A critical appraisal of guidelines for the management of knee osteoarthritis using Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation criteria

Clinical practice guidelines have been elaborated to summarize evidence related to the management of knee osteoarthritis and to facilitate uptake of evidence-based knowledge by clinicians. The objectives of the present review were summarizing the recommendations of existing guidelines on knee osteoarthritis, and assessing the quality of the guidelines using a standardized and validated instrument – the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) tool. Internet medical literature databases from 2001 to 2006 were searched for guidelines, with six guidelines being identified. Thirteen clinician researchers participated in the review. Each reviewer was trained in the AGREE instrument. The guidelines were distributed to four groups of three or four reviewers, each group reviewing one guideline with the exception of one group that reviewed two guidelines. One independent evaluator reviewed all guidelines. All guidelines effectively addressed only a minority of AGREE domains. Clarity/presentation was effectively addressed in three out of six guidelines, scope/purpose and rigour of development in two guidelines, editorial independence in one guideline, and stakeholder involvement and applicability in none. The clinical management recommendation tended to be similar among guidelines, although interventions addressed varied. Acetaminophen was recommended for initial pain treatment, combined with exercise and education. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were recommended if acetaminophen failed to control pain, but cautiously because of gastrointestinal risks. Surgery was recommended in the presence of persistent pain and disability. Education and activity management interventions were superficially addressed in most guidelines. Guideline creators should use the AGREE criteria when developing guidelines. Innovative and effective methods of knowledge translation to health professionals are needed

Transcriptome Analysis Describing New Immunity and Defense Genes in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients

Background: Large-scale gene expression profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from Rheumatoid Arthritis (RA) patients could provide a molecular description that reflects the contribution of diverse cellular responses associated with this disease. The aim of our study was to identify peripheral blood gene expression profiles for RA patients, using Illumina technology, to gain insights into RA molecular mechanisms. Methodology/Principal Findings: The Illumina Human-6v2 Expression BeadChips were used for a complete genome-wide transcript profiling of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from 18 RA patients and 15 controls. Differential analysis per gene was performed with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and P values were adjusted to control the False Discovery Rate (FDR < 5%). Genes differentially expressed at significant level between patients and controls were analyzed using Gene Ontology (GO) in the PANTHER database to identify biological processes. A differentially expression of 339 Reference Sequence genes (238 down-regulated and 101 up-regulated) between the two groups was observed. We identified a remarkably elevated expression of a spectrum of genes involved in Immunity and Defense in PBMCs of RA patients compared to controls. This result is confirmed by GO analysis, suggesting that these genes could be activated systemically in RA. No significant down-regulated ontology groups were found. Microarray data were validated by real time PCR in a set of nine genes showing a high degree of correlation. Conclusions/Significance: Our study highlighted several new genes that could contribute in the identification of innovative clinical biomarkers for diagnostic procedures and therapeutic interventions

LES HEMORRAGIES INTRA-ALVEOLAIRES AU COURS DES MALADIES SYSTEMIQUES (A PROPOS DE 13 OBSERVATIONS)

PARIS6-Bibl. St Antoine CHU (751122104) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

DIMINUTION DE LA PREVALENCE ET DE L'INCIDENCE DE L'ATOPIE AU COURS DE LA POLYARTHRITE RHUMATOIDE (RESULTATS D'UNE ETUDE CAS-TEMOINS (DES RHUMATOLOGIE))

PARIS5-BU Méd.Cochin (751142101) / SudocPARIS-BIUM (751062103) / SudocSudocFranceF

Evaluation des pratiques médicales dans la prise en charge de la lombosciatique par hernie discale (série de 97 cas vus en milieu hospitalier)

PARIS7-Xavier Bichat (751182101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Evaluation des pratiques médicales dans la prise en charge de la lombosciatique par hernie discale (série de 97 cas vus en milieu hospitalier)

PARIS7-Xavier Bichat (751182101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Comparison of Biological Agent Monotherapy and Associations Including Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drugs for Rheumatoid Arthritis: Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Objective: Update the available evidence comparing biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (CsDMARDs) to bDMARDs in monotherapy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Methods: Research was limited to randomized controlled trials. Major outcome: ACR 20 response criteria at 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes: clinical and radiographic criteria at week 24, 52 and 104. Results: 23 trials (6358 patients), including seven bDMARDs and one other molecule: Anbainuo (anti-TNF-R). No study satisfied our search criteria for anakinra, certolizumab and infliximab. Compared to bDMARD monotherapy, combination therapy gives a better ACR 20 at 24 weeks (RR: 0.88 (0.84–0.94)) in fixed and random effect models, and this result is sustained at 52 and 104 weeks. The results were mostly similar for all other outcomes without increasing the risk of adverse effects. Conclusion: This meta-analysis confirms the superiority of combination therapy over monotherapy in rheumatoid arthritis, in accordance to the usual guidelines

Comparison of general practitioners and rheumatologists' prescription patterns for patients with knee osteoarthritis

Abstract Background To compare the prescription modalities of general practitioners (GPs) and rheumatologists (RHs) for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to determine correlates with prescription of low-dose NSAIDs. Methods This observational, prospective, national survey was carried out among a national representative sample of GPs (n = 808) and RHs (n = 134). Each physician completed a medical questionnaire for the 2 most recent patients fulfilling the ACR criteria for knee OA. Results GPs and RHs included 1,570 and 251 patients, respectively. Mean pain level of the knee (on a VAS, 0-100 mm) was greater for GP patients than for RH patients (49.8 ± 16.3 vs. 46.2 ± 17.1 mm, respectively; p As compared with RHs, GPs more frequently prescribed low-dose NSAIDs (p Conclusions This study identified speciality-related variability in some aspects of the management of knee OA. The clinical profile of patients with knee OA differed between GPs and RHs.</p