As seen in “IL-1ab Blockade Prevent Cartilage
and Bone Destruction in Murine Type II CIA, Whereas TNF-a Blockade Only
Ameliorate Joint Inflammation” article, they used histology and radiography to analyze joint destruction, inflammation, bone erosion, and cartilage destruction. I
decided to go off of this to find relevant information and I found 4 main
methods of radiographically scoring RA http://ard.highwire.org/content/60/9/817.full
(and nothing for Histology scoring for
RA!) which include: the Steinbrocker Method, Kellgren Method, Sharp method, and
Larsen Method. Unfortunately these
methods only looked into bone erosion and joint space narrowing so scoring for
other issues such as joint destruction, cartilage destruction and inflammation seem
to be dependent on the study (for more information on the different methods check out the link). In my opinion, I don’t find this very reliable
and is surprising to me since there are so many studies on arthritis
and radiography and histology are very common ways of analyzing it.
Even more, this
article did not resemble any of the 4 main methods of radiographically scoring
RA. Hmm.. So my question to you is, should there be a universally accepted technique in analyzing
arthritis histologically or radiography or should it rather be dependent on the
type of study at hand? Are there any problems/restriction that may come about
if we were to enforce a universal method of scoring? Or are there any benefits
of not have a universal scoring system at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment