Prevalence, presentation and treatment of lower limb pathologies in juvenile idiopathic arthritis: A narrative review

The inhibitory effect of tocilizumab on systemic bone loss and tendon inflammation in a juvenile Collagen-Induced arthritis rat model

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

Reduced Bone Mineral Density (BMD) is a prevalent comorbidity in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA). Enthesitis and other tendon abnormalities, such as tenosynovitis, tendinitis and tendon ruptures are, also, common extra-articular manifestations of the disease. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of tocilizumab, an antibody that binds the Interleukin-6 (IL-6) Receptor, on inflammation-related bone loss and tendon inflammation in an animal model of JIA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Collagen-Induced Arthritis (CIA) model was induced in male rats followed by intraperitoneal administration of tocilizumab for 8 weeks. Methotrexate, the most widely used Disease-Modifying Antirheumatic Drug in the management of JIA, was, also, administered, either as a monotherapy or as an add-on therapy to tocilizumab. BMD was evaluated with Micro-Computed Tomography (Micro-CT) and histopathological examination. Tendon damage was, also, assessed histologically. Finally, two pro-inflammatory cytokines, Tumor Necrosis Factor-alpha (TNF-a) and Interleukin-23 (IL-23) were quantified in tendon tissues by ELISA analysis.

RESULTS

Tocilizumab-treated animals exhibited a significantly improved trabecular microarchitecture on micro-CT analysis and histological examination. Tendon morphology was also improved. Anti-IL-6 treatment led to a significant decrease in TNF-a and IL-23 expression in tendon tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study provide evidence that tocilizumab reduces inflammation-related bone loss and suppresses tendon inflammation in a juvenile CIA rat model. These findings offer perspectives for the management of osteoporosis and enthesitis in JIA.

Physical Examination Tool for Swollen and Tender Lower Limb Joints in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Pilot Diagnostic Accuracy Study

BACKGROUND

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common rheumatic disease in children, with lower limb involvement highly prevalent. Recent evidence has highlighted the lack of specific lower limb physical examination (PE) tools for clinicians assisting the paediatric rheumatology team in identifying lower extremity disease in patients with JIA. Early clinical detection may lead to more prompt and targeted interventions to reduce lower limb problems in children with JIA. The aim of this pilot study is to provide preliminary data on the diagnostic accuracy of a lower limb PE tool in JIA.

METHODS

Children with JIA requiring magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on their lower limb joints per their usual care were eligible. Lower limb joint counts were conducted clinically by a podiatrist and paediatric rheumatologist using the proposed twenty joint per side, PE tool. The PE were compared to MRI assessments completed by two independent paediatric radiologists. Data were analysed using agreement (observed, positive and negative) and Cohen's kappa with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Fifteen participants were recruited into the study in which 600 lower limb joints were clinically examined. Statistical analysis showed excellent inter-rater reliability between podiatrist and paediatric rheumatologist for both joint swelling and tenderness. Results of the intra-rater reliability of the podiatrist using the PE tool indicated excellent percentage agreements (98.5-100%) and substantial kappa coefficients (0.93-1). The inter-rater reliability between radiological assessments contrasted the PE results, showing low agreement and poor reliability. Comparisons between PE and MRI resulted in poor kappa coefficients and low agreement percentages. The most agreeable joint between MRI and PE was the ankle joint, while the worst performing joint was the sub-talar joint.

CONCLUSION

Results indicate potential clinical reliability; however, the validity and diagnostic accuracy of the proposed PE tool remains unclear due to low kappa coefficients and inconsistent agreements between PE and MRI results. Further research will be required before the tool may be used in a clinical setting.

Foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet

BACKGROUND

Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no optimal strategy, nor consensus, for using foot orthoses (FOs) to treat paediatric flat feet.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to 01 September 2021, and two clinical trials registers on 07 August 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of FOs as an intervention for paediatric flat feet. The outcomes included in this review were pain, function, quality of life, treatment success, and adverse events. Intended comparisons were: any FOs versus sham, any FOs versus shoes, customised FOs (CFOs) versus prefabricated FOs (PFOs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials with 1058 children, aged 11 months to 19 years, with flexible flat feet. Distinct flat foot presentations included asymptomatic, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), symptomatic and developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD). The trial interventions were FOs, footwear, foot and rehabilitative exercises, and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). Due to heterogeneity, we did not pool the data. Most trials had potential for selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting bias. No trial blinded participants. We present the results separately for asymptomatic (healthy children) and symptomatic (children with JIA) flat feet. The certainty of evidence was very low to low, downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness. Three comparisons were evaluated across trials: CFO versus shoes; PFO versus shoes; CFO versus PFO. Asymptomatic flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low-quality evidence showed that CFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point visual analogue scale (VAS)) at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.07); absolute decrease (11.8%, 95% CI 4.7% fewer to 15.8% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.19); absolute effect (3.4% more, 95% CI 4.1% fewer to 13.1% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low to very-low quality evidence showed that PFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point VAS) at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16); absolute effect (4.7% fewer, 95% CI 18.9% fewer to 12.6% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.23). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (1 trial, 108 participants): low-quality evidence found no difference in the proportion without pain at one year (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18); absolute effect (7.4% fewer, 95% CI 22.2% fewer to 11.1% more); or on withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12). Function and quality of life (QoL) were not assessed. Symptomatic (JIA) flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 28 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) between groups (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.78 to -0.22). Low-quality evidence showed improvements in function with CFOs (Foot Function Index - FFI disability, 0 to 100, 0 best function; MD -18.55, 95% CI -34.42 to -2.68), child-rated QoL (PedsQL, 0 to 100, 100 best quality; MD 12.1, 95% CI -1.6 to 25.8) and parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 9, 95% CI -4.1 to 22.1) and little or no difference between groups in treatment success (timed walking; MD -1.33 seconds, 95% CI -2.77 to 0.11), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.94); absolute difference (9.7% fewer, 20.5 % fewer to 44.8% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 25 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain between groups (MD 0.02, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.98). Low-quality evidence showed no difference between groups in function (FFI-disability MD -4.17, 95% CI -24.4 to 16.06), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -3.84, 95% CI -19 to 11.33), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -0.64, 95% CI -13.22 to 11.94). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (2 trials, 87 participants): low-quality evidence showed little or no difference between groups in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) at 3 months (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.23 to 0.26), function (FFI-disability MD -7.28, 95% CI -15.47 to 0.92), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 8.6, 95% CI -3.9 to 21.2), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 2.9, 95% CI -11 to 16.8).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low to very low-certainty evidence shows that the effect of CFOs (high cost) or PFOs (low cost) versus shoes, and CFOs versus PFOs on pain, function and HRQoL is uncertain. This is pertinent for clinical practice, given the economic disparity between CFOs and PFOs. FOs may improve pain and function, versus shoes in children with JIA, with minimal delineation between costly CFOs and generic PFOs. This review updates that from 2010, confirming that in the absence of pain, the use of high-cost CFOs for healthy children with flexible flat feet has no supporting evidence, and draws very limited conclusions about FOs for treating paediatric flat feet. The availability of normative and prospective foot development data, dismisses most flat foot concerns, and negates continued attention to this topic. Attention should be re-directed to relevant paediatric foot conditions, which cause pain, limit function, or reduce quality of life. The agenda for researching asymptomatic flat feet in healthy children must be relegated to history, and replaced by a targeted research rationale, addressing children with indisputable foot pathology from discrete diagnoses, namely JIA, cerebral palsy, congenital talipes equino varus, trisomy 21 and Charcot Marie Tooth. Whether research resources should continue to be wasted on studying flat feet in healthy children that do not hurt, is questionable. Future updates of this review will address only relevant paediatric foot conditions.

Foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet

BACKGROUND

Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no optimal strategy, nor consensus, for using foot orthoses (FOs) to treat paediatric flat feet.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to 01 September 2021, and two clinical trials registers on 07 August 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of FOs as an intervention for paediatric flat feet. The outcomes included in this review were pain, function, quality of life, treatment success, and adverse events. Intended comparisons were: any FOs versus sham, any FOs versus shoes, customised FOs (CFOs) versus prefabricated FOs (PFOs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 16 trials with 1058 children, aged 11 months to 19 years, with flexible flat feet. Distinct flat foot presentations included asymptomatic, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), symptomatic and developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD). The trial interventions were FOs, footwear, foot and rehabilitative exercises, and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). Due to heterogeneity, we did not pool the data. Most trials had potential for selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting bias. No trial blinded participants. We present the results separately for asymptomatic (healthy children) and symptomatic (children with JIA) flat feet. The certainty of evidence was very low to low, downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness. Three comparisons were evaluated across trials: CFO versus shoes; PFO versus shoes; CFO versus PFO. Asymptomatic flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low-quality evidence showed that CFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point visual analogue scale (VAS)) at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.07); absolute decrease (11.8%, 95% CI 4.7% fewer to 15.8% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.19); absolute effect (3.4% more, 95% CI 4.1% fewer to 13.1% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low to very-low quality evidence showed that PFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point VAS) at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16); absolute effect (4.7% fewer, 95% CI 18.9% fewer to 12.6% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.23). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (1 trial, 108 participants): low-quality evidence found no difference in the proportion without pain at one year (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18); absolute effect (7.4% fewer, 95% CI 22.2% fewer to 11.1% more); or on withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12). Function and quality of life (QoL) were not assessed. Symptomatic (JIA) flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 28 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) between groups (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.78 to -0.22). Low-quality evidence showed improvements in function with CFOs (Foot Function Index - FFI disability, 0 to 100, 0 best function; MD -18.55, 95% CI -34.42 to -2.68), child-rated QoL (PedsQL, 0 to 100, 100 best quality; MD 12.1, 95% CI -1.6 to 25.8) and parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 9, 95% CI -4.1 to 22.1) and little or no difference between groups in treatment success (timed walking; MD -1.33 seconds, 95% CI -2.77 to 0.11), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.94); absolute difference (9.7% fewer, 20.5 % fewer to 44.8% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 25 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain between groups (MD 0.02, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.98). Low-quality evidence showed no difference between groups in function (FFI-disability MD -4.17, 95% CI -24.4 to 16.06), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -3.84, 95% CI -19 to 11.33), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -0.64, 95% CI -13.22 to 11.94). 3. CFOs versus PFsO (2 trials, 87 participants): low-quality evidence showed little or no difference between groups in pain (0 to scale, 0 no pain) at 3 months (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.23 to 0.26), function (FFI-disability MD -7.28, 95% CI -15.47 to 0.92), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 8.6, 95% CI -3.9 to 21.2), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 2.9, 95% CI -11 to 16.8).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low to very low-certainty evidence shows that the effect of CFOs (high cost) or PFOs (low cost) versus shoes, and CFOs versus PFOs on pain, function and HRQoL is uncertain. This is pertinent for clinical practice, given the economic disparity between CFOs and PFOs. FOs may improve pain and function, versus shoes in children with JIA, with minimal delineation between costly CFOs and generic PFOs. This review updates that from 2010, confirming that in the absence of pain, the use of high-cost CFOs for healthy children with flexible flat feet has no supporting evidence, and draws very limited conclusions about FOs for treating paediatric flat feet. The availability of normative and prospective foot development data, dismisses most flat foot concerns, and negates continued attention to this topic. Attention should be re-directed to relevant paediatric foot conditions, which cause pain, limit function, or reduce quality of life. The agenda for researching asymptomatic flat feet in healthy children must be relegated to history, and replaced by a targeted research rationale, addressing children with indisputable foot pathology from discrete diagnoses, namely JIA, cerebral palsy, congenital talipes equino varus, trisomy 21 and Charcot Marie Tooth. Whether research resources should continue to be wasted on studying flat feet in healthy children that do not hurt, is questionable. Future updates of this review will address only relevant paediatric foot conditions.

Effect of preformed foot orthoses in reducing pain in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis: a multicentre randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of customised preformed foot orthoses on pain, quality of life, swollen and tender lower joints and foot and ankle disability in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA).

METHODS

Parallel group design. Children diagnosed with JIA were recruited from the three children's hospital in NSW, Australia. Participants were randomly assigned to a control group receiving a standard flat innersole (sham) with no corrective modifications. The trial group were prescribed a preformed device that was customised based on biomechanical assessments. Pain was the primary outcome and was followed up to 12-months post intervention. Secondary outcomes include quality of life, foot and ankle disability and swollen and tender joints. A linear mixed model was used to assess the impact of the intervention at each time point.

RESULTS

66 participants were recruited. Child reported pain was reduced statistically and clinically significant at 4-weeks and 3 months post intervention in favour of the trial group. Statistically significance was not reached at 6 and 12-month follow-ups. Quality of life and foot and ankle disability were not statistically significant at any follow-up; however, tender midfoot and ankle joints were significantly reduced 6-months post intervention.

CONCLUSION

Results of this clinical trial indicate customised preformed foot orthoses can be effective in reducing pain and tender joints in children with JIA exhibiting foot and ankle symptoms. Long-term efficacy of foot orthoses remains unclear. Overall, the trial intervention was safe, inexpensive and well tolerated by paediatric patients.

TRIAL REGISTRY

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): 12616001082493.

[Therapeutic options in juvenile idiopathic arthritis : Surgical and conservative orthopedic rheumatological treatment]

The treatment of juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) has made substantial progress within the last 25 years. Modern medicinal treatment enables inflammatory activity of the disease to be controlled in most of the cases. Mutilating courses of disease, which were formerly the rule have now become the exception. Today remission of disease is the aim of pediatric rheumatological treatment. Apart from effective control of inflammation this includes complete restoration of functional abilities of affected joints and the surrounding structures also affected. To achieve this goal a holistic and foresighted view of each patient's course is required. Therefore, even in an apparently uncomplicated course of disease in some cases of JIA it is advisable to plan an early interdisciplinary consultation including the pediatric rheumatologist and the orthopedic surgeon, in order to discuss an early surgical intervention, which can then be carried out in a timely manner, if necessary. This article provides an overview of the orthopedic rheumatological indications and options.

First steps: Parent health behaviours related to children's foot health

Good foot health throughout childhood is important but remains poorly understood with few studies exploring this topic. The aim of this study was to define parents' knowledge, practices and health-related perceptions of children's feet. A qualitative design was adopted. Semi-structured, one-to-one interviews were carried out with parents of children aged five years and under, recruited from South East and North West of England. Interviews explored parents' views, beliefs and understanding of foot health in infancy and early childhood. Transcripts of the interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Eighteen interviews were conducted. Seven themes were identified relating to (1) parents belief and knowledge about children's foot health; (2) how parents use and share foot health information; (3) activities for supporting foot health and development; (4) footwear choices, beliefs and influences; (5) the way they access health professionals; (6) the way they search for foot health information and (7) developing practice(s) to support parents. The study provides the first insight into how parents view foot health in early infancy and childhood. The findings highlight the key foot health beliefs important to parents, how they learn about and what influences their decision-making about caring for children's feet, the way parents receive and seek information, and how they access support for foot health concerns. The findings highlight the need for accurate, clear and consistent foot health messages, and the important role health professionals have in signposting parents towards reliable and informative sources on foot health.

Correlation of ultrasonography synovitis with disease activity and clinical response to etanercept treatment in juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients

This study aimed to investigate the correlation of ultrasonography (US) of synovitis with disease activity and clinical response to etanercept (ETN) in juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients. Eighty-two JIA patients who underwent ETN treatment for 24 weeks were consecutively enrolled. US evaluations of 28 joints (shoulder, elbow, wrist, metacarpophalangeal, and proximal interphalangeal of hands and knee) at baseline were performed using grey-scale US and power doppler (PD) US, and US synovitis was defined as grey-scale abnormalities or PD abnormalities. Clinical response was assessed according to the ACRpedi 50 response criteria. In total, 2296 joints were scanned and 608 (26.5%) joints presented US synovitis, which was numerically higher than clinical synovitis (513 (22.3%)). The mean number of joints showing synovitis on US was 7.42±3.35, which was also numerically higher than that of clinical synovitis (6.26±2.70). The number of joints showing synovitis on US was positively correlated with C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, number of joints with active disease, number of joints with limited range of motion, physician's global assessment of disease activity, parent/patient global assessment of overall well-being, and childhood health assessment questionnaire score. Most interestingly, the baseline number of joints showing synovitis on US was increased in ACRpedi 50 response JIA patients compared to non-response JIA patients, and it serves as an independent predictive factor for higher clinical response to ETN treatment. In conclusion, US is a more sensitive test to evaluate subclinical synovitis and disease activity in JIA patients, and US synovitis might serve as a marker for predicting increased clinical response rate to ETN treatment.

Physical Examination Tools Used to Identify Swollen and Tender Lower Limb Joints in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: A Scoping Review

Background

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is the most common form of rheumatic disease in childhood and adolescents, affecting between 16 and 150 per 100,000 young persons below the age of 16. The lower limb is commonly affected in JIA, with joint swelling and tenderness often observed as a result of active synovitis.

Objective

The objective of this scoping review is to identify the existence of physical examination (PE) tools to identify and record swollen and tender lower limb joints in children with JIA.

Methods

Two reviewers individually screened the eligibility of titles and abstracts retrieved from the following online databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL. Studies that proposed and validated a comprehensive lower limb PE tool were included in this scoping review.

Results

After removal of duplicates, 1232 citations were retrieved, in which twelve were identified as potentially eligible. No studies met the set criteria for inclusion.

Conclusion

Further research is needed in developing and validating specific PE tools for clinicians such as podiatrists and other allied health professionals involved in the management of pathological lower limb joints in children diagnosed with JIA. These lower limb PE tools may be useful in conjunction with existing disease activity scores to optimise screening of the lower extremity and monitoring the efficacy of targeted interventions.