Medical versus surgical approach to initial treatment in septic arthritis: A single spanish center’s 8-year experience

Objective The aim of this study was to compare the functional results of 2 different procedure types, medical or surgical used in treating native joint septic arthritis. Methods In this cohort study, we reviewed the clinical registries of patients admitted to a single third-level hospital with the diagnosis of septic arthritis during the period of January 1, 2008, to January 31, 2016. Results A total of 63 cases of septic arthritis were identified in which the initial approach for 49 patients was medical (arthrocentesis), whereas the initial approach for 14 patients was surgical (arthroscopy or arthrotomy). Of the 49 patients who received initial medical treatment (IMT), 15 patients (30%) later required surgical treatment because of poor progress. The median age of the patients was 60 (SD, 18) years. The group who received IMT were older than those who received initial surgical treatment (median, 64 years [interquartile range {IQR}, 54–76 years], vs. 48 years [IQR, 30–60 years]). There was a larger percentage of male patients in the surgical group (78% vs. 42% [p = 0.018]). Thirty percent of the medical group had been receiving corticosteroid treatment (p = 0.018). Results of complete recovery of joint functionality showed no significant differences after 1 year (68% with MT vs. 67% with ST, p = 0.91). Both groups had similar symptom duration until diagnosis, duration of antibiotic therapy (median, 30 days [IQR, 28–49 days], vs. 29.5 days [IQR, 27–49] days), and mortality rate (3 in the medical group). Conclusions The results of the study show that initial surgical treatment in patients with native joint septic arthritis is not superior to IMT. However, half of the patients with shoulder and hip infections treated with IMT eventually required surgical intervention, suggesting that perhaps this should be the preferred initial approach in these cases

Joint Manifestations in Patients Diagnosed with Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathy: Multicenter Registry on Inflammatory Myositis from the Rheumatology Society in Madrid, Spain

Sin financiación7.783 JCR (2017) Q1, 3/30 Rheumatology3.889 SJR (2017) Q1, 19/227 ImmunologyNo data IDR 2017UE

Long-term pulmonary outcomes and mortality in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies associated with interstitial lung disease

Objective: To study prognostic factors in different types of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) associated with interstitial lung disease (ILD). Patients and methods: Multicenter retrospective study of a Spanish cohort of patients diagnosed with IIM. Patients were classified into four categories: polymyositis (PM), dermatomyositis (DM), antisynthetase syndrome (ASS), and overlap myositis (OM). Sociodemographic data, clinical characteristics, antibodies, and treatments were collected. Cox regression models were calculated to identify factors associated with mortality, the necessity for long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT), and deterioration in respiratory function tests (RFT). Results: The number of patients included was 478, of whom 112 (23.4%) suffered from ILD: 17% PM, 16% DM, 45% ASS, and 22% OM. Factors associated with mortality in the multivariate analysis were clinically meaningful progression of ILD after 3 months (CMP 3m) (hazard ratio (HR) 9.48, p = 0.005), severe infections (HR 6.41, p = 0.016), heliotrope erythema (HR 31.1, p = 0.002), delay in diagnosis (HR 1.29; p = 0.011), and Raynaud's phenomenon (HR 11.9, p = 0.007). However, being female (HR 0.19, p = 0.044) and positivity solely for ANAs (HR 0.08, p = 0.008) presented a protective effect. CMP 3m (HR 22.7, p = 0.027) was associated with the need for LTOT, while basal aldolase (HR 0.90; p = 0.049) had a protective effect. Likewise, joint manifestations (HR 0.04, p = 0.034) were shown to reduce risk of deterioration in RFT. Conclusions: CMP 3m, severe infections, delay in diagnosis, heliotrope erythema, and Raynaud's phenomenon were identified as factors of poor prognosis in different IIM associated with ILD.Sin financiación2.394 JCR (2019) Q3, 20/32 Rheumatology0.755 SJR (2019) Q2, 27/64 RheumatologyNo data IDR 2019UE

Overlap myositis, a distinct entity beyond primary inflammatory myositis: A retrospective analysis of a large cohort from the REMICAM registry

Background: Inflammatory idiopathic myositis (IIM) comprises a heterogeneous group of systemic muscular diseases that can occur together with other connective tissue diseases (CTD), named overlap myositis (OM). The question of whether OM is a distinct entity still remains controversial. Aim: The present study was conducted to assess the clinical and prognostic differences between patients diagnosed with OM, primary polymyositis (PM) and primary dermatomyositis (DM). Method: The study consists of a retrospective longitudinal and multicenter series of IIM patients. Patients were classified as OM, PM and DM. Overlap myositis was defined as patients fulfilling criteria for IIM plus criteria for other CTD (namely systemic sclerosis, systemic lupus erythematosus, mixed connective tissue disease, rheumatoid arthritis and primary Sjögren's syndrome). Result: A total of 342 patients were included (98 OM, 137 PM and 107 DM). Overlap myositis patients, in comparison with PM and DM, showed significant differences, with more extramuscular involvement, particularly more arthritis (66%, 34.6% and 48.1%, respectively), puffy fingers (49.5%, 11.1% and 24.3%), sclerodactyly (45.4%, 2.2% and 2%), dysphagia (41.8%, 18.2% and 26.4%), Raynaud phenomenon (65.3%, 16.9% and 19.8%), leucopenia (28.9%, 2.2% and 8.4%), thrombocytopenia (8.2%, 2.2% and 1.9%), interstitial lung disease (ILD) (48%, 35% and 30.8%), renal manifestations (13.4%, 3.7% and 1.9%), and more severe infections (41.3%, 26.7% and 21%). No significant differences were found in survival between groups in log rank test (P = 0.106). Multivariate adjusted survival analyses revealed a worse prognosis for severe infections, ILD and baseline elevation of acute phase reactants. Conclusion: Overlap myositis stands out as a distinct entity as compared to PM and DM, featuring more extramuscular involvement and more severe infections. Close monitoring is recommended in this subset for early detection and treatment of possible complications.Sin financiación1.980 JCR (2019) Q1, 25/32 Rheumatology0.649 SJR (2019) Q3, 33/64 RheumatologyNo data IDR 2019UE

Mortality and prognostic factors in idiopathic inflammatory myositis: a retrospective analysis of a large multicenter cohort of Spain

The present study was undertaken to assess mortality, causes of death, and associated prognostic factors in a large cohort of patients diagnosed with idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIM) from Spain. A retrospective longitudinal study was carried out in 467 consecutive patients with IIM, identified from 12 medical centers. Patients were classified as primary polymyositis, primary dermatomyositis (DM), overlap myositis, cancer-associated myositis (CAM), and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. A total of 113 deaths occurred (24%) after a median follow-up time of 9.7 years. In the overall cohort, the 2-, 5-, and 10-year survival probabilities were 91.9, 86.7, and 77%, respectively. Main causes of death were infections and cancer (24% each). Multivariate model revealed that CAM (HR = 24.06), OM (HR = 12.00), DM (HR = 7.26), higher age at diagnosis (HR = 1.02), severe infections (HR = 3.66), interstitial lung disease (HR = 1.61), and baseline elevation of acute phase reactants (HR = 3.03) were associated with a worse prognosis, while edema of the hands (HR = 0.39), female gender (HR = 0.39), and longer disease duration (HR = 0.73) were associated with a better prognosis. The standardized mortality ratio was 1.56 (95% CI 1.28-1.87) compared to the Spanish general population. Our findings indicate that IIM has a high long-term mortality, with an excess of mortality compared to the Spanish population. A more aggressive therapy may be required in IIM patients presenting with poor predictive factors.Sin financiación1.952 JCR (2017) Q3, 24/32 Rheumatology0.906 SJR (2017) Q2, 25/66 RheumatologyNo data IDR 2017UE