-
Arthritis Care & Research Jul 2021To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.
OBJECTIVE
To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.
METHODS
We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.
RESULTS
The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional).
CONCLUSION
This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Clinical Decision-Making; Consensus; Decision Support Techniques; Humans; Remission Induction; Rheumatology; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34101387
DOI: 10.1002/acr.24596 -
Medicine Oct 2022The lateral sprain of the ankle is a very frequent injury in the population in general, appearing in the emergency services frequently. The general objective was to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The lateral sprain of the ankle is a very frequent injury in the population in general, appearing in the emergency services frequently. The general objective was to review the current clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on management and treatment of ankle sprains, assess their quality, analyze the levels of evidence and summarize the grades of recommendation.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature in relevant databases with the search terms "ankle," "sprain," "practice guideline," and "guideline" was carried out. There were included those guidelines that had the system of grades of recommendation and level of evidence concerning to management and treatment of ankle sprain. The quality of the guides was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool.
RESULTS
Seven clinical practice guides were included in this review. The AGREE II scores ranged from 42% to 100%, with only six CPGs explicitly declaring the use of a systematic methodology. Seventeen recommendations were extracted and summarized.
DISCUSSION
Six of the recommendations analyzed present enough evidence to be applied in clinical practice and are highly recommended for ankle sprain management: Ottawa rules, manual therapy, cryotherapy, functional supports, early ambulation, short term NSAIDs and rehabilitation.
Topics: Humans; Ankle Injuries; Sprains and Strains; Ankle Joint; Early Ambulation; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal
PubMed: 36281183
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031087 -
Arthritis Care & Research Sep 2022To develop updated guidelines for the perioperative management of disease-modifying medications for patients with rheumatic diseases, specifically those with...
2022 American College of Rheumatology/American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Guideline for the Perioperative Management of Antirheumatic Medication in Patients With Rheumatic Diseases Undergoing Elective Total Hip or Total Knee Arthroplasty.
OBJECTIVE
To develop updated guidelines for the perioperative management of disease-modifying medications for patients with rheumatic diseases, specifically those with inflammatory arthritis (IA) and those with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) or elective total knee arthroplasty (TKA).
METHODS
We convened a panel of rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, and infectious disease specialists, updated the systematic literature review, and included currently available medications for the clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to rate the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations using a group consensus process.
RESULTS
This guideline updates the 2017 recommendations for perioperative use of disease-modifying antirheumatic therapy, including traditional disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, biologic agents, targeted synthetic small-molecule drugs, and glucocorticoids used for adults with rheumatic diseases, specifically for the treatment of patients with IA, including rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthritis, those with juvenile idiopathic arthritis, or those with SLE who are undergoing elective THA or TKA. It updates recommendations regarding when to continue, when to withhold, and when to restart these medications and the optimal perioperative dosing of glucocorticoids.
CONCLUSION
This updated guideline includes recently introduced immunosuppressive medications to help decision-making by clinicians and patients regarding perioperative disease-modifying medication management for patients with IA and SLE at the time of elective THA or TKA.
Topics: Adult; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic; Rheumatic Diseases; Rheumatology; Surgeons; United States
PubMed: 35718887
DOI: 10.1002/acr.24893 -
Arthritis & Rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) Jul 2021To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.
OBJECTIVE
To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis.
METHODS
We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations.
RESULTS
The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional).
CONCLUSION
This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.
Topics: Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Rheumatoid; Biological Products; Drug Therapy, Combination; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Janus Kinase Inhibitors; Rheumatology; Severity of Illness Index; Societies, Medical; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; United States
PubMed: 34101376
DOI: 10.1002/art.41752 -
Arthritis & Rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.) Aug 2021To provide evidence-based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV), including...
OBJECTIVE
To provide evidence-based recommendations and expert guidance for the management of antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV), including granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA), microscopic polyangiitis (MPA), and eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA).
METHODS
Clinical questions regarding the treatment and management of AAV were developed in the population, intervention, comparator, and outcome (PICO) format (47 for GPA/MPA, 34 for EGPA). Systematic literature reviews were conducted for each PICO question. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology was used to assess the quality of evidence and formulate recommendations. Each recommendation required ≥70% consensus among the Voting Panel.
RESULTS
We present 26 recommendations and 5 ungraded position statements for GPA/MPA, and 15 recommendations and 5 ungraded position statements for EGPA. This guideline provides recommendations for remission induction and maintenance therapy as well as adjunctive treatment strategies in GPA, MPA, and EGPA. These recommendations include the use of rituximab for remission induction and maintenance in severe GPA and MPA and the use of mepolizumab in nonsevere EGPA. All recommendations are conditional due in part to the lack of multiple randomized controlled trials and/or low-quality evidence supporting the recommendations.
CONCLUSION
This guideline presents the first recommendations endorsed by the American College of Rheumatology and the Vasculitis Foundation for the management of AAV and provides guidance to health care professionals on how to treat these diseases.
Topics: Anti-Neutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody-Associated Vasculitis; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antirheumatic Agents; Churg-Strauss Syndrome; Disease Management; Evidence-Based Medicine; Granulomatosis with Polyangiitis; Humans; Microscopic Polyangiitis; Remission Induction; Rheumatology; Rituximab; United States
PubMed: 34235894
DOI: 10.1002/art.41773 -
JAMA Network Open Oct 2020Acetaminophen (paracetamol) and ibuprofen are the most widely prescribed and available over-the-counter medications for management of fever and pain in children. Despite... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Acetaminophen (paracetamol) and ibuprofen are the most widely prescribed and available over-the-counter medications for management of fever and pain in children. Despite the common use of these medications, treatment recommendations for young children remain divergent.
OBJECTIVE
To compare acetaminophen with ibuprofen for the short-term treatment of fever or pain in children younger than 2 years.
DATA SOURCES
Systematic search of the databases MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the trial registers ClinicalTrials.gov and the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry from inception to March 2019, with no language limits.
STUDY SELECTION
Studies of any design that included children younger than 2 years and directly compared acetaminophen with ibuprofen, reporting antipyretic, analgesic, and/or safety outcomes were considered. There were no limits on length of follow-up.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline, 2 authors independently extracted data and assessed quality. Data were pooled using a fixed-effects method if I2 was less than 50% and using a random-effects method if I2 was 50% or greater.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcomes were fever or pain within 4 hours of treatment onset. Safety outcomes included serious adverse events, kidney impairment, gastrointestinal bleeding, hepatotoxicity, severe soft tissue infection, empyema, and asthma and/or wheeze.
RESULTS
Overall, 19 studies (11 randomized; 8 nonrandomized) of 241 138 participants from 7 countries and various health care settings (hospital-based and community-based) were included. Compared with acetaminophen, ibuprofen resulted in reduced temperature at less than 4 hours (4 studies with 435 participants; standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.08-0.67; P = .01; I2 = 49%; moderate quality evidence) and at 4 to 24 hours (5 studies with 879 participants; SMD, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.03-0.45; P = .03; I2 = 57%; moderate-quality evidence) and less pain at 4 to 24 hours (2 studies with 535 participants; SMD, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03-0.37; P = .02; I2 = 25%; moderate-quality evidence). Adverse events were uncommon. Acetaminophen and ibuprofen appeared to have similar serious adverse event profiles (7 studies with 27 932 participants; ibuprofen vs aceteminophen: odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.87-1.33; P = .50, I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
In this study, use of ibuprofen vs acetaminophen for the treatment of fever or pain in children younger than 2 years was associated with reduced temperature and less pain within the first 24 hours of treatment, with equivalent safety.
Topics: Acetaminophen; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Child, Preschool; Female; Fever; Humans; Ibuprofen; Infant; Male; Pain
PubMed: 33125495
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.22398 -
Arthritis Care & Research Mar 2023To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).
OBJECTIVE
To provide evidence-based recommendations on the use of vaccinations in children and adults with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs).
METHODS
This guideline follows American College of Rheumatology (ACR) policy guiding management of conflicts of interest and disclosures and the ACR guideline development process, which includes the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. It also adheres to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria. A core leadership team consisting of adult and pediatric rheumatologists and a guideline methodologist drafted clinical population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) questions. A review team performed a systematic literature review for the PICO questions, graded the quality of evidence, and produced an evidence report. An expert Voting Panel reviewed the evidence and formulated recommendations. The panel included adult and pediatric rheumatology providers, infectious diseases specialists, and patient representatives. Consensus required ≥70% agreement on both the direction and strength of each recommendation.
RESULTS
This guideline includes expanded indications for some vaccines in patients with RMDs, as well as guidance on whether to hold immunosuppressive medications or delay vaccination to maximize vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy. Safe approaches to the use of live attenuated vaccines in patients taking immunosuppressive medications are also addressed. Most recommendations are conditional and had low quality of supporting evidence.
CONCLUSION
Application of these recommendations should consider patients' individual risk for vaccine-preventable illness and for disease flares, particularly if immunosuppressive medications are held for vaccination. Shared decision-making with patients is encouraged in clinical settings.
Topics: Child; Humans; United States; Rheumatology; Antirheumatic Agents; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Vaccination; Rheumatic Diseases
PubMed: 36597813
DOI: 10.1002/acr.25045 -
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases Jan 2023To update the evidence on efficacy and safety of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) to inform... (Review)
Review
Efficacy and safety of biological DMARDs: a systematic literature review informing the 2022 update of the ASAS-EULAR recommendations for the management of axial spondyloarthritis.
OBJECTIVE
To update the evidence on efficacy and safety of biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in patients with axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) to inform the 2022 update of the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society/European Alliance of Associations for Rheumatology (ASAS-EULAR) recommendations for the management of axSpA.
METHODS
Systematic literature review (2016-2021) on efficacy and safety of bDMARDs in axSpA (radiographic axSpA (r-axSpA)/non-radiographic axSpA (nr-axSpA)). Eligible study designs included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), strategy trials and observational studies (the latter only for safety and extra-musculoskeletal manifestations). All relevant efficacy/safety outcomes were included.
RESULTS
In total, 148 publications were included. Efficacy of golimumab and certolizumab was confirmed. Tumour necrosis factor inhibitor (TNFi) biosimilar-originator equivalence was demonstrated. RCT (n=15) data on efficacy of interleukin-17 inhibitors (IL-17i) demonstrated clinically relevant effects (risk ratio vs placebo to achieve ASAS40 response 1.3-15.3 (r-axSpA, n=9), 1.4-2.1 (nr-axSpA, n=2)). Efficacy of secukinumab/ixekizumab was demonstrated in TNFi-naïve and TNFi-inadequate responders. IL-23 and IL-12/23 inhibitors (risankizumab/ustekinumab) failed to show relevant benefits. Tapering of TNFi by spacing was non-inferior to standard-dose treatment. The first axSpA treat-to-target trial did not meet its primary endpoint, but showed improvements in secondary outcomes. No new risks were identified with TNFi use in observational studies (data lacking for IL-17i). Secukinumab (n=1) and etanercept (n=2) were associated with increased risk of uveitis in observational studies compared to monoclonal TNFi.
CONCLUSIONS
New evidence supports the efficacy and safety of TNFi (originators/biosimilars) and IL-17i in r-axSpA and nr-axSpA, while IL-23i failed to show relevant effects. Observational studies are needed to confirm long-term IL-17i safety.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42021257588.
Topics: Humans; Non-Radiographic Axial Spondyloarthritis; Antirheumatic Agents; Spondylarthritis; Certolizumab Pegol; Axial Spondyloarthritis; Biosimilar Pharmaceuticals; Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors; Spondylitis, Ankylosing; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 36270657
DOI: 10.1136/ard-2022-223298 -
BMC Pulmonary Medicine Dec 2021Research questions To compare the efficacy of nintedanib and pirfenidone in the treatment of progressive pulmonary fibrosis; and to compare the efficacy of anti-fibrotic... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Efficacy of antifibrotic drugs, nintedanib and pirfenidone, in treatment of progressive pulmonary fibrosis in both idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and non-IPF: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Research questions To compare the efficacy of nintedanib and pirfenidone in the treatment of progressive pulmonary fibrosis; and to compare the efficacy of anti-fibrotic therapy (grouping nintedanib and pirfenidone together) in patients with IPF versus patients with progressive lung fibrosis not classified as IPF.
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
A search of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov was conducted. Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials of pirfenidone or nintedanib in adult patients with IPF or non-IPF patients, and with extractable data on mortality or decline in forced vital capacity (FVC). Random effects meta-analyses were performed on changes in FVC and where possible on mortality in the selected studies.
RESULTS
13 trials of antifibrotic therapy were pooled in a meta-analysis (with pirfenidone and nintedanib considered together as anti-fibrotic therapy). The change in FVC was expressed as a standardised difference to allow pooling of percentage and absolute changes. The mean effect size in the IPF studies was - 0.305 (SE 0.043) (p < 0.001) and in the non-IPF studies the figures were - 0.307 (SE 0.063) (p < 0.001). There was no evidence of any difference between the two groups for standardised rate of FVC decline (p = 0.979). Pooling IPF and non-IPF showed a significant reduction in mortality, with mean risk ratio of 07.01 in favour of antifibrotic therapy (p = 0.008). A separate analysis restricted to non-IPF did not show a significant reduction in mortality (risk ratio 0.908 (0.547 to 1.508), p = 0.71.
INTERPRETATION
Anti-fibrotic therapy offers protection against the rate of decline in FVC in progressive lung fibrosis, with similar efficacy shown between the two anti-fibrotic agents currently in clinical use. There was no significant difference in efficacy of antifibrotic therapy whether the underlying condition was IPF or non-IPF with progressive fibrosis, supporting the hypothesis of a common pathogenesis. The data in this analysis was insufficient to be confident about a reduction in mortality in non-IPF with anti-fibrotic therapy. Trial Registration PROSPERO, registration number CRD42021266046.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Antifibrotic Agents; Cause of Death; Humans; Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis; Indoles; Pulmonary Fibrosis; Pyridones; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34895203
DOI: 10.1186/s12890-021-01783-1 -
Bioscience Reports Jun 2021To assess the efficacy and safety of Curcuma longa extract and curcumin supplements on osteoarthritis (OA). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To assess the efficacy and safety of Curcuma longa extract and curcumin supplements on osteoarthritis (OA).
METHODS
The databases such as Pubmed and Cochrane Library were searched to collect the article about Curcuma longa extract and curcumin in the treatment of OA. Then, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected and their data were extracted. Finally, the RevMan5.3 was utilized for risk of bias assessment and meta-analysis, the STATA15.0 were utilized for publication bias assessment, and GRADE tool were used for the evidence quality assessment of primary outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 15 RCTs involving 1621 participants were included. (1) Compared with placebo, Curcuma longa extract and curcumin (C.) can decrease the visual analog scale (VAS) and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score-pain, the WOMAC score-function and the WOMAC score-stiffness. In terms of adverse events, Curcuma longa extract and curcumin are comparable with those of placebo. (2) Compared with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), Curcuma longa extract and curcumin have similar effects on joint pain, function and stiffness. The incidence of adverse events in Curcuma longa extract and curcumin was lower. (3) Compared with the NSAIDs group, C.+NSAIDs can also decrease the VAS and WOMAC score-pain, the WOMAC score-function and the WOMAC score-stiffness. In terms of adverse events, the addition of Curcuma longa extract and curcumin to NSAIDs did not increase adverse events.
CONCLUSION
Curcuma longa extract and curcumin may be a safer and effective supplement for OA patients. It is recommended to use Curcuma longa extract and curcumin supplement for OA patients for more than 12 weeks.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antirheumatic Agents; Curcuma; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Osteoarthritis; Pain Measurement; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
PubMed: 34017975
DOI: 10.1042/BSR20210817