From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.


Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is
Natural History/Untreated Prognosis
Clinical Features
Non-Operative Treatment
Risks of Non-Operative Treatment
Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment
Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry)
Risks of Operative Treatment
Prognosis Post Operation
--Mylesclough 05:21, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

From article page[edit]

osteophytes of the knee

Xray diagnosis of my knee swelling and pain indicated osteophytes of the knee, further diagnosis will be a knee scan with dye and an MRI. I have read taping can reduce pain and improve movement over time so I am wrapping my knee with an ace bandage. Please include your treatment experience of knee pain in this article. thanks

I moved this here because it is a question. JFW | T@lk 12:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Replacement rate and such[edit]

The article says

In an adult, 20 percent of bone calcium is withdrawn from bones and replaced each year. Thus, every five years the bones are renewed.

This is not true. Perhaps 20% of bone calcium is withdrawn and replaced each year (although this does need a citation), but this does not mean that every five years the bones are completely renewed. Only faulty reasoning leads from one to the other; the same reasoning would lead one to think that a radioactive sample will have completely decayed after two half-lives. Not so. After five years, about 33% of bone calcium will still be in place. Reason is that some of the 20 percent that gets replaced this year is the same calcium that got replaced last year. I'm removing the sentence "Thus, every five years..." to this page. 01:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Possible plagarism[edit]

The "Cause" section is nearly identical with the "What Causes" section of this commercial page:
Somebody is using somebody else's work without attribution.
Also, source number 4, Neurosurgery Today, says nothing about eruptions being a source of bone spurs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jcatkeson (talkcontribs) 14:23, August 22, 2007 (UTC).

Merger Proposal[edit]

Bone spur and Osteophyte pages contain virtually the same content. Most referenced sources for each typically reference a bone spur thus: Bone spur (Osteophyte). I propose merging the two pages retaining the most complete work from each. Particlebry (talk) 09:15, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Bone spur is synonymous with osteophyte. Corta (talk) 04:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Strongly Agree --Daydreamer302000 (talk) 08:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely Hananekosan (talk) 08:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

It looks like this has been resolved and done. I removed the merge template. -- B.S. Lawrence (talk) 18:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Where they form[edit]

I added clarification to the intro that osteophytes do not only form at joints as they can actually form anywhere on the body. They do usually form at joints, but not exclusively. Hananekosan (talk) 08:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Opening contradiction re: "bone spur" and "osteophyte"[edit]

The article opens with "Osteophytes, also known as bone spurs ..." The sentence immediately following, however, is, "There is a great difference between osteophytes and bone spurs."

Well, which is it? Somebody who understands these things should clear this up.

Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:07, 12 January 2010 (UTC)