My 'interesting' rheumy appointment yesterday at least focused my mind on some things that keep puzzling me. What I don't fully understand is the difference, from the patient's point of view, between damage caused by Osteoarthritis which, as Arthritis Research puts it, can be 'a result of damage from a different kind of joint disease, such as rheumatoid arthritis' and damage to a joint that is purely caused by RA?
I get the impression that damage & erosions caused by RA and only RA are more serious. But is this necessarily the case? From the patients point of view, any joint damage is bad news & OA can be disabling.
As I see it, OA that comes about because of RA is basically an RA problem linked to poorly controlled inflammatory arthritis & it’s just as important to look out for it as it is to keep a watch on other forms of damage.
I understand that anyone can get OA quite independently of RA & at the same time as RA, but for OA to coincidentally show itself in the same joints that are swollen & tender because of RA, and at exactly the same time, without the causal connection that Arthritis Research mentions seems to me to be too much of a coincidence.
I'd be very grateful for any thoughts anyone has about this. Luce xx