Osteoarthritis historical perspective: Difference between revisions
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
According to the ancient era, [[osteoarthritis]] is a common finding in Egyptian mummies and also in ancient skeletons found in England. There are Strong evidences in ancient skeletons with there was osteoarthritis in their shoulders with some degenerative changes in the lumbar spine, while their knee joints were less influenced. | According to the ancient era, [[osteoarthritis]] is a common finding in Egyptian mummies and also in ancient skeletons found in England. There are Strong evidences in ancient skeletons with there was osteoarthritis in their shoulders with some degenerative changes in the lumbar spine, while their knee joints were less influenced. | ||
It is strange that, despite its widespread occurrence in ancient skeletons, clinicians did not recognise osteoarthritis until the 18th century. This is probably due to the fact that, apart from digital node osteoarthritis immortalized by William Heberden, The Elder (1710– 1801) (Heberden, 1802; Buchanan and Kean, 1987) (Fig. 1) there were few obvious physical signs, such as described by Hippocrates (460–375 BC) in gout (Adams, 1849), or in spinal tuberculosis, by Percivall Pott (1714– 1784) (Pott, 1779). However, according to Sokoloff, there are a number of descriptions by pathologists suggestive of osteoarthritis (Sokoloff, 1969). | |||
Confusion with nomenclature also caused delay in recognition of the disease. Although malum coxae senilis, hip osteoarthritis, was recognised in the early 19th century (Sokoloff, 2001) the disease was lumped together with rheumatoid arthritis as arthritis deformans, a term introduced by Rudolf Virchow (1821– 1902) (1869) and used into the 20th century (Sokoloff, 2001). Alfred Baring Garrod (1819–1907) separated the two diseases in 1859, and was the rst to propose the name rheumatoid arthritis (Garrod, Sir, 1859). It was John Kent Spender of Bath, England (1829– 1916), who rst introduced the term osteo-arthritis (Spender, 1889;Benedek, 1999). In 1904 Joel E. Goldthwait (1867–1961) clearly differentiated atrophic (rheumatoid) arthritis from hypertrophic (osteo) arthritis, and this was later con rmed a few years later by others (Hoffa and Wollenberg, 1908; Nichols and Richardson, 1909). In the 1910 edition of his famous landmark textbook, The Principles and Practise of Medicine, Sir William Osler (1849– 1919) clearly differentiated the two diseases on the basis of clinical features and pathology, but surprisingly made no mention of X-rays (Balint et al., 1987). Debate continues as to nomenclature. Some workers argue for osteoarthritis, while others prefer degenerative arthritis. The latter to us has connotations of an inevitable concomitant of aging. Osteoarthrosis, although still used by some, has gradually been replaced by osteoarthritis, since histological (Goldenberg et al., 1982), biochemical (Spector et al., 1997) and radionuclide studies (Dick et al., 1970) have shown evidence of synovial in ammation. In the hip joint, a severe synovitis, assumed to be the result of a reaction to joint detritus, is frequently present and may be histologically indistinguishable from rheumatoid arthritis (Byers et al., 1970, 1976; Pringle et al., 1978). Osteoarthritis is best considered, like heart and kidney disease, the result of a number of different causes. | |||
Historical evidences revealed that all forms of arthritis were considered to be clinical presentations of [[gout]]. | Historical evidences revealed that all forms of arthritis were considered to be clinical presentations of [[gout]]. | ||
Revision as of 09:53, 28 March 2018
|
Osteoarthritis Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Case Studies |
|
Osteoarthritis historical perspective On the Web |
|
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Osteoarthritis historical perspective |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Osteoarthritis historical perspective |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief:
Overview
Osteoarthritis / Osteoarthrosis (OA, also known as degenerative joint disease, degenerative arthritis, arthrosis or in more colloquial terms "wear and tear") is the most common form of arthritis, caused by wearing of the cartilage that covers and cushions joint spaces. As the cartilage wears away, the patient experiences pain with weight bearing, including walking and standing. This word is derived from the Greek word "osteo", meaning "of the bone", "arthro", meaning "joint", and "itis", meaning inflammation, meanwhile, inflammation is not a common finding in this regard. OA possesses a great degree of variability in disease onset, progression, and severity. The earliest descriptions of OA were provided by Heberden and Haygarth in the 19th century. [3] [4] In the 1930s and 1940s, Dr. Stecher showed that there were two forms of OA, idiopathic and post-traumatic. [5] And, in the 1950s the links between Heberden’s nodes and large joint OA were revealed by Kellgren and Moore. In this regard, the first x-ray grading system for OA was developed by Jonas Kellgren and John Lawrence in the 1950s. Surgical management of OA was developed in the 1960s by Drs. Charnley and McKee
Historical Perspective
The historical view of osteoarthritis from antiquity to the present year has interestingly conventional perspective which can be found among: paleopathological findings about skeletal discoveries, plenty of historical literature's, visual representations found among artworks. Considering the historical findings about the osteoarthritis (such as evidences revealed in dinosaurs skeletons for example in a 200 million year old Dimetrodon Permian reptile recovered in Texas, USA there was an interesting evidence of a compound fracture in its spine which was infected with pus formation), osteoarthritis can be called as the oldest known disease on earth. According to the available evidences, osteoarthritis (OA) has been called by different terminologies: arthrosis deformans, osteoarthrosis-osteoarthritis, degenerative joint disease, morbus (malum) coxae seniles; Meanwhile, loss of cartilage associated with it bone features (such as osteophytes and subchondral bone sclerosis) is common among all types of OA. As mentioned before this illness has been called by many names over the years but None of them was entirely satisfactory for this condition. Despise of this fact that the word "Osteoarthritis" is a misnomer because it implies a definite existence of an inflammatory process, It has been used for many decades in the English language and will probably continue to do so because it has a well known appeal comparing with other more accurate terms of degenerative joint disease. But, totally, Osteoarthritis is considered as a non-inflammatory disease of movable joints characterized by possible formation of new bone at the articular surface and subchondral bone involvement with the abrasion and deterioration of involved articular cartilages.
According to the ancient era, osteoarthritis is a common finding in Egyptian mummies and also in ancient skeletons found in England. There are Strong evidences in ancient skeletons with there was osteoarthritis in their shoulders with some degenerative changes in the lumbar spine, while their knee joints were less influenced.
It is strange that, despite its widespread occurrence in ancient skeletons, clinicians did not recognise osteoarthritis until the 18th century. This is probably due to the fact that, apart from digital node osteoarthritis immortalized by William Heberden, The Elder (1710– 1801) (Heberden, 1802; Buchanan and Kean, 1987) (Fig. 1) there were few obvious physical signs, such as described by Hippocrates (460–375 BC) in gout (Adams, 1849), or in spinal tuberculosis, by Percivall Pott (1714– 1784) (Pott, 1779). However, according to Sokoloff, there are a number of descriptions by pathologists suggestive of osteoarthritis (Sokoloff, 1969).
Confusion with nomenclature also caused delay in recognition of the disease. Although malum coxae senilis, hip osteoarthritis, was recognised in the early 19th century (Sokoloff, 2001) the disease was lumped together with rheumatoid arthritis as arthritis deformans, a term introduced by Rudolf Virchow (1821– 1902) (1869) and used into the 20th century (Sokoloff, 2001). Alfred Baring Garrod (1819–1907) separated the two diseases in 1859, and was the rst to propose the name rheumatoid arthritis (Garrod, Sir, 1859). It was John Kent Spender of Bath, England (1829– 1916), who rst introduced the term osteo-arthritis (Spender, 1889;Benedek, 1999). In 1904 Joel E. Goldthwait (1867–1961) clearly differentiated atrophic (rheumatoid) arthritis from hypertrophic (osteo) arthritis, and this was later con rmed a few years later by others (Hoffa and Wollenberg, 1908; Nichols and Richardson, 1909). In the 1910 edition of his famous landmark textbook, The Principles and Practise of Medicine, Sir William Osler (1849– 1919) clearly differentiated the two diseases on the basis of clinical features and pathology, but surprisingly made no mention of X-rays (Balint et al., 1987). Debate continues as to nomenclature. Some workers argue for osteoarthritis, while others prefer degenerative arthritis. The latter to us has connotations of an inevitable concomitant of aging. Osteoarthrosis, although still used by some, has gradually been replaced by osteoarthritis, since histological (Goldenberg et al., 1982), biochemical (Spector et al., 1997) and radionuclide studies (Dick et al., 1970) have shown evidence of synovial in ammation. In the hip joint, a severe synovitis, assumed to be the result of a reaction to joint detritus, is frequently present and may be histologically indistinguishable from rheumatoid arthritis (Byers et al., 1970, 1976; Pringle et al., 1978). Osteoarthritis is best considered, like heart and kidney disease, the result of a number of different causes.
Historical evidences revealed that all forms of arthritis were considered to be clinical presentations of gout.
In 1802, William Heberden in his book named "Commentaries on the History and Cure of Diseases" has described a disease which had no connection with gout. He also described the small nodes which later we know those nodes with his name.
In 1793, Sandifort of Leiden described osteoarthrosis of the hip.
In 1805, John Haygarth described polyarticular disease influencing the distal interphalangeal and other joints, resembling almost perfectly OA as seen in our present modern society.5
In 1824, Bell, similar to Sandifort in 1793, have described osteoarthrosis of the hip.
In 1829, Benjamin C Brodie revealed a non-inflammatory erosion of articular cartilage peculiar to the elderly.
In 1831, Robert Adams distinguished osteoarthritis from polyarticular rheumatoid arthritis considering its localized character (also he even tried to use “partial” rheumatic arthritis name for osteoarthritis). This big step in differentiating OA from rheumatic arthritis had a huge acceptance in many parts of European scientist.
In 1835, J V Cruveilhier and Cruveilhier’s mentor Laennec (inventor of the stethoscope) were used the term "usure" for defects in the articular cartilage of involved joints.
In 1835, Robert Smith named the degenerative joint disease as: "sui generis" and after that he came with the description of "malum coxae senilis" related to the osteoarthritis of the hip.
In 1857, Schöman made monographs affirming Adams’ great work (in 1831) and published them were published 1857.
In 1869, Charcot and Virchow, known as the fathers of cellular pathology, used the term “arthritis deformans” for both osteoarthritis and rheumatic arthritis
In 1890, A E Garrod was granted the current title of “osteoarthritis"
In 1895, (Soon after the introduction of X-rays as a great step in medicine by Wilhelm Konrad Röntgen), Goldthwaite and other scientists were able to differentiate two main forms of arthritis: a) the “atrophic” type, which was found as polyarticular, in young population, and b) the “hypertrophic” type, non-polyarticular form occurred in fewer joints in young population. Then, the hypertrophic arthritis and Atrophic arthritis were considered as osteoarthritis and rheumatic arthritis, respectively.
In 1907, Albutt and Rolleston in a book named Albutt and Rolleston's System of Medicine describes both osteoarthritis and rheumatic arthritis separately with their own different special pathological specifications.
In 1952, Kellgren and Moore connected the Heberden noduli to osteoarthritis, considering it as a primary generalised OA in order to differentiate it primary generalised OA from secondary OA.
In 1950s and 1960s, Kellgren and Lawrence introduced a radiographic scoring system in grading OA
In 1953, Collins described the possible association of age with the prognosis of trauma in pathological evaluations.
In 1989, Hans Valkenburg’s team worked on the descriptive epidemiology of osteoarthritis
In 1890,
In 1890,