Significant use of non-evidence-based therapeutics in a cohort of Australian fibromyalgia patients.

BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a common condition characterised by chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain and central sensitivity features. Appropriate management requires a multidisciplinary approach prioritising non-pharmacological strategies. Evidence-based fibromyalgia medications are not always easily available, effective or tolerated. AIM: To characterise actual medication usage in Australian fibromyalgia patients. METHODS: Demographic and clinical data, including medication use information, were gathered by chart review from patients attending the Monash Fibromyalgia Clinic between January 2019 and June 2022. Eligible patients were invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire between June and August 2022 to assess current therapeutic use. The questionnaire assessed fibromyalgia clinical features by using the Revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire and the 2016 modified American College of Rheumatology Fibromyalgia criteria. RESULTS: The chart review included 474 patients, and 108 participants completed the questionnaire. Most chart review (78.7%) and questionnaire participants (85.2%) reported using at least one medication for their fibromyalgia. 48.5% of chart review patients and 58.3% of questionnaire participants reported using at least one evidence-based medication, usually amitriptyline, duloxetine or pregabalin. However, the most common individual medications for questionnaire participants were non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (48.2%), paracetamol (59.3%) and opioids (34.3%), with most opioids being typical opioids. Among questionnaire participants, 14.8% reported using cannabinoids, and 70.4% reported using at least one supplement, vitamin or herbal/naturopathic preparation. Not all medication or substance use was recorded during clinic appointments. CONCLUSION: Fibromyalgia patients engage in various pharmacotherapeutic strategies that are not always evidence-based or disclosed to their treating clinicians.

Central sensitivity and fibromyalgia.

Fibromyalgia presents with symptoms of widespread pain, fatigue, sleeping and cognitive disturbances as well as other somatic symptoms. It often overlaps with other conditions termed 'central sensitivity syndromes', such as irritable bowel syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome and temporomandibular disorder. Central sensitisation, mediated by amplified processing in the central nervous system, has been identified as the key pathogenic mechanism in these disorders. The term 'central sensitivity' can be used to describe collectively the clinical presentation of these disorders. Fibromyalgia is highly prevalent in most rheumatic diseases as well as non-rheumatic chronic diseases and if unrecognised results in high morbidity. It is diagnosed clinically after excluding important differential diagnoses. Diagnostic criteria have been developed as tools to help identify and diagnose fibromyalgia. Such tools can fulfil an important need when managing patients with rheumatic disease and other chronic diseases as a way to identify fibromyalgia and improve patient outcomes. Treatment involves an integrated approach including education, exercise, stress reduction and pharmacological therapies targeting the central nervous system. This approach is suitable for all presentations of central sensitivity and some central sensitivity syndromes have additional treatment options specific to the clinical presentation.

Pseudotumours in haemophilia: non-adherence, under-reporting bleeds or bad luck?

Pseudotumours are a rare, severe complication of haemophilia which can occur in a spectrum of bones and soft tissues. It consists of an encapsulated blood collection, and as the swelling increases causes compression and eventual slow destruction of surrounding structures. Presented here are two cases of patients with haemophilia and pseudotumours, which demonstrate the heterogeneity of presenting symptoms and of treatment options.

Antiphospholipid syndrome: a clinical review.

Antiphospholipid syndrome is characterised by recurrent thrombosis (arterial, venous, microvascular) and/or pregnancy complications in the presence of persistent antiphospholipid antibodies (lupus anticoagulant, anti-ß2-glycoprotein 1 and anticardiolipin). It can be a primary disease or associated with another autoimmune disease (especially systemic lupus erythematosis). Testing for antiphospholipid antibodies should be considered in patients < 50 years of age with unprovoked venous or arterial thromboembolism, thrombosis at unusual sites or pregnancy complications. The mainstay of treatment is antithrombotic therapy and recommendations vary based on arterial, venous or pregnancy complications. If associated with systemic lupus erythematosis, hydroxychloroquine is recommended both as primary and secondary prophylaxis. Antithrombotic treatment is gold standard and effective.

Meniscal pathology - the evidence for treatment.

Whilst arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of meniscal tears is the most commonly performed orthopaedic surgery, meniscal tears at the knee are frequently identified on magnetic resonance imaging in adults with and without knee pain. The evidence for arthroscopic treatment of meniscal tears is controversial and lacks a supporting evidence base; it may be no more efficacious than conservative therapies. Surgical approaches to the treatment of meniscal pathology can be broadly categorised into those in which partial menisectomy or repair are performed. This review highlights that the major factor determining the choice of operative approach is age: meniscal repair is performed exclusively on younger populations, while older populations are subject to partial menisectomy procedures. This is probably because the meniscus is less amenable to repair in the older population where other degenerative changes co-exist. In middle-aged to older adults, arthroscopic partial menisectomy (APM) may treat the meniscus tear, but does not address the degenerative whole organ disease of knee osteoarthritis. Thus far, there is no convincing evidence that operative approaches are superior to conservative measures as the first-line treatment of older people with knee pain and meniscal tears. However, in two randomised controlled trials (RCTs) approximately one-third of subjects in the exercise groups had persisting knee pain with some evidence of improvement following APM, although the characteristics of this subgroup are unclear. From the available data, a first-line trial of conservative therapy, which includes weight loss, is recommended for the treatment of degenerative meniscal tears in older adults. The exception to this may be when mechanical symptoms, such as knee locking, predominate. Although requiring corroboration by RCTs, there is accumulating evidence from cohort studies and case series that meniscal repair rather than APM may improve function and reduce the long-term risk of knee osteoarthritis in young adults. There is no clear evidence from RCTs that one surgical method of meniscal repair is superior to another.