Impaired bone formation and osteoporosis in postmenopausal elderly onset rheumatoid arthritis patients

Relation between panoramic mandibular index and disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Background

DEXA scan could be unavailable at some health centers, and radiologic examination of the mandible and oral cavity is considered more commonly used radiologic test that can predict, diagnose, or even follow-up on any defect in bone mineralization. The aim of this study was to elucidate the ability of panoramic radiograph to detect osteoporosis in rheumatoid arthritis patients and correlate panoramic mandibular index with RA disease activity and severity parameters.

Results

The sensitivity of panoramic mandibular index for diagnosis of osteoporosis was 96% in group Ι (primary OP) and 70% in group ΙΙ (RA patients). The positive predictive value of PMI was 67% in group Ι and 55% in group ΙΙ. The negative predictive value of PMI was 34% in group Ι and was 46% in group ΙΙ. The cutoff value of PMI for diagnosis of OP was ≤ 0.31 in group Ι and ≤ 0.17 in group ΙΙ. In group I, there were significant correlations between panoramic mandibular index and patient’s ages, weights, T score at L1-4, T score at femoral neck, and T score at forearm while there were insignificant correlations between PMI and patients’ heights. In group ΙΙ, there were significant correlations between PMI, patients’ ages, weights, disease durations, SHARP score, ESR, RF, T score at L1-4, T score at femoral neck, and T score at forearm, while there were insignificant correlations between PMI and patients’ heights, DAS, and CRP.

Conclusions

Panoramic radiography could have a potential usability in the diagnosis of osteoporosis in rheumatoid arthritis patients regardless of displaying insignificant correlation with disease activity.

Evaluation of Bone Mineral Density, Serum Osteocalcin, and Osteopontin Levels in Postmenopausal Women with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, with/without Osteoporosis

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis (OP) is a worldwide ailment; we aim to establish new biomarkers in diagnosis by determining the levels of serum osteocalcin and osteopontin along with bone mineral density (BMD) and lumbar T-score, in postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with or without OP.

METHODS

This observational study included 160 postmenopausal women who were an attendee at outpatient clinics in Al-Hussein Hospital, Thi-Qar province; subdivided into 3 groups based on their T-score testing: Group I (n = 40) comprised postmenopausal women without T2DM as controls, Group II (n = 60) comprised postmenopausal women with T2DM but without OP, and Group III (n = 60) comprised postmenopausal women with T2DM with OP. The dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure the BMD (total body, lumbar spine, and femoral) and T-score for lumbar spine and femoral. Glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), osteocalcin, and osteopontin levels were assessed in all three groups.

RESULTS

Compared with controls, Group III demonstrated significantly lower BMD (total body, lumbar spine, and femoral), T-score for lumbar spine and femoral, serum osteocalcin, and osteopontin levels than Group II and Group I (P < 0.001). FBG and HbA1c levels were significantly higher in Group III than in Groups I and II (P < 0.001). A negative correlation was proved between HbA1c levels with BMD, osteocalcin levels, and osteopontin levels in the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Iraqi postmenopausal women with T2DM had a significantly lower bone mineral density, serum osteocalcin, and osteopontin levels. These results may serve as adjuvants in screening for OP, particularly among diabetic patients.

Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for trigger finger

BACKGROUND

Trigger finger is a common hand condition that occurs when movement of a finger flexor tendon through the first annular (A1) pulley is impaired by degeneration, inflammation, and swelling. This causes pain and restricted movement of the affected finger. Non-surgical treatment options include activity modification, oral and topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), splinting, and local injections with anti-inflammatory drugs.

OBJECTIVES

To review the benefits and harms of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) versus placebo, glucocorticoids, or different NSAIDs administered by the same route for trigger finger.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, www.ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO trials portal until 30 September 2020. We applied no language or publication status restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomised trials of adult participants with trigger finger that compared NSAIDs administered topically, orally, or by injection versus placebo, glucocorticoid, or different NSAIDs administered by the same route.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more review authors independently screened the reports, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence. The seven major outcomes were resolution of trigger finger symptoms, persistent moderate or severe symptoms, recurrence of symptoms, total active range of finger motion, residual pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse events. Treatment effects were reported as risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs conducted in an outpatient hospital setting were included (231 adult participants, mean age 58.6 years, 60% female, 95% to 100% moderate to severe disease). Both studies compared a single injection of a non-selective NSAID (12.5 mg diclofenac or 15.0 mg ketorolac) given at lower than normal doses with a single injection of a glucocorticoid (triamcinolone 20 mg or 5 mg), with maximum follow-up duration of 12 weeks or 24 weeks. In both studies, we detected risk of attrition and performance bias. One study also had risk of selection bias. The effects of treatment were sensitive to assumptions about missing outcomes. All seven outcomes were reported in one study, and five in the other. NSAID injection may offer little to no benefit over glucocorticoid injection, based on low- to very low-certainty evidence from two trials. Evidence was downgraded for bias and imprecision. There may be little to no difference between groups in resolution of symptoms at 12 to 24 weeks (34% with NSAIDs, 41% with glucocorticoids; absolute effect 7% lower, 95% confidence interval (CI) 16% lower to 5% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; low-certainty evidence). The rate of persistent moderate to severe symptoms may be higher at 12 to 24 weeks in the NSAIDs group (28%) compared to the glucocorticoid group (14%) (absolute effect 14% higher, 95% CI 2% to 33% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.46; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether NSAIDs result in fewer recurrences at 12 to 24 weeks (1%) compared to glucocorticoid (21%) (absolute effect 20% lower, 95% CI 21% to 13% lower; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.38; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in mean total active motion at 24 weeks (235 degrees with NSAIDs, 240 degrees with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 5% lower, 95% CI 34.54% lower to 24.54% higher; 1 study, 99 participants; MD -5.00, 95% CI -34.54 to 24.54; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in residual pain at 12 to 24 weeks (20% with NSAIDs, 24% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 4% lower, 95% CI 11% lower to 7% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.31; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between groups in participant-reported treatment success at 24 weeks (64% with NSAIDs, 68% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 4% lower, 95% CI 18% lower to 15% higher; 1 study, 121 participants; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.23; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether NSAID injection has an effect on adverse events at 12 to 24 weeks (1% with NSAIDs, 1% with glucocorticoid) (absolute effect 0% difference, 95% CI 2% lower to 3% higher; 2 studies, 231 participants; RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.19 to 21.42; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For adults with trigger finger, by 24 weeks' follow-up, results from two trials show that compared to glucocorticoid injection, NSAID injection offered little to no benefit in the treatment of trigger finger. Specifically, there was no difference in resolution, symptoms, recurrence, total active motion, residual pain, participant-reported treatment success, or adverse events.