Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 85
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Exp Rheumatol ; 2019 Sep 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31573477

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To explore the remission concept in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and the implications of the existing definitions when applied to clinical practice among rheumatologists with different profiles. METHODS: A qualitative study through focus groups was conducted. Three focus groups were organised from February to March 2016. Each group was composed of rheumatologists with extensive clinical experience with different profiles; experts in basic research (RBR), experts in imaging techniques research (RIR), and experts in clinical research (RCR). The data was collected with audio recording. Verbatim transcriptions of the audio files were made, and a subsequent reflexive thematic analysis assisted by ATLAS.ti (GmbH, Berlin, v. 7) software was performed. RESULTS: From the reflexive thematic analysis, three main themes were generated: (1) remission limitations, (2) instruments or measures to assess remission, and (3) a new definition of remission. Rheumatologists mentioned frequently that the following variables should be considered when developing a new remission definition: inflammatory activity, calprotectin, psychological variables, sex, disease stage, and sociocultural factors. Contrary to what could be expected, all groups acknowledged that their research field could contribute with domains for a gold standard remission instrument, but not in a hierarchical arrangement of importance. The dissonance existing in the entire remission evaluation process was outlined: remission in clinical practice versus remission in clinical trials, remission following the American College of Rheumatology (ACR)/European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) Boolean versus Musculoskeletal Ultrasound (US) remission, and remission from the rheumatologist's point of view versus the patient's point of view. CONCLUSIONS: Currently, rheumatologists would not accept a domain as more important than others in remission. Our suggestion is, not to generate a universal definition of remission - one that could cover all aspects - but rather to develop definitions of remission for the different settings that could be pondered by the patient's perspective.

2.
Reumatol. clín. (Barc.) ; 15(4): 237-241, jul.-ago. 2019. tab
Artigo em Inglês | LILACS-Express | ID: ibc-ET1-3395

RESUMO

Objective: To describe patient's characteristics, the activity and patient's satisfaction with a multidisciplinary care unit in patients with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods: A retrospective medical records review of patients with psoriasis or PsA attended in a multidisciplinary care unit was performed. Included patients were contacted to fulfill a satisfaction questionnaire. A specific electronic database was set up. Data regarding to patients and their baseline characteristics and the activity of the unit were collected. Descriptive analysis were performed. Results: A total of 112 patients with 154 visits were included in almost 3 years, 54% women, with a mean age of 51 years, 43.7% presented hyperlipidemia and 30.4% arterial hypertension. Half of patients were referred due to diagnostic doubts and the other half for therapeutic problems. After the evaluation of the patients, 66 patients (58.9%) met diagnostic criteria for PsA, and 13 (11.6%) of an inflammatory disease other than PsA, and 95% came back to their usual physician. The most ordered test were laboratory tests (75.6% of patients), followed by X-rays in 57 patients (51.3%). In general the number of patients with different treatments increased, and 55.4% and 42% of patients changed their topic and systemic treatments respectively. The level of satisfaction was very high and all of patients considered that their disease was better controlled in this multidisciplinary care unit. Conclusions: This multidisciplinary care unit has improved the care and satisfaction of patients with psoriasis or PsA, and increased collaboration between rheumatology and dermatology departments


Objetivo: Describir las características de los pacientes, la actividad registrada, así como la satisfacción percibida, de una consulta de atención multidisciplinar para pacientes con psoriasis o artritis psoriásica (APs). Métodos: Estudio observacional retrospectivo con revisión de historias clínicas de todos los pacientes atendidos en la consulta de atención multidisciplinar. Se contactó con todos ellos para que contestasen una encuesta de satisfacción. Varios investigadores recogieron datos sociodemográficos y clínicos, así como administrativos incluyendo el número de visitas en una base de datos especialmente generada para este proyecto. Se realizó un análisis descriptivo. Resultados: Se incluyó a 112 pacientes con 154 visitas en casi 3 años, 54% mujeres, y una edad media de 51 años; el 43,7% presentó hiperlipidemia y el 30,4% hipertensión arterial. La mitad fueron referidos por dudas diagnósticas y la otra por problemas terapéuticos. Tras su evaluación, 66 pacientes (58,9%) cumplieron los criterios diagnósticos de APs y 13 (11,6%) de una enfermedad inflamatoria distinta. El 95% regresó a su médico habitual. La pruebas complementarias más solicitadas fueron analíticas (75,6%) y radiografías simples (51,3%). En general, el número de pacientes con nuevos tratamientos aumentó y el 55,4 y el 42% de los pacientes cambiaron sus tratamientos tópico y sistémico, respectivamente. El nivel de satisfacción fue muy alto y todos los pacientes consideraron que su enfermedad estaba mejor controlada en esta unidad. Conclusiones: Esta consulta de atención multidisciplinar ha mejorado el manejo y satisfacción de pacientes con psoriasis o APs y ha incrementado la colaboración entre los servicios de Reumatología y Dermatología

3.
Clin Exp Rheumatol ; 2019 Jun 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31287409

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the feasibility and changes in the collection of clinical measures after the implementation in daily practice of a checklist designed for an optimal evaluation and monitoring of patients with spondyloarthritis (SpA). METHODS: An observational prospective study was performed. The feasibility of the assessment checklist (paper/on-line format) for patients with SpA was tested (time to complete the checklist, simplicity, amenity clarity, usefulness). Through a medical files review, changes in the number of the checklist variables collected were analysed previous to the implementation of the checklist and 6 months later. A descriptive and bivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total 6 hospitals and 11 rheumatologists participated. The median time to checklist completion was 15 (12-20) minutes, and the mean scores for the rest of variables of the feasibility test were in general positives. A total of 83 and 68 medical files pre-implementation and post-implementation were reviewed respectively. We observed a significant increase in the collection of many of the checklist variables after the implementation. The record of BASDAI increased from 46.2% to 73.1% (p=0.001), physical activity from 48.2% to 88.2% (p<0.0001), physician global (VAS) from 28.0% to 73.5% (p<0.0001), patient global (VAS) from 48.8% to 85.3% (p<0.0001), morning stiffness from 62.8% to 84.8% (p=0.003), ASDAS from 12.2% to 32.8% (p=0.002), BASFI from 43.7% to 65.7% (p=0.008), or DAS28 from 24.7% to 46.3% (p=0.006). These changes were observed irrespectively of SpA classification. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an assessment checklist in daily practice is feasible and improves the assessment of SpA patients.

6.
Rheumatol Int ; 2018 Nov 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30421105

RESUMO

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of biological therapy with cyclosporin A (CsA), azathioprine (AZA), or placebo in uveitis flares and other ocular outcomes in patients with Behçet disease. A comprehensive and sensitive search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed. We selected articles including: (1) adult patients with Behçet's and uveitis; (2) on biological therapies; (3) placebo or active control with CsA or AZA; (4) analyzing efficacy (number of uveitis flares, macular edema, etc.) and/or safety outcomes. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, clinical trials, and observational studies with > 10 patients were included. The selection, data collection and quality assessment (Oxford scale) was carried out by 2 reviewers independently. Nine articles of moderate quality were included (6 randomized clinical trials and 3 retrospective studies) involving 378 patients. Most of them, apart from the study drugs received systemic corticosteroids and other immunosuppressant drugs. Infliximab was more effective than CsA in reducing short-term uveitis flares and severe complications of retinal vasculitis in the long term. Rituximab was similar to a combination of cytotoxic drugs in improving inflammatory activity. In patients with active uveitis adalimumab was associated with a lower risk of uveitic flare or visual impairment, and in patients with inactive uveitis to a significantly lowered the risk of flare upon corticosteroid withdrawal. Secukinumab and daclizumab were not superior to placebo in reducing uveitis flares, like interferonα compared to other drugs. Our results highlight the need for better designed comparative studies on Behçet's uveitis.

7.
Clin Exp Rheumatol ; 36 Suppl 113(4): 68-75, 2018 Jul-Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30277860

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To describe differences in clinical presentation between men and women in a large group of patients with early (<3 years' duration) systemic sclerosis (SSc) according to disease subsets. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of the prospective EULAR Scleroderma Trial and Research database (EUSTAR) was performed. Patients fulfilling preliminary ACR 1980 classification criteria for SSc, with less than 3 years from the first non-Raynaud's symptom at first entry, were selected. A group of patients with less than 3 years from the first SSc symptom, including Raynaud's phenomenon, was also analysed. SSc related variables, including antibodies, SSc subsets, disease activity and organ involvement were included. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 1,027 patients were included, 90% Caucasian, 80% women, and 40% with diffuse cutaneous disease. In early stages of SSc, men showed more frequently than women active disease, diffuse cutaneous subset, anti-Scl-70 antibodies, elevated acute phase reactants, muscular and pulmonary involvement. Differences between men and women were confirmed in the limited, but not in the diffuse SSc subset. The results were similar when 650 patients with less than three years from the first SSc symptom, including Raynaud's phenomenon, were analysed. CONCLUSIONS: In early stages of SSc, men present signs and symptoms of more severe disease. In the limited disease subset, men might appear with clinical features and organ involvement similar to those of the diffuse subgroup. In clinical practice, the identification of such differences might help to select the appropriate management for each particular patient.

8.
Reumatol Clin ; 2018 Sep 04.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30193774

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To develop a consensus to standardize the use of Spanish terms, abbreviations and acronyms in the field of spondyloarthritis (SpA). METHODS: An international task force comprising all native Spanish-speaking Assessment of SpondyloArthritis International Society (ASAS) members, the executive committee of Grupo para el estudio de la Espondiloartritis de la Sociedad Española de Reumatología (GRESSER), two methodologists, two linguists from the Real Academia Nacional de Medicina de España (RANM) and two patients from the Spanish Coordinator of Spondylitis Associations (CEADE) was established. A literature review was performed to identify the conflicting terms/abbreviations/acronyms in SpA. This review examined written sources in Spanish including manuscripts, ICF and ICD, guidelines, recommendations and consensuses. This was followed by a nominal group meeting and a three-round Delphi. The recommendations from the RANM based on the Panhispanic dictionary were followed throughout the process. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 46 terms, abbreviations or acronyms related to the field of SpA. A Spanish translation was accepted for 6 terms and 6 abbreviations to name or classify the disease, and for 6 terms and 4 abbreviations related to SpA. It was agreed not to translate 15 acronyms into Spanish. However, when mentioning them, it was recommended to follow this structure: type of acronym in Spanish and acronym and expanded form in English. With regard to 7 terms or abbreviations attached to acronyms, it was agreed to translate only the expanded form and a translation was also selected for each of them. CONCLUSIONS: Through this standardization, it is expected to establish a common use of the Spanish nomenclature for SpA. The implementation of this consensus across the community will be of substantial benefit, avoiding misunderstandings and time-consuming processes.

9.
Reumatol. clín. (Barc.) ; 14(4): 183-190, jul.-ago. 2018. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-175919

RESUMO

Objetivos: Desarrollar recomendaciones sobre el uso de metotrexato (MTX) en pacientes con artritis psoriásica (APs) basadas en la mejor evidencia y experiencia. Métodos: Se seleccionó un grupo de 12 expertos reumatólogos en el manejo de MTX. Los coordinadores generaron 14 preguntas sobre el uso de MTX en pacientes con APs (perfiles de indicación, eficacia y seguridad) para ser contestadas mediante una revisión sistemática de la literatura. En función de las preguntas se definieron los criterios de inclusión y exclusión y las estrategias de búsqueda (para interrogar Medline, Embase y la Cochrane Library). Dos revisores seleccionaron los artículos resultantes de la búsqueda. Se generaron tablas de evidencia. Paralelamente se evaluaron abstracts de congresos de EULAR y ACR. Con toda esta evidencia los coordinadores generaron 12 recomendaciones preliminares que se evaluaron, discutieron y votaron en una reunión de grupo nominal con el resto de expertos. Para cada recomendación se estableció el nivel de evidencia, grado de recomendación, y grado de acuerdo mediante un Delphi. Se definió acuerdo si al menos el 80% de los participantes contestan sí a la recomendación (sí o no). Resultados: De las 12 recomendaciones preliminares se aceptaron 9 recomendaciones sobre el uso de MTX en la APs. Una se englobó en otra y otras 2 no se llegaron a votar porque se decidió no incluirlas, pero se comentan en el texto final. Conclusiones: Estas recomendaciones pretenden resolver algunos interrogantes clínicos habituales y facilitar la toma de decisiones con el uso de MTX en la APs


Objectives: To develop recommendations for the management of methotrexate (MTX) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), based on best evidence and experience. Methods: A group of 12 experts on MTX use was selected. The coordinators formulated 14 questions about the use of MTX in PsA patients (indications, efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness). A systematic review was conducted to answer the questions. Using this information, inclusion and exclusion criteria were established, as were the search strategies (Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched). Two different reviewers selected the articles. Evidence tables were created. At the same time, European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology abstracts were evaluated. Based on this evidence, the coordinators proposed 12 preliminary recommendations that the experts discussed and voted on in a nominal group meeting. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were established using the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine and the level of agreement with the Delphi technique (2 rounds). Agreement was established if at least 80% of the experts voted yes (yes/no). Results: A total of 12 preliminary recommendations on the use of MTX were proposed, 9 of which were accepted. One was included in a different recommendation and another 2 were not voted on and were thereafter clarified in the main text. Conclusions: These recommendations aim to answer frequent questions and help in decision making strategies when treating PsA patients with MTX


Assuntos
Humanos , Metotrexato/uso terapêutico , Artrite Psoriásica/tratamento farmacológico , Padrões de Prática Médica , Segurança do Paciente , Antirreumáticos/uso terapêutico , Terapia Biológica
10.
Reumatol. clín. (Barc.) ; 14(supl.2): 3-6, jun. 2018. mapas
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-176060

RESUMO

La artritis reumatoide es una enfermedad crónica, de distribución universal y con un impacto muy importante sobre la vida del paciente y la sociedad en su conjunto. En España se ha estimado una prevalencia del 0,5%, que es mayor en mujeres y en áreas urbanas, y una incidencia anual de 8,3 casos por cada 100.000 adultos mayores de 16 años. Tanto la prevalencia como la incidencia varían dependiendo del área geográfica y de otros factores. Su etiología es desconocida, aunque existen datos que sugieren la implicación de genes y de factores ambientales en su desarrollo, como el hábito tabáquico. La artritis reumatoide disminuye enormemente la calidad de vida de los pacientes, tanto en su área física como en la psicológica, lo que a su vez repercute en el plano familiar, social y laboral. Todo ello, además, genera un importante coste sociosanitario


Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a worldwide chronic illness with a significant impact on patients' lives and society as a whole. In Spain, its prevalence has been estimated at 0.5%, with a higher prevalence among women and in urban areas. It has an annual incidence of 8.3 cases per 100,000 adults aged 16 and older. Both the prevalence and the incidence vary depending on geographic area and other factors. Although the aetiology of the disease is unknown, data show a relationship between the involvement of genes and environmental factors, such as smoking, in the development of this pathology. RA dramatically impairs patients' quality of life, both physically and psychologically, with family, social, and professional repercussions. All this also leads to significant societal and healthcare costs


Assuntos
Humanos , Artrite Reumatoide/epidemiologia , Avaliação da Deficiência , Custos de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Qualidade de Vida , Perfil de Impacto da Doença , Fatores de Risco
11.
Reumatol. clín. (Barc.) ; 14(3): 155-159, mayo-jun. 2018. ilus
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-174100

RESUMO

Objetivo. Estandarizar la evaluación clínica de pacientes con espondiloartritis (EspA) axial y artritis psoriásica (APs). Métodos. Estudio cualitativo que incluyó: 1) grupo nominal (18 expertos); 2) revisión de la literatura sobre variables empleadas en la evaluación de los pacientes con EspA axial o APs, y 3) grupo focal con reumatólogos y otro con pacientes con EspA axial o APs para analizar la evaluación de las EspA en las consultas de reumatología. Los expertos seleccionaron las variables a incluir en el cuadro de actuación con base en su relevancia, factibilidad en consulta y método/s de medición. Resultados. El cuadro de actuación incluye las variables para valorar antecedentes personales, exploración física, actividad y función, pruebas complementarias y tratamientos. Detalla factores de riesgo de progresión radiográfica, factores predictores de respuesta a terapia biológica, e incluye variables de excelencia. Conclusiones. Este cuadro de actuación para pacientes con EspA axial y APs podrá ayudar a homogeneizar la práctica clínica diaria y a mejorar el manejo y el pronóstico de estos pacientes


Objective. To standardize clinical evaluation of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using a checklist. Methods. Qualitative study that included: 1) nominal group (18 experts); 2) literature reviews of measures used in the assessment of patients with axial SpA or PsA; and 3) focus groups, one with rheumatologists and another with patients, organized to become familiar with their opinion on medical assistance. Taking this into account, the experts selected the measures to be included in the checklist based on their relevance, feasibility, and the outcome type. Results. The checklist includes measures for the evaluation of personal history, physical examination, activity and function, laboratory tests, imaging studies and treatments. It also defines risk factors of radiographic progression, predictors of the response to biological therapies, and comprises measures of excellence. Conclusions. This checklist for patients with axial SpA and PsA could help standardize daily clinical practice and improve clinical management and patient prognosis


Assuntos
Humanos , Literatura de Revisão como Assunto , Espondilartrite/diagnóstico , Artrite Psoriásica/diagnóstico , Exame Físico/métodos , Fatores de Risco , Prognóstico , Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde , Análise Qualitativa , Projetos , Espondilartrite/terapia , Artrite Psoriásica/terapia , Epidemiologia Descritiva , Análise Estatística
12.
Rheumatol Int ; 38(12): 2167-2182, 2018 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29808295

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To establish feasible and practical recommendations for the management of the psychological needs of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) from the moment of diagnosis through the course of the disease. METHODS: A nominal group meeting was held with an RA expert team including rheumatologists and psychologists, at which a guided discussion addressed the most important psychological and emotional needs in RA. Based on the comments collected, and a literature review, a matrix document of recommendations for telematics discussion was prepared, as well as a Delphi survey to test agreement with these recommendations. Agreement was defined if at least 80% of participants voted ≥ 7 (from 1, totally disagree to 10, totally agree). For each recommendation, the level of evidence and grading of recommendations was established following the Oxford criteria, and the degree of agreement through the Delphi. RESULTS: Thirteen recommendations were established, addressing several key processes: (1) identification of psychological problems and needs in patients with RA, and a guideline for their management in daily practice; (2) communication with patients; (3) referral criteria to mental health professionals. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are intended to help health care professionals openly address the psychological aspects of patients in daily practice to follow and treat them properly.

13.
Reumatol. clín. (Barc.) ; 14(1): 9-19, ene.-feb. 2018. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-170367

RESUMO

Objetivo. Establecer recomendaciones, basadas en la evidencia, sobre el uso de la ecografía (US) y la resonancia magnética (RM) en pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR). Métodos. Las recomendaciones se consensuaron mediante metodología basada en grupos nominales. Un grupo de expertos (15 reumatólogos y 3 radiólogos) definió el alcance, usuarios, apartados del documento, posibles recomendaciones, revisiones sistemáticas a realizar (se utilizaron y actualizaron las revisiones de documentos de consenso previos de EULAR), y de la asignación de tareas. Los expertos delimitaron los apartados y redactaron las recomendaciones. El nivel de evidencia y grado de recomendación se realizó utilizando el sistema del Center for Evidence Based Medicine de Oxford. El grado de acuerdo se estableció mediante un Delphi a 2 rondas. Las recomendaciones se votaron según una escala de 1 (total desacuerdo) a 10 (total acuerdo), definiéndose el acuerdo como una puntuación ≥ 7 por al menos el 70% de los participantes. El documento completo fue revisado por los expertos y el proyecto coordinado por un metodólogo experto. Resultados. Se emitieron 20 recomendaciones que cubren: la validez de la US y RM para la detección de actividad y daño estructural, capacidad diagnóstica, predictora (de progresión de daño estructural, de brote de la enfermedad, respuesta al tratamiento, etc.), utilidad en la evaluación y monitorización de estos pacientes que están en tratamiento, y uso de la US como guía (para infiltraciones o biopsias). Conclusiones. Se presentan recomendaciones útiles para el manejo de la US y RM por los clínicos en pacientes con AR (AU)


Objective. To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods. Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts, consisting of 15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists, was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of experts voted ≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. Results. A total of 20 recommendations were proposed. They include the validity of US and MRI regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. Conclusions. These recommendations will help clinicians use US and MRI in RA patients (AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Artrite Reumatoide/diagnóstico por imagem , Ultrassonografia , Imagem por Ressonância Magnética , Padrões de Prática Médica/tendências , Revisão por Pares/métodos
14.
Reumatol. clín. (Barc.) ; 14(1): 27-35, ene.-feb. 2018. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-170369

RESUMO

Objetivo. Establecer recomendaciones, basadas en la evidencia, sobre el uso de la ecografía (US) y la resonancia magnética en pacientes con espondiloartritis, incluyendo la artritis psoriásica, y en la artritis idiopática juvenil. Métodos. Las recomendaciones se consensuaron mediante metodología basada en grupos nominales. Un grupo de expertos (15 reumatólogos y 3 radiólogos) definió el alcance, los usuarios, los apartados, las posibles recomendaciones y las revisiones sistemáticas a realizar (se utilizaron y actualizaron las revisiones de documentos de consenso de EULAR), y se asignaron tareas. Los expertos delimitaron los apartados y redactaron las recomendaciones. El nivel de evidencia y el grado de recomendación se establecieron utilizando el sistema del Centre for Evidence Based Medicine de Oxford, y el grado de acuerdo mediante Delphi a 2 rondas. Las recomendaciones se votaron según una escala de 1 (total desacuerdo) a 10 (total acuerdo), definiéndose el acuerdo como una puntuación≥7 por al menos el 70% de los participantes. El documento fue revisado por los expertos y el proyecto estuvo coordinado por un metodólogo experto. Resultados. Se emitieron 12 recomendaciones sobre la validez de la US y la resonancia magnética para la detección de actividad y daño estructural, capacidad diagnóstica, predictora (de progresión de daño estructural, brote de la enfermedad, respuesta al tratamiento, etc.), utilidad en la evaluación y monitorización del tratamiento, y uso de la US como guía (para infiltraciones, biopsias, etc.) en pacientes con espondiloartritis y artritis idiopática juvenil. Conclusiones. Se presentan unas recomendaciones útiles para el manejo de la US y la resonancia magnética por los clínicos en pacientes con espondiloartritis y artritis idiopática juvenil (AU)


Objective. To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Methods. Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts (15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists) was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of participants voted≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine levels of evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. Results. A total of 12 recommendations were proposed for each disease. They include, along with explanations of the validity of US and magnetic resonance imaging regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. Conclusions. These recommendations will help clinicians use US and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Espondilartrite/diagnóstico por imagem , Artrite Juvenil/diagnóstico por imagem , Artrite Psoriásica/diagnóstico por imagem , Padrões de Prática Médica , Ultrassonografia/métodos , Espectroscopia de Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Prática Clínica Baseada em Evidências/métodos
15.
Semin Arthritis Rheum ; 47(6): 870-876, 2018 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29126717

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the performance of the 1980 ACR and new 2013 ACR/EULAR criteria for systemic sclerosis (SSc) in cutaneous SSc (lcSSc) patients, especially those affected by lcSSc and pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). METHODS: All patients with a clinical lcSSc diagnosis from a prospective observational SSc cohort were included. Sociodemographic and disease-related variables were collected, and PAH confirmed by right heart catheterization (RHC). Performance of the 2013 and 1980 SSc criteria was analyzed in terms of clinical diagnosis. Descriptive and between-group analyses were performed as to the fulfillment of criterion sets, including comparison of survival. RESULTS: Overall, 321 patients were included, 63% of whom fulfilled the 1980 ACR and 93% the 2013 ACR/EULAR criteria. Agreement between both criteria sets proved poor (κ = 0.23). LcSSC patients fulfilling both criterion sets were significantly younger at diagnosis, whilst presenting organ involvement, calcinosis, fingertip digital ulcers, and pitting scars more frequently than those who met the 2013 criteria only. Patients who fulfilled the 2013 but not the 1980 criteria presented a higher degree of ACA positivity and PAH. Nearly 12% of patients developed PAH. Patients who did not meet the 1980 criteria were affected by a milder disease from but demonstrated higher pulmonary vascular resistance and lower cardiac index than those fulfilling both criterion sets. Whereas patients with PAH met the 2013 criteria, only 47% fulfilled the 1980 criteria. Regardless of criterion set fulfillment, high mortality was observed in PAH patients, with no significant between-patient difference based on criterion set. CONCLUSION: The new 2013 ARC/EULAR criteria prove more accurate than the former 1980 ACR criteria in identifying and differentiating patients with lcSSc, especially those with associated PAH. Since PAH exhibits a better prognosis if treated early, all SSc patients should undergo PAH screening.


Assuntos
Hipertensão Pulmonar/classificação , Escleroderma Sistêmico/classificação , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Hipertensão Pulmonar/etiologia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos , Escleroderma Sistêmico/complicações
16.
Reumatol Clin ; 14(1): 9-19, 2018 Jan - Feb.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28029551

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts, consisting of 15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists, was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of experts voted ≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. RESULTS: A total of 20 recommendations were proposed. They include the validity of US and MRI regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will help clinicians use US and MRI in RA patients.


Assuntos
Artrite Reumatoide/diagnóstico por imagem , Imagem por Ressonância Magnética , Antirreumáticos/uso terapêutico , Artrite Reumatoide/tratamento farmacológico , Técnica Delfos , Monitoramento de Medicamentos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Humanos , Ultrassonografia
17.
Reumatol Clin ; 14(3): 155-159, 2018 May - Jun.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28284772

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To standardize clinical evaluation of patients with axial spondyloarthritis (SpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) using a checklist. METHODS: Qualitative study that included: 1) nominal group (18 experts); 2) literature reviews of measures used in the assessment of patients with axial SpA or PsA; and 3) focus groups, one with rheumatologists and another with patients, organized to become familiar with their opinion on medical assistance. Taking this into account, the experts selected the measures to be included in the checklist based on their relevance, feasibility, and the outcome type. RESULTS: The checklist includes measures for the evaluation of personal history, physical examination, activity and function, laboratory tests, imaging studies and treatments. It also defines risk factors of radiographic progression, predictors of the response to biological therapies, and comprises measures of excellence. CONCLUSIONS: This checklist for patients with axial SpA and PsA could help standardize daily clinical practice and improve clinical management and patient prognosis.

18.
Reumatol Clin ; 14(4): 183-190, 2018 Jul - Aug.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29050840

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: To develop recommendations for the management of methotrexate (MTX) in psoriatic arthritis (PsA), based on best evidence and experience. METHODS: A group of 12 experts on MTX use was selected. The coordinators formulated 14 questions about the use of MTX in PsA patients (indications, efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness). A systematic review was conducted to answer the questions. Using this information, inclusion and exclusion criteria were established, as were the search strategies (Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched). Two different reviewers selected the articles. Evidence tables were created. At the same time, European League Against Rheumatism and American College of Rheumatology abstracts were evaluated. Based on this evidence, the coordinators proposed 12 preliminary recommendations that the experts discussed and voted on in a nominal group meeting. The level of evidence and grade of recommendation were established using the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine and the level of agreement with the Delphi technique (2 rounds). Agreement was established if at least 80% of the experts voted yes (yes/no). RESULTS: A total of 12 preliminary recommendations on the use of MTX were proposed, 9 of which were accepted. One was included in a different recommendation and another 2 were not voted on and were thereafter clarified in the main text. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations aim to answer frequent questions and help in decision making strategies when treating PsA patients with MTX.

19.
Reumatol Clin ; 14(1): 27-35, 2018 Jan - Feb.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28277255

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based recommendations on the use of ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis, including psoriatic arthritis, and juvenile idiopathic arthritis. METHODS: Recommendations were generated following a nominal group technique. A panel of experts (15 rheumatologists and 3 radiologists) was established in the first panel meeting to define the scope and purpose of the consensus document, as well as chapters, potential recommendations and systematic literature reviews (we used and updated those from previous EULAR documents). A first draft of recommendations and text was generated. Then, an electronic Delphi process (2 rounds) was carried out. Recommendations were voted from 1 (total disagreement) to 10 (total agreement). We defined agreement if at least 70% of participants voted≥7. The level of evidence and grade or recommendation was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence Based Medicine levels of evidence. The full text was circulated and reviewed by the panel. The consensus was coordinated by an expert methodologist. RESULTS: A total of 12 recommendations were proposed for each disease. They include, along with explanations of the validity of US and magnetic resonance imaging regarding inflammation and damage detection, diagnosis, prediction (structural damage progression, flare, treatment response, etc.), monitoring and the use of US guided injections/biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations will help clinicians use US and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with spondyloarthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis.


Assuntos
Artrite Juvenil/diagnóstico por imagem , Artrite Psoriásica/diagnóstico por imagem , Imagem por Ressonância Magnética , Espondilartrite/diagnóstico por imagem , Humanos , Ultrassonografia
20.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 96(42): e8045, 2017 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29049193

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: To assess the efficacy and safety of immunomodulatory drugs in patients with noninfectious anterior uveitis (AU). METHODS: Systematic review of studies were retrieved from Medline (1961 to March 2016), Embase (1961 to March 2016), and Cochrane Library (up to March 2016), and a complementary hand search was also performed. The selection criteria were as follows: (population) noninfectious AU patients, adults; (intervention) immunomodulatory drugs (any dose, regimen, route of administration, duration of treatment); (outcome) control of inflammation, steroid-sparing effect, AU flares, adverse events, and so on; (study design) systematic literature reviews, randomized controlled trials, and observational studies. The study quality was assessed using the Jadad scale and according to The Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine (update 2009). RESULTS: We included 13 studies of moderate-poor quality, with a mean duration from 5 months to 20 years, and number of AU patients ranging from 9 to 274. Patient's demographic and clinical characteristics were very heterogeneous. In most cases, uveitis anatomic classification criteria and outcomes definitions were unclear. Some of the studies only included AU patients with a systemic disease associated, mostly spondyloarthritis, others, mixed populations (idiopathic and systemic disease associated patients), and in some articles this data is not described. We found that methotrexate, cyclosporine A, azathioprine, adalimumab, and golimumab might prevent AU flares, improve ocular inflammation and visual acuity, and decrease systemic steroids doses. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is a lack of robust evidence, methotrexate, cyclosporine A, azathioprine, adalimumab, and golimumab might be effective in AU patients.


Assuntos
Imunossupressores/uso terapêutico , Uveíte Anterior/tratamento farmacológico , Adalimumab/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Anticorpos Monoclonais/uso terapêutico , Azatioprina/uso terapêutico , Ciclosporina/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Metotrexato/uso terapêutico , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA