Is it possible to predict which patients are most likely to benefit from intra-articular corticosteroid injections? A systematic review.

AIM: Intra-articular corticosteroid injections (IACIs) can reduce osteoarthritis-related pain, with differing levels of response across patient groups. This systematic review investigates what is known about the positive and negative predictors of outcomes in patients with osteoarthritis who undergo IACIs. METHODS: We systematically searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases to May 2023 for studies that evaluated patients undergoing IACIs for osteoarthritis and reported on predictors of outcomes in these patients. RESULTS: Eight studies were included. Two were placebo-controlled trials, six were observational studies. Due to the heterogeneity of outcomes and variables between the studies, it was not possible to pool the results for formal meta-analysis. Higher baseline pain, older age, higher BMI, lower range of movement, higher Kellgren-Lawrence radiographic score, joint effusion, and aspiration were shown to be predictors of a positive response to IACIs in some of the included studies. However, other studies showed no difference in response with these variables, or a negative correlation with response. Sex, smoking, mental health status, hypertension/ischaemic heart disease, diabetes mellitus, duration of symptoms, and socioeconomic status did not demonstrate any correlation with the prediction of positive or negative outcomes after IACIs. CONCLUSION: Several patient features have been identified as positive predictors of outcomes following IACIs. However, this systematic review has identified inconsistent and variable findings across the existing literature. Further research with standardization of IACI administration and outcome measures is required to facilitate further analysis of the reliability and significance of predictive factors for response to IACIs.

Post-operative Surveillance Following Curative Resection of Colorectal Cancer in the Elderly Population in the United Kingdom: An Observational Study.

Background Colorectal cancer most commonly affects the elderly population. Post-colorectal cancer surveillance aims to reduce cancer incidence and mortality, but its necessity and effectiveness are debated, especially in the elderly population. This study explores the relevance of computer tomography (CT) and colonoscopy surveillance in patients aged 75 and over who have undergone curative resection for colorectal cancer. Methods A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted on patients aged 75 and over who had undergone surgical resection of colorectal cancer between November 2014 and August 2021. Data on demographics, treatment, survival, and surveillance were gathered from electronic patient records. The primary outcome was adherence to follow-up colonoscopy and CT-scan surveillance following surgery. Results A total of 417 patients underwent colorectal cancer surgery, with 334 included for analysis. The cohort had an average age of 81 years, with the majority receiving laparoscopic surgery and primary anastomosis. Twelve-month CT surveillance showed normal results in 281 patients (91.8%), while 24-month CT surveillance demonstrated normal findings in 244 patients (88.7%). Only 175 patients (52.4%) had colonoscopy follow-up, with 94 (53.7%) showing normal results, 74 (42.3%) demonstrating benign polyps, and two patients (1.1%) having histologically proven cancer. Reasons for not undergoing colonoscopy included declining invitations (30 patients, 19.1%) and being too frail (45 patients, 28.7%). Conclusion This study reinforces the notion that colonoscopy surveillance for patients over the age of 75 may have limited benefits. In an ageing population, the benefits of surveillance in terms of early detection of recurrence must be balanced against the risks of harm from the procedure, the availability of further management, cost-effectiveness, and patient preferences. An individualised approach should be adopted, potentially with colonoscopy surveillance only recommended in patients of higher risk (extramural venous invasion (EMVI)) and a low frailty score with a life expectancy over 10 years.