Clinical and ultrasound evaluation of patients with haemophilia on prophylaxis

Age-specific incidence of joint disease in paediatric patients with haemophilia: A single-centre real-world outcome based on consecutive US examination

INTRODUCTION

Joint health is one of the most important factors contributing to a healthy life in patients with haemophilia. Recent study revealed that starting early prophylaxis was not enough to prevent joint disease in most paediatric patients with haemophilia.

AIM

In this study, we aimed to determine the age-specific incidence of acute joint disease during childhood at single haemophilia treatment centre (HTC).

METHOD

The joint health in 48 patients was evaluated based on consecutive US testing for 5 years at annual multidisciplinary comprehensive care.

RESULTS

During the study period, 23 patients (47.9%) had no joint disease since the initial examination, whereas 13 patients (27.0%) showed development from negative to positive findings. The incidence of joint disease increased with age: 0% in preschool, 5.3% in elementary school, 14.3% in junior high school and 35% beyond high school age. Among the 13 patients who developed joint disease, two experienced acquired synovitis that resolved during the follow-up period. Statistical analysis revealed that the patients who routinely underwent follow-up by the HTC exhibited a significantly lower incidence of joint disease than did those followed up at other institutions (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

These results indicated that close check-up, including routine joint examination using US as well as frequent assessment of pharmacokinetic profile at the HTC, might play an important role in avoiding joint disease among paediatric patients with haemophilia.

The hidden joint in children with haemophilia on prophylaxis

Prophylaxis is the gold standard treatment for children with haemophilia (CWH). MRI studies revealed joint damage, even with this treatment; this suggests the presence of subclinical bleeding. In the case of children with haemophilia, it is relevant to detect early signs of joint damage, as this allows the medical team to provide the appropriate treatment and follow-up, in order to avoid arthropathy development and its consequences. The aim of this study is to detect the hidden joint in children with haemophilia on prophylaxis (CWHP) and analyse, by age group, which joint is the most affected. We define the hidden joint in CWH on prophylaxis as the joint that presents joint damage secondary to repetitive bleeding episodes and is detected in the joint evaluation, despite being asymptomatic or with mild symptoms. It is most commonly caused by repetitive subclinical bleeding.

METHODS

This was an observational, analytical, cross-sectional study of 106 CWH on prophylaxis treated in our centre. Patients were divided according to age and type of treatment. Joint damage was defined as a HEAD-US score ≥ 1.

RESULTS

Patients' median age was 12 years. All had severe haemophilia. The median age of onset of prophylaxis was 2.7. Forty-seven (44.3 %) patients received primary prophylaxis (PP) and 59 (55.7 %), secondary prophylaxis. Six hundred and thirty-six joints were analysed. Type of prophylaxis and joint involvement showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.001). However, patients on PP had a greater number of damaged joints at older ages. Twenty-two % (140) of the joints scored ≥1 on HEAD-US. Cartilage was most frequently involved, followed by synovitis, and bone damage. We observed a greater frequency and degree of arthropathy in subjects aged 11 and above. Sixty (12.7 %) joints showed a HEAD-US score ≥ 1, with no history of bleeding. The ankle was the most affected joint, representing the hidden joint according to our definition.

CONCLUSION

Prophylaxis is the best treatment for CWH. However, symptomatic or subclinical joint bleeding may occur. The routine evaluation of joint health is relevant, particularly, of the ankle. In our study, early signs of arthropathy according to age and type of prophylaxis were detected by HEAD-US.

Screening for subclinical synovial proliferation in haemophilia: A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing physical examination and ultrasound

INTRODUCTION

Ultrasound is increasingly used as addition to physical examination for detection of subclinical joint changes in haemophilia. However, the added value of ultrasound to physical examination for detecting synovial proliferation is not fully established.

AIM

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of swelling at physical examination for ultrasound-detected synovial proliferation in haemophilia.

METHODS

PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to 2 August 2022. Studies reporting original data on occurrence of swelling at physical examination and synovial proliferation on ultrasound of index joints in persons with haemophilia were included. Risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Diagnostic accuracy parameters of swelling at physical examination for ultrasound-detected synovial proliferation were determined. Summary sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a bivariate random-effects model.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies reporting on swelling at physical examination and synovial proliferation on ultrasound in 2890 joints of 627 patients were included. Prevalence of subclinical synovial proliferation ranged between 0% and 55%. Sensitivity of swelling was low [summary estimate .34; 95% confidence interval (CI) .24-.46], while specificity was high (summary estimate .97; CI .92-.99). Predictive values varied widely due to inter-study differences in prevalence of synovial proliferation.

CONCLUSION

Joint swelling has low sensitivity for presence of ultrasound-detected synovial proliferation in haemophilia, suggesting underestimation of synovial proliferation by physical examination alone. Consequently, ultrasound screening may generate important information on synovial changes which would otherwise remain undetected.