Article Text
Abstract
Background Risk factors for shoulder osteoarthritis (SOA) have been poorly studied. SOA has two anatomical subtypes: primary centred SOA (centred SOA) and rotator cuff-related OA (non-centred SOA). We examined whether cardiometabolic risk factors are preferentially associated with centred than mechanical-induced non-centred SOA.
Methods This 2004–2012 retrospective multicentric study included patients with SOA. Data on clinical characteristics, especially cardiometabolic risk factors, were collected. We compared patients with radiographic-centred and non-centred SOA and tested the association between cardiometabolic risk factors and subtypes of SOA.
Results We included 147 patients (101 women (68.7%); mean age 75.8±10 years); 99 had centred SOA. As compared with patients with non-centred SOA, those with centred SOA were older (77.5±9 vs 72.4±11 years; p=0.004) with no difference in cardiometabolic disturbances or their accumulation. Multivariable analyses indicated that older age was independently associated with centred SOA (OR 1.06;95% CI 1.02 to 1.1; p=0.004), and cardiovascular diseases were less associated with this subtype (OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.089 to 0.824; p=0.02) than with the non-centred one.
Conclusion Cardiometabolic risk factors were not more prevalent with primary centred than rotator cuff-related SOA. They may participate in the pathophysiology of both SOA subtypes through cartilage and tendon disruption.
- Osteoarthritis
- Cardiovascular Disease
- Arterial Hypertension
- Lipids
This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Contributors JS, LB, GN, FB and P-AJ contributed to study conception, data acquisition, data analysis and interpretation. SK and TS contributed to statistical analysis. FB, LD and AS contributed to data analysis and interpretation. All the authors reviewed the manuscript.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval Comité de Protection des Personnes + Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.