Peter M. van Roermund

Tissue structure modification in knee osteoarthritis by use of joint distraction: an open 1-year pilot study

Background Modification of joint tissue damage is challenging in late-stage osteoarthritis (OA). Few options are available for treating end-stage knee OA other than joint replacement. Objectives To examine whether joint distraction can effectively modify knee joint tissue damage and has the potential to delay prosthesis surgery. Methods 20 patients (<60 years) with tibiofemoral OA were treated surgically using joint distraction. Distraction (∼5 mm) was applied for 2 months using an external fixation frame. Tissue structure modification at 1 year of follow-up was evaluated radiographically (joint space width (JSW)), by MRI (segmentation of cartilage morphology) and by biochemical markers of collagen type II turnover, with operators blinded to time points. Clinical improvement was evaluated by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score. Results Radiography demonstrated an increase in mean and minimum JSW (2.7 to 3.6 mm and 1.0 to 1.9 mm; p<0.05 and <0.01). MRI revealed an increase in cartilage thickness (2.4 to 3.0 mm; p<0.001) and a decrease of denuded bone areas (22% to 5%; p<0.001). Collagen type II levels showed a trend towards increased synthesis (+103%; p<0.06) and decreased breakdown (−11%; p<0.08). The WOMAC index increased from 45 to 77 points, and VAS pain decreased from 73 to 31 mm (both p<0.001). Conclusions Joint distraction can induce tissue structure modification in knee OA and could result in clinical benefit. No current treatment is able to induce such changes. Larger, longer and randomised studies on joint distraction are warranted.

Unloading joints to treat osteoarthritis, including joint distraction

Purpose of reviewPatients are increasingly becoming interested in nonpharmacologic approaches to manage their osteoarthritis. This review examines the recent literature on the potential beneficial effects of unloading joints in the treatment of osteoarthritis, with a focus on joint distraction. Recent findingsMechanical factors are involved in the development and progression of osteoarthritis. If ‘loading’ is a major cause in development and progression of osteoarthritis, then ‘unloading’ may be able to prevent progression. There is evidence that unloading may be effective in reducing pain and slowing down structural damage. This review describes unloading by footwear and bracing (nonsurgical), unloading by osteotomy (surgical), and has a focus on unloading by joint distraction. Excellent reviews in all these three fields have been published over the past few years. Recent studies argue for the usefulness of a biomechanical approach to improve function and possibly reduce disease progression in osteoarthritis. SummaryTo improve patient function and possibly reduce disease progression, a biomechanical approach should be considered in treating patients with osteoarthritis. Further research (appropriate high-quality clinical trials) and analysis (clinical as well as preclinical and fundamental) are still necessary, however, to understand, validate, and refine the different approaches of unloading to treat osteoarthritis.

Joint distraction as an alternative for the treatment of osteoarthritis

Irrespective of underlying mechanisms, the long-term efficacy of joint distraction in the treatment of severe ankle osteoarthritis at young age validates the concept of joint distraction in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Therefore, joint distraction in the case of severe ankle osteoarthritis may be a treatment of choice. This opens the possibility to study joint distraction as a treatment for other joints. Because knee osteoarthritis is much more common, it is a much greater social and economic problem. Beneficial effects of joint distraction in the case of ankle osteoarthritis, and specifically in the treatment of more common forms of osteoarthritis such as severe knee and hip osteoarthritis, may therefore have a great impact, especially in view of the increasing age of our population.

Clinical benefit of joint distraction in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis

Irrespective of underlying mechanisms, the structural changes after joint distraction and the efficacy during several years validate the concept of joint distraction in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Therefore, joint distraction in the case of severe ankle osteoarthritis at relatively young age may be a treatment of choice. In the light of increased aging, and the limited life span of an endoprosthesis, evaluation of joint distraction in the case of knee and hip osteoarthritis is justified.

Evidence of cartilage repair by joint distraction in a canine model of osteoarthritis

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disorder characterized by cartilage, bone, and synovial tissue changes that lead to pain and functional impairment. Joint distraction is a treatment that provides long‐term improvement in pain and function accompanied by cartilage repair, as evaluated indirectly by imaging studies and measurement of biochemical markers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate cartilage tissue repair directly by histologic and biochemical assessments after joint distraction treatment.

Growth rate after limb deformity correction by the Ilizarov method with or without knee joint distraction: Lengthening in 30 children followed for at least 2 years

Background and purpose Growth inhibition and stimulation have both been reported after juvenile limb lengthening. Distraction of a joint usually suspends and unloads the growth plate and may stimulate growth. We investigated the influence of knee joint distraction on the speed of growth after limb lengthening. Methods In a retrospective study, growth patterns were analyzed in 30 children mean 61 (24–109) months after limb lengthening with the Ilizarov method, each child having more than 2 years of remaining growth. In 14 patients with knee joint instability, the knee was bridged over during lengthening for joint stabilization. Whether or not joint bridging and distraction would affect patterns of growth of the lengthened limb by unloading the growth plate was evaluated with a repeated measurements analysis of variance. Results After lengthening procedures, the proportionate leg-length discrepancy was found to decrease in 16 children, suggesting increased growth rate in the lengthened limbs. A statistically significantly faster growth rate was seen in 8 of 14 patients with knee distraction as compared to patients with single bone frame configurations. Interpretation Further research is required to investigate whether growth stimulation is due to the surgical technique and whether joint distraction should be recommended during limb lengthening in growing children.

Five-Year Follow-up of Knee Joint Distraction : Clinical Benefit and Cartilaginous Tissue Repair in an Open Uncontrolled Prospective Study

Objective In end-stage knee osteoarthritis, total knee arthroplasty (TKA) may finally become inevitable. At a relatively young age, this comes with the risk of future revision surgery. Therefore, in these cases, joint preserving surgery such as knee joint distraction (KJD) is preferred. Here we present 5-year follow-up data of KJD. Design Patients (n = 20; age <60 years) with conservative therapy resistant tibiofemoral osteoarthritis considered for TKA were treated. Clinical evaluation was performed by questionnaires. Change in cartilage thickness was quantified on radiographs and magnetic resonance images (MRI). The 5-year changes after KJD were evaluated and compared with the natural progression of osteoarthritis using Osteoarthritis Initiative data. Results Five-years posttreatment, patients still reported clinical improvement from baseline: ΔWOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index) +21.1 points (95% CI +8.9 to +33.3; P = 0.002), ΔVAS (visual analogue scale score) pain −27.6 mm (95%CI −13.3 to −42.0; P < 0.001), and minimum radiographic joint space width (JSW) of the most affected compartment (MAC) remained increased as well: Δ +0.43 mm (95% CI +0.02 to +0.84; P = 0.040). Improvement of mean JSW (x-ray) and mean cartilage thickness (MRI) of the MAC, were not statistically different from baseline anymore (Δ +0.26 mm; P = 0.370, and Δ +0.23 mm; P = 0.177). Multivariable linear regression analysis indicated that KJD treatment was associated with significantly less progression in mean and min JSW (x-ray) and mean cartilage thickness (MRI) compared with natural progression (all Ps <0.001). Conclusions KJD treatment results in prolonged clinical benefit, potentially explained by an initial boost of cartilaginous tissue repair that provides a long-term tissue structure benefit as compared to natural progression. Level of evidence, II.

Total Knee Prosthesis after Knee Joint Distraction Treatment

Background and purpose: During knee joint distraction (KJD) treatment, using an external fixation-frame, pin-tract infections frequently occur. These local skin infections, although treated successfully with oral antibiotics, might lead to latent infections. This raises concern about subsequent placement of a total knee prosthesis (TKP). This study evaluates the first five cases in which patients had to be treated with TKO after KJD failure.