Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2016 Feb 4;24(7):1160–1166. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2016.01.981

Table 2. Relation of baseline compartment status to follow-up compartment status.

MRI Feature

Full-thickness cartilage damage Any cartilage damage Any BML

Baseline Status Follow Up Status Incidence Adjusted OR* Incidence Adjusted OR* Incidence Adjusted OR*
No damage Incident PFJ damage 97/582<br>(16.7%) Reference 29/103<br>(28.2%) Reference 63/232<br>(27.2%) Reference
Isolated TFJ damage 20/152<br>(13.2%) 0.80<br>(0.47, 1.3) 43/138<br>(31.2%) 1.2<br>(0.65, 2.1) 23/94<br>(24.5%) 0.84<br>(0.48, 1.5)

No damage Incident TFJ damage 112/582<br>(19.2%) Reference 40/103<br>(38.8%) Reference 53/232<br>(22.8%) Reference
Isolated PFJ damage 48/187<br>(25.7%) 1.3<br>(0.89, 2.0) 80/179<br>(44.7%) 1.2<br>(0.75, 2.1) 73/239<br>(30.5%) 1.3<br>(0.86, 2.0)

No damage Incident mixed damage 31/582<br>(5.3%) Reference 11/103<br>(10.7%) Reference 17/232<br>(7.3%) Reference
Isolated PFJ damage 48/187<br>(25.7%) 5.8<br>(3.6, 9.6) 80/179<br>(44.7%) 6.5<br>(3.2, 13.1) 73/239<br>(30.5%) 5.4<br>(3.1, 9.7)
Isolated TFJ damage 20/152<br>(13.2%) 2.7<br>(1.5, 4.9) 43/138<br>(31.2%) 4.0<br>(1.9, 8.4) 23/94<br>(24.5%) 4.2<br>(2.1, 8.4)
*

Adjusted for age, sex and BMI