Article

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing complications following total joint arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis versus for osteoarthritis.

University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. .
Arthritis & Rheumatology (Impact Factor: 7.48). 12/2012; 64(12):3839-49. DOI: 10.1002/art.37690
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Most of the evidence regarding complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is based on studies of patients with osteoarthritis (OA), with little being known about outcomes in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The objective of the present study was to review the current evidence regarding rates of THA/TKA complications in RA versus OA.
Data sources used were Medline, EMBase, Cinahl, Web of Science, and reference lists of articles. We included reports published between 1990 and 2011 that described studies of primary total joint arthroplasty of the hip or knee and contained information on outcomes in ≥200 RA and OA joints. Outcomes of interest included revision, hip dislocation, infection, 90-day mortality, and venous thromboembolic events. Two reviewers independently assessed each study for quality and extracted data. Where appropriate, meta-analysis was performed; if this was not possible, the level of evidence was assessed qualitatively.
Forty studies were included in this review. The results indicated that patients with RA are at increased risk of dislocation following THA (adjusted odds ratio 2.16 [95% confidence interval 1.52-3.07]). There was fair evidence to support the notion that risk of infection and risk of early revision following TKA are increased in RA versus OA. There was no evidence of any differences in rates of revision at later time points, 90-day mortality, or rates of venous thromboembolic events following THA or TKA in patients with RA versus OA. RA was explicitly defined in only 3 studies (7.5%), and only 11 studies (27.5%) included adjustment for covariates (e.g., age, sex, and comorbidity).
The findings of this literature review and meta-analysis indicate that, compared to patients with OA, patients with RA are at higher risk of dislocation following THA and higher risk of infection following TKA.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
88 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A multidisciplinary approach is required to care for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the perioperative period. In preparation for surgery, patients must have a cardiovascular risk assessment performed due to the high risk of heart disease in patients with RA. Treatment of RA is with immunomodulatory medications, which present unique challenges for the perioperative period. Currently, there is no consensus on how to manage disease modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy in the perioperative setting. Much of the data to guide therapy is based on retrospective cohort data. Choices regarding DMARDs require an individualized approach with collaboration between surgeons and rheumatologists. Consensus regarding biologic therapy is to hold the therapy in the perioperative period with the length of time dictated by the half-life of the medication. Special attention is required at the time of surgery for potential need for stress dose steroids. Further, there must be close communication with anesthesiologists in terms of airway management particularly in light of the risk for cervical spine disease. There are no consensus guidelines regarding the requirement for cervical spine radiographs prior to surgery. However, history and exam alone cannot be relied upon to identify cervical spine disease. Patients with RA who undergo joint replacement arthroplasty are at higher risk for infection and dislocation compared to patients with osteoarthritis, necessitating particular vigilance in postoperative follow up. This review summarizes available evidence regarding perioperative management of patients with RA.
    World journal of orthopedics. 07/2014; 5(3):283-91.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with an inflammatory disease have an elevated risk for periprosthetic joint infections due to impairment of the immune system caused by the disease itself in combination with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARD). These infections can cause life-threatening sepsis. Unfortunately recommendations on the diagnostics and treatment are mostly based on studies with a level of evidence grade IV or V. This article gives an overview of recent publications evaluating the level of evidence of recommendations on diagnostics and treatment of periprosthetic joint infections in patients with inflammatory diseases. A systematic literature search was performed in the Medline database in January and February 2014. The search included all articles on diagnostic and/or treatment of periprosthetic joint infections in patients with inflammatory diseases. Articles in languages other than English or German were excluded, as well as case reports, studies with less than 20 patients and articles only referring to patients with inflammatory diseases without periprosthetic infections. Nearly all recommendations are based on retrospective studies or expert opinions (level of evidence IV or V). Conflicting results are common but there is good evidence on preoperative aspiration of joint fluid (level of evidence I) and a doubled risk of joint infections under treatment with anti-tumor necrosis factor (level of evidence II). An increased mortality has been reported in multiple studies. Two-stage revision seems to have a slightly better outcome than retention of prosthesis or one-stage revision. Generally, therapeutic recommendations for periprosthetic joint infections lack a good level of evidence. Future studies are urgently needed.
    Zeitschrift für Rheumatologie 05/2014; · 0.46 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: GP88 (Progranulin; PGRN) is a secreted glycosylated protein with important functions in several processes, including immune response and cancer growth. Recent reports have shown that PGRN is a therapeutic target for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) because of its capability to bind with tumor necrosis factor receptor (TNFR). However, the serum PGRN level in RA patients has not been investigated. We used enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to quantify the serum levels of PGRN in 417 healthy subjects, 56 patients with RA and 31 patients with osteoarthritis (OA). In RA patients, we also measured the serum TNF-α and sTNFR concentration. Immunohistochemical staining of PGRN was performed using synovectomy tissue of RA patients. The serum PGRN normal range was established as 40.1 ± 8.7 ng/ml. PGRN levels were not influenced by sex or age. A significant increase in serum PGRN levels was observed in RA (50.2 ± 11.1 ng/ml) and OA (45.4 ± 6.6 ng/ml) groups compared to those in age-matched healthy controls (40.4 ± 9.9 ng/ml) (p < 0.05, Tukey). Further, PGRN levels in the synovial fluid of RA patients (68.4 ± 3.4 ng/ml) were found to be significantly higher than those in OA patients (35.9 ± 16.8 ng/ml). Immunohistochemical staining of PGRN revealed that the highest positive signal was detected in macrophages. Circulating PGRN in RA patients was weakly associated with TNF-α and sTNFR 2 concentration. Furthermore, PGRN/TNF-α ratio was correlated the stage of the disease in RA patients. The concentrations of serum PGRN in RA were found to be significantly higher than those in age-matched healthy controls, although it remains to be clarified how blood PGRN is related to the pathogenesis of RA. Our results showed that the serum PGRN may be a useful approach to monitor the disease activity in RA patients.
    Inflammation 05/2014; 37(5). · 1.92 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
2 Downloads