Perioperative Drug Safety in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Postoperative complications in rheumatic disease patients undergoing arthroscopy on immunosuppression

BACKGROUND

There are currently no guidelines on peri-arthroscopic management of immunosuppressive (IS) treatment in rheumatic disease patients.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to characterize the rheumatic disease patient population undergoing arthroscopy, compare the incidence of postoperative complications among patients who either remained on IS perioperatively, held IS perioperatively or were not on IS at baseline, and compare the incidence of postoperative complications by rheumatic disease type, medication type, and procedure.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of all arthroscopic sports medicine surgeries in patients with a rheumatic disease diagnosis at our institution over an 11-year period. Patients on IS at baseline were grouped into those who remained on IS perioperatively or held all IS before the date of their surgery. These two groups were compared to patients who were not on IS at baseline. Incidence of postoperative complications was calculated for the three cohorts and by medication class, rheumatic disease type, and procedure risk. Analysis of variance (ANOVA), chi-squared, and Fisher's exact tests were used to determine the statistical significance of between-group differences in postoperative complication incidence.

RESULTS

We identified 1,316 rheumatic disease patients undergoing arthroscopy, with 214 of them taking IS medications at baseline. In total, 8.4% (n = 110) remained on IS perioperatively, 7.9% (n = 104) held IS perioperatively, and 83.7% (n = 1102) were not on IS at baseline. In all cohorts, seven patients experienced postoperative complications; six of whom experienced infections. Two (1.82%) occurred in patients remaining on IS perioperatively, zero infections occured in patients who held all IS, and four (0.36%) occured in patients who were not on any IS at baseline. There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative infections or complication rates among the three cohorts or further subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The risk of postoperative complications including infectious, major, and minor complications in patients on IS at the time of arthroscopy is low and acceptable.

Postoperative flares and peri-arthroscopic management of immunosuppressive medications in patients with rheumatic disease

PURPOSE

To determine the rate and characteristics of postoperative flares in rheumatic disease patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery, and the role of perioperative immunosuppression (IS) management in preventing or provoking these exacerbations.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of arthroscopic surgeries in patients with rheumatologic disease over 11 years. Patients taking IS at baseline and those without were matched 1:1 using propensity scores on age, sex, rheumatic disease type, and procedure complexity. Patients taking IS at baseline were sub-divided into those remaining on IS perioperatively versus those who held IS before surgery. Multivariable logistic regression identified risk factors for postoperative flares for the three IS groups, and survival analysis was used to compare the probability of remaining flare-free up to 12 weeks postoperatively.

RESULTS

After matching, 428 patients (214 on various types of baseline IS, 214 not on baseline IS) were included, with 110 on baseline IS remaining on it perioperatively. Rates of postoperative flares were similar for those staying on vs holding their baseline IS (9.1% vs 9.6%) but flares were less frequent in patients not on baseline IS (1.9%). Patients who remained on perioperative IS did not have significantly less flares compared to patients taken off perioperative IS (OR 0.764 [0.267, 2.181]; p = 0.61). Patients not on baseline IS had a significantly higher probability ofremaining flare-free up to 12 weeks (p = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Rheumatic disease patients who hold IS medication before undergoing arthroscopy, out of concern for potential infection or complications, do not significantly increase their risk of flaring their autoimmune disease whether they had been taking csDMARDs or biologic agents. Those not taking any IS at baseline have a much lower risk of post-arthroscopic flaring, though as a group they likely harbor less of an autoimmune burden.

Safety of microvascular free tissue transfer reconstruction of the head and neck in the setting of chronic pharmacologic immunosuppression

BACKGROUND

Patients on chronic pharmacologic immunosuppressive therapy are at increased risk of wound infection and complications after surgery. There is a paucity of data examining perioperative complications after microvascular free tissue transfer (MVFTT) reconstruction of the head and neck in this patient population.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study performed at two tertiary referral centers between August 2016 and May 2020.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and seventy-nine patients underwent MVFTT during the study period; of these 47 (5%) patients were taking chronic immunosuppressive medications. The most common indications for immunosuppression were solid organ transplant and autoimmune disease. Fourteen (30%) patients had surgical complications within 30 days of surgery: 8 (17%) wound dehiscences, 6 (12%) hematomas, and 2 (4%) surgical site infections. There was one total and one partial flap failure with a 30-day reoperation rate of 4%.

CONCLUSIONS

MVFTT of the head and neck appears to be safe in patients on chronic pharmacologic immunosuppression.

Perioperative Management of Immunosuppressive Medications in Rheumatic Disease Patients Undergoing Arthroscopy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This manuscript reviews relevant prior literature regarding management of immunosuppressants in patients with rheumatic diseases around the time of orthopedic surgery, highlighting important considerations specifically regarding arthroscopy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Utilization rates of arthroscopic surgery in patients with rheumatic diseases are on the rise, as immunosuppressive treatment options enable them to lead more active lives and hence experience more injuries. Physicians regularly manage patients' glucocorticoids and conventional synthetic and biologic disease modifying antirheumatic drugs around the time of orthopedic surgery, aiming to minimize infection risk while optimizing disease control. However, there is a paucity of randomized controlled trial data for orthopedic surgery-and specifically nothing in the literature pertaining to arthroscopic surgery. Recent guidelines for rheumatic disease patients undergoing elective total hip and knee arthroplasty recommend that most immunosuppressive medications should be held perioperatively, citing the high-risk profile of arthroplasty cases and arthroplasty patients. While 2017 societal guidelines for perioperative immunosuppression during arthroplasty currently serve as a guide for physicians, they may not be applicable to arthroscopy. The less aggressive arthroscopic surgeries span a broader range of patient ages and risk profiles, indications for surgery, and procedural complexity and associated risks. Given these considerations, the majority of routine arthroscopic patients may not require holding of their immunosuppressive medications in the perioperative period.

Impact of Chronic DMARD Therapy in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis Undergoing Surgery of the Craniovertebral Junction: A Multi-center Retrospective Study

STUDY DESIGN

A multi-centered retrospective review from five institutions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine whether continuing or withholding disease-modifying antirheumatoid drugs (DMARDs) in the perioperative period affect outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients undergoing arthrodesis at the craniovertebral junction SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: RA is a chronic systemic inflammatory disease that affects the cervical spine and is treated with DMARDs. Some advocate withholding DMARDs in the perioperative period due to concern for the cytotoxic effects of these medications. However, the impact of DMARDs in the perioperative period is not well understood.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study from five affiliated institutions was performed. Adult patients with RA on chronic DMARDs undergoing posterior arthrodesis of the craniovertebral junction (occipital-cervical or atlanto-axial arthrodesis) were identified. Patients were stratified based on whether DMARD therapy was continued (C group) or discontinued (DC group) in the perioperative period. The primary outcome was the need for reoperation and reason for reoperation.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients met inclusion criteria, 19 in C group and 20 in DC group. Average follow-up time was 42 months. Four patients (three in DC group and one in C group) required reoperation. Two patients from the DC group required readmission secondary to RA flare-up.

CONCLUSION

Our cohort of RA patients who underwent occipital-cervical and C1/C2 posterior arthrodesis showed no significant differences in surgical complications when DMARD therapy was continued or discontinued in the perioperative period. The decision to continue or discontinue DMARD therapy in the perioperative period is at the discretion of the treating physician, but we encourage physicians to counsel patients regarding this theoretical risk and their tolerance of the medications as well as the risk of RA flare-up. Factors such as overall health, disease burden, nutrition, bone quality, smoking status, and other comorbid conditions are likely to have a larger influence on perioperative complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Gel network comprising UV crosslinked PLGA-b-PEG-MA nanoparticles for ibuprofen topical delivery

Ibuprofen is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug for the treatment of Rheumatoid Arthritis and osteoarthritis. In this study, we prepared topical gel network for enhancement of ibuprofen penetration, maintenance of controlled release and increased patient compliance. Nanoparticles containing ibuprofen were prepared by means of emulsion formation/solvent diffusion method using synthesized copolymer. Nanoparticles were then conjugated with aminoethylmethacrylate, resulting in ibuprofen-loaded nanoparticles in PLGA-b-PEG-MA structure. Ibuprofen-loaded gel networks were developed by crosslinking nanoparticles via UV exposure. Suitability for topical application has been assessed through characterization of particle size, zeta potential, morphology, encapsulation efficiency, in vitro release, cytotoxicity and enhancement of in vitro wound healing. The mean diameter of nanoparticles was measured as 230 ± 20 nm. Gel network formulations with higher particle size (2800 ± 350 nm) and zeta potential (39.8 ± 9.2 mV), depending on conjugation of methacrylate within copolymeric structure, and having encapsulation efficacy of 73.6 ± 2.8% were prepared. The in vitro release of ibuprofen was sustained for more than 7 hours. Gel network improved collagen synthesis, type I collagen mRNA expression and fibrosis in dose dependent manner. Based on this, we can conclude that PLGA-b-PEG gel network might be a promising systems for the local delivery of ibuprofen in RA patients.

Clinical Outcomes After Hip Arthroscopy for Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Matched-Pair Control Study With Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

This study analyzed minimum 2-year hip arthroscopy outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and non-RA control patients. It also examined whether disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) affected RA patient outcomes. We hypothesized that patients with RA undergoing hip arthroscopy would have lower reported outcome scores.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected on all hip arthroscopies performed from 2009-2013. The indications for surgery were patients with hip pain and with physical examination and imaging studies confirming intra-articular pathology in whom conservative management had failed. The exclusion criteria were previous ipsilateral hip conditions and Tönnis grade greater than 1. Patients with at least 2 years of follow-up and preoperative RA diagnoses were matched (1:2 ratio) to controls without RA (based on age ± 5 years, body mass index ± 5, and lateral center-edge angle [18°-25°, 26°-39°, or >39°]). RA cases were further analyzed based on DMARD use. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were collected preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 months, as well as annually thereafter. The outcomes collected included the modified Harris Hip Score, Non-Arthritic Hip Score, Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale, visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, satisfaction rating, future procedures, and complications.

RESULTS

We matched 26 hips in 20 RA patients to a control group of 52 hips in 52 patients. At a minimum of 2 years of follow-up, RA patients reported no significant improvements except in the Non-Arthritic Hip Score, whereas the control group significantly improved in all PRO and VAS scores. Preoperative PRO and VAS scores between the RA and control groups were not significantly different, but postoperatively, all scores were lower in RA patients at a minimum of 2 years, whether they were taking DMARDs or not. Patients taking DMARDs showed slightly more improvement in PRO and VAS scores. There was a greater trend toward more secondary arthroscopy procedures for RA patients (19.2% vs 7.7%, P = .47), but total hip arthroplasty rates were similar. Complication rates were low in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing hip arthroscopy who have a diagnosis of RA had less improvement in PRO and VAS scores and were less satisfied than a matched control group of patients without RA at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients who were taking DMARDs had slightly better improvement in their PRO and VAS scores than nonmedicated patients. With this early follow-up, we could not show a difference in the rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty, although RA patients required more revision arthroscopies than controls. Patients with a diagnosis of RA who undergo hip arthroscopy should be counseled about the potential for lesser degrees of postoperative improvement and should have their expectations managed accordingly. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, comparative trial.

Special aspects of biologics treatment in psoriasis: management in pregnancy, lactation, surgery, renal impairment, hepatitis and tuberculosis

Background of the article: Biologics are modern immunomodulatory drugs, whose use in the treatment of psoriasis has led to remarkable results in psoriatic patients. The administration of these agents in special population groups, such as patients with chronic infections and renal impairment, as well as perioperative, pregnant or lactating patients, has not been thoroughly addressed, mostly because these patients are excluded from clinical studies. Materials and methods: This report is an updated systematic overview of the use of biologics in the above-mentioned types of patients and was conducted according to the PRISMA Guidelines for systematic reviews. Articles derived from the databases PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS, published between 1999 and 2018, were analyzed for the study. Results: Research efforts as well as clinical reporting are necessary in order to provide more insight on the management of these therapeutic dilemmas. Conclusion: The aim of this review, other than providing a summarized update on the clinical knowledge on this special topic, is also to raise awareness for the need to conduct larger systematic studies in order to adequately evaluate the use of biologics in these special patient categories and therefore draw definite conclusions on their safety profile.

Perioperative management of drugs commonly used in patients with rheumatic diseases: a review

Rheumatic diseases are very prevalent, affecting about 7 million people in North America; they affect the musculoskeletal system, often with systemic involvement and potential for serious consequences and limitation on quality of life. Clinical treatment is usually long-term and includes drugs that are considered either simple or complex and are occasionally unknown to many health professionals who do not know how to manage these patients in emergency units and surgical wards. Thus, it is important for clinicians, surgeons and anesthesiologists who are involved with rheumatic patients undergoing surgery to know the basic principles of therapy and perioperative management. This study aims to do a review of the perioperative management of the most commonly used drugs in rheumatologic patients. Manuscripts used in this review were identified by surveying MEDLINE, LILACS, EMBASE, and COCHRANE databases and included studies containing i) the perioperative management of commonly used drugs in patients with rheumatic diseases: and ii) rheumatic diseases. They are didactically discussed according to the mechanism of action and pharmacokinetics; and perioperative management. In total, 259 articles related to the topic were identified. Every medical professional should be aware of the types of drugs that are appropriate for continuous use and should know the various effects of these drugs before indicating surgery or assisting a rheumatic patient postoperatively. This information could prevent possible complications that could affect a wide range of patients.

[Registries of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma : Overview and perspectives of the DGU and DGOOC registries]

The register network of the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma (DGOU) consists of 14 registries that cover the various fields of traumatology and elective orthopedics. In addition to registries that focus on implants and types of diseases without age limitations, there are also registries dealing with special diseases in children and adolescents as well as the special needs of elderly patients with fractures. The registries serve as instruments for outcome research and quality assurance and can be used to develop treatment recommendations on a high level of evidence. The objective of the network is to exchange experience that facilitates the establishment of new registers, to pool expertise and to conserve resources.

Perioperative management of patients with rheumatic diseases

This paper aims to explore the assessment of patients with rheumatologic diseases, especially rheumatoid arthritis (RA), before undergoing orthopedic surgery. Perioperative assessment ensures an early diagnosis of the patient's medical condition, overall health, medical co-morbidities, and the assessment of the risk factors associated with the proposed procedures. Perioperative assessment allows for proper postoperative management of complications and of the management of drugs such as disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARD) and anti-platelets, and corticosteroids. The assessment also supports follow up plans, and patient education. Perioperative assessment enables the discussion of the proposed treatment plans and the factors associated with them in each case among the different specialists involved to facilitate an appropriate early decision-making about the assessment and treatment of patients with rheumatologic diseases. It also enables the discussion of both condition and procedure with the patient to ensure a good postoperative care. The article identifies the components of perioperative medical evaluation, discusses perioperative management of co-morbidities and the management of specific clinical problems related to RA, systemic lupus erythematosus, the management of DMARDs, like methotrexate (MTX) and biologic therapies, prophylactic antibiotics, and postoperative follow up, including patient education and rehabilitation.