Arthritis Research UK.

ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effectiveness of adding a single ultrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of corticosteroid and local anaesthetic to advice and education in adults with hip osteoarthritis.DesignPragmatic, three arm, parallel group, single blind, randomised controlled trial.SettingTwo community musculoskeletal services in England.Participants199 adults aged ≥40 years with hip osteoarthritis and at least moderate pain: 67 were randomly assigned to receive advice and education (best current treatment (BCT)), 66 to BCT plus ultrasound guided injection of triamcinolone and lidocaine, and 66 to BCT plus ultrasound guided injection of lidocaine.InterventionsBCT alone, BCT plus ultrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of 40 mg triamcinolone acetonide and 4 mL 1% lidocaine hydrochloride, or BCT plus ultrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of 5 mL 1% lidocaine. Participants in the ultrasound guided arms were masked to the injection they received.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was self-reported current intensity of hip pain (0-10 Numerical Rating Scale) over six months. Outcomes were self-reported at two weeks and at two, four, and six months.ResultsMean age of the study sample was 62.8 years (standard deviation 10.0) and 113 (57%) were women. Average weighted follow-up rate across time points was 93%. Greater mean improvement in hip pain intensity over six months was reported with BCT plus ultrasound-triamcinolone-lidocaine compared with BCT: mean difference −1.43 (95% confidence interval −2.15 to −0.72), P<0.001; standardised mean difference −0.55 (−0.82 to −0.27). No difference in hip pain intensity over six months was reported between BCT plus ultrasound-triamcinolone-lidocaine compared with BCT plus ultrasound-lidocaine (−0.52 (−1.21 to 0.18)). The presence of ultrasound confirmed synovitis or effusion was associated with a significant interaction effect favouring BCT plus ultrasound-triamcinolone-lidocaine (−1.70 (−3.10 to −0.30)). One participant in the BCT plus ultrasound-triamcinolone-lidocaine group with a bioprosthetic aortic valve died from subacute bacterial endocarditis four months after the intervention, deemed possibly related to the trial treatment.ConclusionsUltrasound guided intra-articular hip injection of triamcinolone is a treatment option to add to BCT for people with hip osteoarthritis.Trial registrationEudraCT 2014-003412-37; ISRCTN50550256.

Objectives ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) can affect all age groups. We aimed to show that differences in disease presentation and 6 month outcome between younger- and older-onset patients are still incompletely understood. Methods We included patients enrolled in the Diagnostic and Classification Criteria for Primary Systemic Vasculitis (DCVAS) study between October 2010 and January 2017 with a diagnosis of AAV. We divided the population according to age at diagnosis: &lt;65 years or ≥65 years. We adjusted associations for the type of AAV and the type of ANCA (anti-MPO, anti-PR3 or negative). Results A total of 1338 patients with AAV were included: 66% had disease onset at &lt;65 years of age [female 50%; mean age 48.4 years (s.d. 12.6)] and 34% had disease onset at ≥65 years [female 54%; mean age 73.6 years (s.d. 6)]. ANCA (MPO) positivity was more frequent in the older group (48% vs 27%; P = 0.001). Younger patients had higher rates of musculoskeletal, cutaneous and ENT manifestations compared with older patients. Systemic, neurologic,cardiovascular involvement and worsening renal function were more frequent in the older-onset group. Damage accrual, measured with the Vasculitis Damage Index (VDI), was significantly higher in older patients, 12% of whom had a 6 month VDI ≥5, compared with 7% of younger patients (P = 0.01). Older age was an independent risk factor for early death within 6 months from diagnosis [hazard ratio 2.06 (95% CI 1.07, 3.97); P = 0.03]. Conclusion Within 6 months of diagnosis of AAV, patients &gt;65 years of age display a different pattern of organ involvement and an increased risk of significant damage and mortality compared with younger patients.

To develop and validate updated classification criteria for giant cell arteritis (GCA). Methods. Patients with vasculitis or comparator diseases were recruited into an international cohort. The study proceeded in 6 phases: 1) identification of candidate items, 2) prospective collection of candidate items present at the time of diagnosis, 3) expert panel review of cases, 4) data-driven reduction of candidate items, 5) derivation of a points-based risk classification score in a development data set, and 6) validation in an independent data set.Results. The development data set consisted of 518 cases of GCA and 536 comparators. The validation data set consisted of 238 cases of GCA and 213 comparators. Age ≥50 years at diagnosis was an absolute requirement for classification. The final criteria items and weights were as follows: positive temporal artery biopsy or temporal artery halo sign on ultrasound (+5); erythrocyte sedimentation rate ≥50 mm/hour or C-reactive protein ≥10 mg/liter (+3); sudden visual loss (+3); morning stiffness in shoulders or neck, jaw or tongue claudication, new temporal headache, scalp tenderness, temporal artery abnormality on vascular examination, bilateral axillary involvement on imaging, and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography activity throughout the aorta (+2 each). A patient could be classified as having GCA with a cumulative score of ≥6 points. When these criteria were tested in the validation data set, the model area under the curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.88-0.94) with a sensitivity of 87.0% (95% CI 82.0-91.0%) and specificity of 94.8% (95% CI 91.0-97.4%).Conclusion. The 2022 American College of Rheumatology/EULAR GCA classification criteria are now validated for use in clinical research.This criteria set has been approved by the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) Board of Directors and the EULAR Executive Committee. This signifies that the criteria set has been quantitatively validated using patient data, and it has undergone validation based on an independent data set. All ACR/EULAR-approved criteria sets are expected to undergo intermittent updates.The ACR is an independent, professional, medical and scientific society that does not guarantee, warrant, or endorse any commercial product or service.This article is published simultaneously in Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases. The Diagnostic and Classification Criteria in Vasculitis (DCVAS) study, which included the development of this classification criteria, was funded by grants from the American College of Rheumatology (ACR), EULAR, the Vasculitis Foundation, and the

BackgroundEvidence on the effectiveness of intra-articular corticosteroid injection for hip osteoarthritis is limited and conflicting. The primary objective of the Hip Injection Trial (HIT) is to compare pain intensity over 6 months, in people with hip OA between those receiving an ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection of corticosteroid with 1% lidocaine hydrochloride plus best current treatment with those receiving best current treatment alone. Secondary objectives are to determine specified comparative clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes, and to explore, in a linked qualitative study, the lived experiences of patients with hip OA and experiences and impact of, ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection.MethodsThe HIT trial is a pragmatic, three-parallel group, single-blind, superiority, randomised controlled trial in patients with painful hip OA with a linked qualitative study. The current protocol is described, in addition to details and rationale for amendments since trial registration. 204 patients with moderate-to-severe hip OA will be recruited. Participants are randomised on an equal basis (1:1:1 ratio) to one of three interventions: (1) best current treatment, (2) best current treatment plus ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection of corticosteroid (triamcinolone acetonide 40 mg) with 1% lidocaine hydrochloride, or (3) best current treatment plus an ultrasound-guided intra-articular hip injection of 1% lidocaine hydrochloride alone. The primary endpoint is patient-reported hip pain intensity across 2 weeks, 2 months, 4 months and 6 months post-randomisation. Recruitment is over 29 months with a 6-month follow-up period. To address the primary objective, the analysis will compare participants’ ‘average’ follow-up pain NRS scores, based on a random effects linear repeated-measures model. Data on adverse events are collected and reported in accordance with national guidance and reviewed by external monitoring committees. Individual semi-structured interviews are being conducted with up to 30 trial participants across all three arms of the trial.DiscussionTo ensure healthcare services improve outcomes for patients, we need to ensure there is a robust and appropriate evidence-base to support clinical decision making. The HIT trial will answer important questions regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of intra-articular corticosteroid injections.Trial registrationISRCTN: 50550256, 28th July 2015.