA: HR 1.20 (1.14 to 1.26) and 1.23 (1.13 to 1.34), respectively. Conclusions The effect of age is greatest in the elderly for knee and hip OA, but around the menopause for hand OA. OA clusters within individuals, with higher risk of incident knee and hip disease from prevalent lower limb and hand OA.

The growing recognition of sarcopenia, the age-related loss of skeletal muscle mass and function, has highlighted the need to understand more about its etiology. Declines in muscle mass and strength are expected aspects of aging, but there is significant variability between individuals in rates of loss. Although some of these differences can be explained by fixed factors, such as sex, much of the remaining variation is unexplained. This has led to increasing interest in the influence of adult lifestyle, particularly in the effects of modifiable factors such as physical activity and diet, and in identifying intervention opportunities both to prevent and manage sarcopenia. A number of trials have examined the separate effects of increased exercise or dietary supplementation on muscle mass and physical performance of older adults, but less is known about the extent to which benefits of exercise training could be enhanced when these interventions are combined. In a comprehensive review of the literature, we consider 17 studies of older adults (≥65 years) in which combined nutrition and exercise interventions were used to increase muscle strength and/or mass, and achieve improvements in physical performance. The studies were diverse in terms of the participants included (nutritional status, degree of physical frailty), supplementation strategies (differences in nutrients, doses), exercise training (type, frequency), as well as design (duration, setting). The main message is that enhanced benefits of exercise training, when combined with dietary supplementation, have been shown in some trials - indicating potential for future interventions, but that existing evidence is inconsistent. Further studies are needed, particularly of exercise training combined with dietary strategies that increase intakes of a range of nutrients, as well as bioactive non-nutrients, to provide the evidence on which public health and clinical recommendations can be based.

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a heterogeneous disease associated with substantial effects on quality of life, and its clinical management is difficult. Among the several available guidelines for the management of knee OA, those from OARSI and ESCEO were updated in 2019. Here, we examine the similarities and differences between these two guidelines and provide a narrative to help guide health-care providers through the complexities of non-surgical management of knee OA. OARSI and ESCEO both recommend education, structured exercise and weight loss as core treatments, topical NSAIDs as first-line treatments and oral NSAIDs and intra-articular injections for persistent pain. Low-dose, short-term acetaminophen, pharmaceutical grade glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate are recommended by ESCEO whereas OARSI strongly recommends against their use (including all glucosamine and chondroitin formulations). Despite this difference, the two guidelines are consistent in the majority of their recommendations and provide useful treatment recommendations for individuals with OA and health-care providers.A working group including authors of the latest OARSI and ESCEO recommendations for the management of knee osteoarthritis and independent experts compare and contrast these guidelines, and provide insights into their differences that could help inform application of the recommendations.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are widely recommended and prescribed to treat pain in osteoarthritis. While measured to have a moderate effect on pain in osteoarthritis, NSAIDs have been associated with wide-ranging adverse events affecting the gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, and renal systems. Gastrointestinal toxicity is found with all NSAIDs, which may be of particular concern when treating older patients with osteoarthritis, and gastric adverse events may be reduced by taking a concomitant gastroprotective agent, although intestinal adverse events are not ameliorated. Cardiovascular toxicity is associated with all NSAIDs to some extent and the degree of risk appears to be pharmacotherapy specific. An increased risk of acute myocardial infarction and heart failure is observed with all NSAIDs, while an elevated risk of hemorrhagic stroke appears to be restricted to the use of diclofenac and meloxicam. All NSAIDs have the potential to induce acute kidney injury, and patients with osteoarthritis with co-morbid conditions including hypertension, heart failure, and diabetes mellitus are at increased risk. Osteoarthritis is associated with excess mortality, which may be explained by reduced levels of physical activity owing to lower limb pain, presence of comorbid conditions, and the adverse effects of anti-osteoarthritis medications especially NSAIDs. This narrative review of recent literature identifies data on the safety of non-selective NSAIDs to better understand the risk:benefit of using NSAIDs to manage pain in osteoarthritis.

Osteoporosis is associated with increased fragility of bone and a subsequent increased risk of fracture. The diagnosis of osteoporosis is intimately linked with the imaging and quantification of bone and BMD. Scanning modalities, such as dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or quantitative CT, have been developed and honed over the past half century to provide measures of BMD and bone microarchitecture for the purposes of clinical practice and research. Combined with fracture prediction tools such as Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) (which use a combination of clinical risk factors for fracture to provide a measure of risk), these elements have led to a paradigm shift in the ability to diagnose osteoporosis and predict individuals who are at risk of fragility fracture. Despite these developments, a treatment gap exists between individuals who are at risk of osteoporotic fracture and those who are receiving therapy. In this Review, we summarize the epidemiology of osteoporosis, the history of scanning modalities, fracture prediction tools and future directions, including the most recent developments in prediction of fractures.This Review highlights various medical imaging techniques and fracture prediction tools that are used to diagnosis osteoporosis and discusses the potential importance of screening in at-risk populations.

Many lines of evidence, including epidemiologic data and extensive clinical and experimental studies, indicate that early life events play a powerful role in influencing later susceptibility to certain chronic diseases. This review synthesizes evidence from several disciplines to support the contention that environmental factors acting during development should be accorded greater weight in models of disease causation. This review synthesizes evidence from several disciplines to support the contention that environmental factors acting during development should be accorded greater weight in models of disease causation. A long latency period between an environmental trigger and the onset of subsequent disease is widely recognized in the etiology of certain cancers, yet this phenomenon is not generally considered in the etiology of other conditions such as cardiovascular disease, metabolic disease, or osteoporosis. However, many lines of evidence, including epidemiologic data and data from extensive clinical and experimental studies, indicate that early life events play a powerful role in influencing later susceptibility to certain chronic diseases. An increased understanding of developmental plasticity (defined as the ability of an organism to develop in various ways, depending on the particular environment . . .

Natural experimental studies are often recommended as a way of understanding the health impact of policies and other large scale interventions. Although they have certain advantages over planned experiments, and may be the only option when it is impossible to manipulate exposure to the intervention, natural experimental studies are more susceptible to bias. This paper introduces new guidance from the Medical Research Council to help researchers and users, funders and publishers of research evidence make the best use of natural experimental approaches to evaluating population health interventions. The guidance emphasises that natural experiments can provide convincing evidence of impact even when effects are small or take time to appear. However, a good understanding is needed of the process determining exposure to the intervention, and careful choice and combination of methods, testing of assumptions and transparent reporting is vital. More could be learnt from natural experiments in future as experience of promising but lesser used methods accumulates.