Systemic osteoarthritis: the difficulty of categorically naming a continuous condition.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a disease with systemic implications that go beyond joint problems. Its pathogenic mechanisms involve a variety of systemic conditions that contribute to joint damage. These include metabolic dysfunction, chronic low-grade inflammation, neuroplastic pain, and the influence of the central nervous system in the development of neuropathic pain. Besides, OA can negatively affect other aspects of health, such as quality of life, reduced physical activity, social isolation, depression, and anxiety. OA can be considered a complex system in which pathological interactions involve not only obesity and metabolic dysfunction, but also fragility syndrome, sarcopenia, neurological complications, and systemic energy redistribution. Complex systems are composed of multiple interacting and dynamic parts and exhibit emergent properties that cannot be fully explained by examining their individual components. Chronic low-grade inflammation is characteristic of OA, occurring both in the affected joint, and systemically, mainly due to adipose tissue inflammation in obese patients. Obesity is a key factor in the progression of OA, so primary treatment should focus on its control, while maintaining muscle health. The chronic inflammation could lead to changes in energy distribution among the affected joint tissues. Therefore, OA should be approached as a systemic disease, considering individual patient factors, such as genetics, inflammatory response, and lifestyle. Medical care should be more holistic and personalized. Consideration of a name change, such as "systemic OA", could help to move away from the perception of a disease focused only on the joints.

EUROVISCO Good Practice Recommendations for a First Viscosupplementation in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis.

RATIONALE: Viscosupplementation (VS) with hyaluronic acid is widely used in the management of knee osteoarthritis. There is no clear recommendation on the decision-making to achieve VS. DESIGN: Based on extensive research of the literature and expert opinion, the members of the EUROVISCO (European Viscosupplementation Consensus Group) task force were asked to give their degree of agreement with 60 issues, using a Delphi method. RESULTS: The expert panel achieved unanimous agreement in favor of the following statements: It is recommended to assess pain on a visual or 10-point numeric scale before considering VS. VS can be considered for patients with pain scores between 3 and 8. A standard x-ray must be obtained before the decision of VS. If the x-ray is normal, osteoarthritis must be confirmed by MRI or computed tomography (CT) arthrogram before considering VS. The aims of VS are relieving pain, improving function, and reducing non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) consumption. The use of VS must not be considered for treating an osteoarthritis flare. VS can be envisaged as a first-line pharmacological treatment in patients having a contra-indication to NSAIDs or analgesics. VS can be considered in patients with contra-indications to arthroplasty. In the case of severe comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, gastrointestinal disorders, renal failure), VS can avoid the use of potentially dangerous treatments. VS can be considered in patients receiving antiplatelet agents, vitamin K antagonists, and direct factor Xa or thrombin inhibitors. Five other statements obtained a high level of consensus. CONCLUSION: These recommendations, illustrated in a decision algorithm, have been established to help practitioners in the decision-making of knee VS.

Information Survey on the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine.

Background and Objectives: Complementary and alternative medicines (CAMs) are generally considered non-scientific and poor effective therapies. Nevertheless, CAMs are extensively used in common clinical practice in Western countries. We decided to promote a Delphi consensus to intercept the opinion of Italian physicians on CAM use in clinical practice. Materials and Methods: We run a Delphi-based consensus, interviewing anonymously 97 physicians. Of these, only 78 participate to the questionnaire. Results: Consensus about agreement and disagreement have been reached in several topics, including indication, as well as safety issues concerning CAMs. Conclusions: The use of CAMs in clinical practice still lacks evidence. Experts agree about the possibility to safely use CAMs in combination with conventional medicines to treat non-critical medical conditions.

Web Axillary Pain Syndrome-Literature Evidence and Novel Rehabilitative Suggestions: A Narrative Review.

Axillary web syndrome (AWS) is defined as a visible and palpable network of cords in the skin of the axillary cavity that are tensed by shoulder abduction following surgery for breast cancer, causing significant functional limits of the ipsilateral upper limb (UL) and pain. The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss rehabilitation approaches for greater efficacy with respect to pain and novel suggestions. AWS is a frequent complication of axillary lymphadenectomy that necessitates a thorough follow-up in the medium to long term. Physiotherapy is effective in the treatment of functional limb deficits, the management of pain, and the treatment of upper limb disability. The best management approach involves the use of soft tissue techniques to slow the natural course of the syndrome, in association with therapeutic exercises for functional recovery and muscle strengthening. AWS is linked secondary lymphedema, requiring integration with manual lymphatic drainage. The physiotherapy management of AWS is currently fragmented, and insufficient information is available on the nature of the disease. Thus, randomized and controlled studies that compare rehabilitation approaches in AWS are desirable, including the possibility of using mesotherapy in the treatment of axillary and upper limb pain.

Hepatitis B (HBV) reactivation in patients receiving biologic therapy for chronic inflammatory diseases in clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: Biologic treatment - particularly with the anti-TNF molecules - is frequently used in clinical practice to treat the severe form for both chronic rheumatic diseases and inflammatory bowel diseases. The immunosuppression induced by biologic therapies increases the risk of infections, including tuberculosis, as well as hepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation may occur in inactive carriers or occult HBV infection (OBI) subjects during biologic therapy. This study aimed to update data on HBV prevalence and reactivation in patients receiving biologic therapy for either chronic rheumatic diseases or IBD, and to describe their management in clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was performed in 6 Italian centers (3 Rheumatology Units and 3 Gastroenterology Units). Clinical, biochemical and virological data, as well as follow up information, were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: 984 patients were considered, including 817 with rheumatic disease and 167 with IBD. A total of 43 showed HBV infection (38 OBI and 5 carriers) accounting for a prevalence of 4%. Among OBI patients, 1 (2.6%) case of HBV reactivation occurred in a male patient with Crohn disease. Among the 5 HBV carriers, two patients (1 with spondyloarthritis and 1 with rheumatoid arthritis) did not received HBV antiviral therapy, and both experienced flare of hepatitis at 47 and 49 months following biologic therapy starting. DISCUSSION: Data of our study highlight that guidelines on management of HBV patients treated with biologic therapies should be still implemented in clinical practice when considering that, although infrequent, HBV reactivation could be potentially life-threatening.

A Call to Action by the Italian Mesotherapy Society on Scientific Research.

Mesotherapy (local intradermal therapy, LIT) is a technique used to slowly spread drugs in tissues underlying the site of injection to prolong the pharmacological effect with respect to intramuscular injection. Recommendations for proper medical use of this technique have been made for pain medicine and rehabilitation, chronic venous disease, sport medicine, musculoskeletal disorders, several dermatological conditions, skin ageing, and immune-prophylaxis. Although mesotherapy is considered a valid technique, unresolved questions remain, which should be answered to standardize methodology and dosing regimen as well as to define the right indications in clinical practice. New randomized controlled trials are needed to test single products (dose, frequency of administration, efficacy and safety). Even infiltration of substances for dermo-cosmetic purposes must be guided by safety and efficacy tests before being proposed by mesotherapy. In this article, we put forth a preclinical and clinical research plan and a health technology assessment as a call to action by doctors, researchers and scientific societies to aid national health authorities in considering mesotherapy for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation paths.

Intradermal Vaccination: A Potential Tool in the Battle Against the COVID-19 Pandemic?

This narrative review is the final output of an initiative of the SIM (Italian Society of Mesotherapy). A narrative review of scientific literature on the efficacy of fractional intradermal vaccination in comparison with full doses has been conducted for the following pathogens: influenza virus, rabies virus, poliovirus (PV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis A virus (HAV), diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis bacterias (DTP), human papillomavirus (HPV), Japanese encephalitis virus (JE), meningococcus, varicella zoster virus (VZV) and yellow fever virus. The findings suggest that the use of the intradermal route represents a valid strategy in terms of efficacy and efficiency for influenza, rabies and HBV vaccines. Some systematic reviews on influenza vaccines suggest the absence of a substantial difference between immunogenicity induced by a fractional ID dose of up to 20% and the IM dose in healthy adults, elderly, immunocompromised patients and children. Clinical studies of remaining vaccines against other pathogens (HAV, DTP bacterias, JE, meningococcal disease, VZV, and yellow fever virus) are scarce, but promising. In the context of a COVID-19 vaccine shortage, countries should investigate if a fractional dosing scheme may help to save doses and achieve herd immunity quickly. SIM urges the scientific community and health authorities to investigate the potentiality of fractionate intradermal administration in anti-COVID-19 vaccination.

Mesotherapy: From Historical Notes to Scientific Evidence and Future Prospects.

Intradermal therapy, known as mesotherapy, is a technique used to inject a drug into the surface layer of the skin. In particular, it involves the use of a short needle to deposit the drug in the dermis. The intradermal microdeposit modulates the drug's kinetics, slowing absorption and prolonging the local mechanism of action. It is successfully applied in the treatment of some forms of localized pain syndromes and other local clinical conditions. It could be suggested when a systemic drug-sparing effect is useful, when other therapies have failed (or cannot be used), and when it can synergize with other pharmacological or nonpharmacological therapies. Despite the lack of randomized clinical trials in some fields of application, a general consensus is also reached in nonpharmacological mechanism of action, the technique execution modalities, the scientific rationale to apply it in some indications, and the usefulness of the informed consent. The Italian Mesotherapy Society proposes this position paper to apply intradermal therapy based on scientific evidence and no longer on personal bias.

Vitamin D deficiency in patients with either rheumatic diseases or inflammatory bowel diseases on biologic therapy.

Vitamin D deficiency has been reported in patients with chronic inflammatory conditions, such as rheumatic and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). We evaluated the role of biologic therapy on vitamin D, calcium and parathormone (PTH) levels. This cross-sectional study enrolled consecutive patients with either rheumatic diseases or IBD who underwent an ambulatory visit. Patients receiving vitamin D/calcium supplementation were excluded. Vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency was diagnosed when values were <20 ng/mL and 21-29 ng/ml, respectively. Patients were sub-grouped according to biologic therapy. A multivariate analysis was performed. Two-hundred patients, including 136 with a rheumatic disease (M/F 37/99; mean age 60.7 ± 12.9 years) and 64 with IBD (M/F 41/23; Mean age 49.6 ± 13.1 years) were enrolled. Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency was detected in as many as 63.5 % patients, being 61.8 and 67.2 % in patients with either rheumatic diseases or IBD, respectively. The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency was higher in those receiving biologics than other therapies (78.3 vs 43.2 %; p < 0.0001), in either rheumatic diseases (78.7 vs 41 %; p < 0.0001) or IBD (75 vs 50 %; p = 0.03) group. At multivariate analysis, only biologic therapy was independently associated with vitamin D deficit (OR 4.61; p = 0.001). Patients with vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency had hypocalcemia more frequently than controls (22.8 vs 10.9 %; p = 0.03), while PTH values did not differ significantly. This study finds that the prevalence of vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency was very high in patients with either rheumatic diseases or IBD receiving a biologic therapy.

Is it the time to rethink clinical decision-making strategies? From a single clinical outcome evaluation to a Clinical Multi-criteria Decision Assessment (CMDA).

There are plenty of different clinical, organizational and economic parameters to consider in order having a complete assessment of the total impact of a pharmaceutical treatment. In the attempt to follow, a holistic approach aimed to provide an evaluation embracing all clinical parameters in order to choose the best treatments, it is necessary to compare and weight multiple criteria. Therefore, a change is required: we need to move from a decision-making context based on the assessment of one single criteria towards a transparent and systematic framework enabling decision makers to assess all relevant parameters simultaneously in order to choose the best treatment to use. In order to apply the MCDA methodology to clinical decision making the best pharmaceutical treatment (or medical devices) to use to treat a specific pathology, we suggest a specific application of the Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis for the purpose, like a Clinical Multi-criteria Decision Assessment CMDA. In CMDA, results from both meta-analysis and observational studies are used by a clinical consensus after attributing weights to specific domains and related parameters. The decision will result from a related comparison of all consequences (i.e., efficacy, safety, adherence, administration route) existing behind the choice to use a specific pharmacological treatment. The match will yield a score (in absolute value) that link each parameter with a specific intervention, and then a final score for each treatment. The higher is the final score; the most appropriate is the intervention to treat disease considering all criteria (domain an parameters). The results will allow the physician to evaluate the best clinical treatment for his patients considering at the same time all relevant criteria such as clinical effectiveness for all parameters and administration route. The use of CMDA model will yield a clear and complete indication of the best pharmaceutical treatment to use for patients, helping physicians to choose drugs with a complete set of information, imputed in the model.