BackgroundTourette syndrome (TS) is a neurodevelopmental condition characterised by chronic motor and vocal tics affecting up to 1% of school-age children and young people and is associated with significant distress and psychosocial impairment.ObjectiveTo conduct a systematic review of the benefits and risks of pharmacological, behavioural and physical interventions for tics in children and young people with TS (part 1) and to explore the experience of treatment and services from the perspective of young people with TS and their parents (part 2).Data SourcesFor the systematic reviews (parts 1 and 2), mainstream bibliographic databases, The Cochrane Library, education, social care and grey literature databases were searched using subject headings and text words for tic* and Tourette* from database inception to January 2013.Review/research methodsFor part 1, randomised controlled trials and controlled before-and-after studies of pharmacological, behavioural or physical interventions in children or young people (aged < 18 years) with TS or chronic tic disorder were included. Mixed studies and studies in adults were considered as supporting evidence. Risk of bias associated with each study was evaluated using the Cochrane tool. When there was sufficient data, random-effects meta-analysis was used to synthesize the evidence and the quality of evidence for each outcome was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. For part 2, qualitative studies and survey literature conducted in populations of children/young people with TS or their carers or in health professionals with experience of treating TS were included in the qualitative review. Results were synthesized narratively. In addition, a national parent/carer survey was conducted via the Tourettes Action website. Participants included parents of children and young people with TS aged under 18 years. Participants (young people with TS aged 10–17 years) for the in-depth interviews were recruited via a national survey and specialist Tourettes clinics in the UK.ResultsFor part 1, 70 studies were included in the quantitative systematic review. The evidence suggested that for treating tics in children and young people with TS, antipsychotic drugs [standardised mean difference (SMD) –0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) –1.08 to –0.41;n = 75] and noradrenergic agents [clonidine (Dixarit®, Boehringer Ingelheim) and guanfacine: SMD –0.72, 95% CI –1.03 to –0.40;n = 164] are effective in the short term. There was little difference among antipsychotics in terms of benefits, but adverse effect profiles do differ. Habit reversal training (HRT)/comprehensive behavioural intervention for tics (CBIT) was also shown to be effective (SMD –0.64, 95% CI –0.99 to –0.29;n = 133). For part 2, 295 parents/carers of children and young people with TS contributed useable survey data. Forty young people with TS participated in in-depth interviews. Four studies were in the qualitative review. Key themes were difficulties in accessing specialist care and behavioural interventions, delay in diagnosis, importance of anxiety and emotional symptoms, lack of provision of information to schools and inadequate information regarding medication and adverse effects.LimitationsThe number and quality of clinical trials is low and this downgrades the strength of the evidence and conclusions.ConclusionsAntipsychotics, noradrenergic agents and HRT/CBIT are effective in reducing tics in children and young people with TS. The balance of benefits and harms favours the most commonly used medications: risperidone (Risperdal®, Janssen), clonidine and aripiprazole (Abilify®, Otsuka). Larger and better-conducted trials addressing important clinical uncertainties are required. Further research is needed into widening access to behavioural interventions through use of technology including mobile applications (‘apps’) and video consultation.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002059.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Severe allograft dysfunction after heart transplant (HT), without ischemia or evidence of cellular rejection upon endomyocardial biopsy (EMB), is a rare but potentially fatal condition that suggests humoral rejection (HR). Its incidence, and the methods of choice for its diagnosis and management, remain uncertain. We retrospectively studied 445 HT patients (April 1991-December 2003) to determine incidence of HR diagnosed by clinical and conventional histopathological criteria. We used immunofluorescence (IF) techniques to test archived frozen EMB issue for IgM, IgG, C1q, C3, fibrin and C4d. Twelve patients (2.7%) fulfilled the criteria for HR after a mean time post-HT of 21.3 ± 24.7 months (range: 2-72 months). Patients were treated with high doses of steroids and plasmapheresis, with successful recovery in 11 cases. IF studies using classical markers were mainly negative for the six patients with enough EMB tissue for testing. All six patients showed positivity for C4d during the HR episode but not before or after. Humoral rejection was observed in less than 3% of HT patients. Plasmapheresis treatment was highly effective. Classical IF tests were not useful for diagnosis, but C4d appears to be useful both for confirmation of diagnosis and for monitoring response to treatment.

BackgroundTourette syndrome (TS) among young people is associated with psychosocial difficulties and parents play an important role in the management of the condition. Clinical guidelines have been developed for the treatment of TS and tics, but little is known about how young people and their parents perceive their treatment options or their desired outcomes of treatment. The aim of this study is to explore perceptions of treatments for tics among young people with TS and their parents.MethodsIn-depth interviews with 42 young people with TS and a mixed-methods, online survey of 295 parents of young people with TS. Participant recruitment was conducted through Tourettes Action (TA): a non-profit UK organisation for the support of people with TS. Interview transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis and responses to survey open-ended questions were analysed using content analysis. Triangulation of qualitative and quantitative data from the parents’ survey and qualitative data from the interviews with young people was used to increase the validity and depth of the findings.ResultsA strong theme was the perception that health professionals have limited knowledge of TS and its treatment. Medication was a common treatment for tics and both young people and parents described benefits of medication. However, adverse effects were frequently described and these were a common reason for stopping medication among young people. Aripiprazole was viewed most positively. Access to behavioural interventions for tics was limited and 76% of parents wanted this treatment to be available for their child. Some young people had reservations about the effectiveness or practicality of behavioural interventions. Reduction and abolition of tics were desired outcomes of treatment, but both parents and young people also identified the importance of increasing control over tics and reducing anxiety-related symptoms. For young people, managing the urge to tic was an important outcome of treatment.ConclusionsThe results suggest a need for more training in the identification and management of TS and wider availability of behavioural treatments. Clinical trials could explore the effectiveness of Aripiprazole used in combination with psycho-educational interventions to reduce anxiety and promote a sense of control.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-015-0430-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.