MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412167272 · doi:10.1177/20494637251358334

Pain catastrophising predicts optimal improvement in pain following genicular arterial embolisation for the treatment of mild and moderate knee osteoarthritis

2025· article· en· W4412167272 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Harrison, Tim V. Salomons, Sarah MacGill, Mark W. Little

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Pain · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisMedicinePain managementPhysical therapyAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of OA. Patients with mild-to-moderate OA, who do not respond to conservative treatment or yet warrant joint replacement, represent a significant clinical challenge. Genicular Arterial Embolisation (GAE) is a promising interventional radiological technique for OA. However, data highlight a consistent subset of patients that do not respond to GAE, despite a successful procedure. Pain Catastrophising (PC) represents a set of cognitive/affective biases to pain, linked to maladaptations in the descending pain modulatory system and has been frequently identified as a predictor of clinical outcomes. Purpose: This study aimed to investigate whether baseline pain catastrophising is associated with treatment outcomes following GAE, and to explore its neural correlates using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI). Research Design: A prospective, longitudinal cohort design was employed for this study. Study Sample: Thirty patients with mild-to-moderate knee OA scheduled for GAE completed a presurgical assessment including psychometric profiling and quantitative sensory testing. A neuroimaging subset of 17 patients, who met MRI safety criteria, also completed rs-fMRI. Data Collection: Participants completed outcome assessments at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 12 months post-GAE. Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS) scores were analysed in relation to treatment outcomes and to whole-brain voxel-wise functional connectivity using the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) as a seed region. PCS scores were included as regressors in rs-fMRI analyses. Results: Pain Catastrophising was associated with a myriad of psychological/lifestyle baseline variables, such as depression, anxiety and poor sleep. Surprisingly, high pain catastrophisers demonstrated the best improvements, with PC scores predicting higher reductions in pain at 6-weeks (R 2 = .18, p = .024), 3-months (R 2 = .37, p < .001) and 1-year (R 2 = .18, p = .027). Resting-state analyses revealed that catastrophising was associated with higher connectivity between the DLPFC and areas of the brain associated with pain processing, suggesting more frequent engagement of top-down modulatory processes. Conclusions: These results highlight that, interestingly, patients who catastrophise may benefit most from GAE. Potential explanations for this are discussed within. Overall, this data indicates GAE is an effective treatment for knee OA, and may be valuable at managing pain for high catastrophisers, who often fare worse in more invasive surgical procedures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of PainSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207