Teach your adolescent patients about normal menses, so they know when it’s abnormal

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:09

 

Not only do you need to know the normal features of adolescent menstruation to identify what’s abnormal, but you also need to teach your patients what’s typical, according to S. Paige Hertweck, MD, chief of gynecology at Norton Children’s Hospital in Louisville, Ky.

“Remember to use the menstrual cycle as a vital sign,” Dr. Hertweck told attendees at the American Academy of Pediatrics annual meeting. “Even within the first year of menarche, most girls have a period at least every 90 days, so work up those who don’t.”

The median age of menarche is 12.4 years, typically beginning within 2-3 years of breast budding at Tanner Stage 4 breast development, she said. By 15 years of age, 98% of girls have begun menstruation.

Girls’ cycles typically last 21-45 days, an average of 32.2 days during their first year of menstruation, with flow for 7 days or less, requiring an average of 3-6 pads and/or tampons per day. Dr. Hertweck recommends you write down these features of normal menstruation so that your patients can tell you when their cycle is abnormal or menses doesn’t return.

“Cycle length is more variable for teens versus women 20-40 years old,” she said. However, “it’s not true that ‘anything goes’ for cycle length” in teens, she added. “Cycles that are consistently outside the range of 21-45 days are statistically uncommon.” Hence the need to evaluate causes of amenorrhea in girls whose cycles exceed 90 days.

Possible causes of amenorrhea include pregnancy, polycystic ovary syndrome, thyroid abnormalities, hyperprolactinemia, primary ovarian insufficiency, or hypogonadal amenorrhea, typically stimulated by the first instance of anorexia, Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, or a gluten intolerance.
 

Primary amenorrhea

Dr. Hertweck listed five benchmarks that indicate primary amenorrhea requiring evaluation. Those indicators include girls who have no menarche by age 15 years or within 3 years of breast budding, no breast development by age 13 years, or no menses by age 14 years with hirsutism or with a history of excessive exercise or of an eating disorder.

You can start by examining what normal menstruation relies on: an intact central nervous system with a functioning pituitary, an ovarian response, and a normal uterus, cervix, and vagina. You should check the patient’s follicle-stimulating hormone, thyroid-stimulating hormone, and prolactin levels to assess CNS functioning, and estradiol levels to assess ovarian response. A genital exam with a pelvic ultrasound can reveal any possible defects in the uterus, cervix, or vagina.

The presence of breasts without a uterus indicates normal estrogen production, so the missing uterus could be a congenital defect or result from androgen insensitivity, Dr. Hertweck explained. In those without breasts, gonadal dysgenesis or gonadal enzymatic deficiency may explain no estrogen production. If the patient has both breasts and a uterus, you should rule out pregnancy first and then track CNS changes via FSH, TSH, and prolactin levels.
 

Premature ovarian insufficiency

Approximately 1% of females experience premature ovarian insufficiency, which can be diagnosed as early as age 14 years and should be suspected in a patient with a uterus but without breasts who has low estradiol levels, CNS failure identified by a high FSH level, and gonadal failure.

Formal diagnosis requires two separate instances of FSH elevation, and chromosomal testing should be done to rule out gonadal dysgenesis. You also should test the serum anti-Müllerian hormone biomarker (readings above 8 are concerning) and look for two possible causes. The FMR1 (Fragile X) premutation carrier status could be a cause, or presence of 21-hydroxylase and/or adrenal antibodies indicate autoimmune polyglandular syndrome.

Catching premature ovarian insufficiency early enough may allow patients to preserve some fertility if they still have oocytes present. Aside from this, girls will need hormone replacement therapy to fulfill developmental emotional and physical needs, such as bone growth and overall health. Despite a history of treating teens with premature ovarian insufficiency like adults, you should follow the practice guidelines specific to adolescents by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists committee opinion statement (Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:193-7).
 

Menorrhagia: heavy menstrual bleeding

Even though average blood loss is estimated at 30 mL per period, that number means little in clinical practice because patients cannot measure the actual amount of menses. Better indicators of abnormally greater flow include flow lasting longer than 7 days, finding clots larger than a quarter, changing menstrual products every 1-2 hours, leaking onto clothing such that patients need to take extra clothes to school, and any heavy periods that occur with easy bruising or with a family history of bleeding disorders.

First-line treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in teens is hormonal contraception, either combination oral contraceptive pills, the transdermal patch, or the intravaginal ring, which can be combined with other therapies.

An alternative for those under age 18 (per Food and Drug Administration labeling) is oral tranexamic acid, found in a crossover trial with an oral contraceptive pill to be just as effective at reducing average blood loss and improving quality of life, but with fewer side effects and better compliance. Before prescribing anything for heavy menstrual bleeding, however, you must consider possible causes and rule some out that require different management.

Aside from pregnancy, one potential cause of menorrhagia is infection such as chlamydia or gonorrhea, which should be considered even in those with a negative sexual history, Dr. Hertweck said. Other possible causes include an immature hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis, polycystic ovary syndrome (even with low hemoglobin), malignancy with a hormone-producing tumor, hypothalamic dysfunction (often stimulated by eating disorders, obesity, rapid weight loss, or gluten intolerance), or coagulopathy.

“Teens with menorrhagia may need to be screened for a bleeding disorder,” Dr. Hertweck said. At a minimum, she recommends checking complete blood count, ferritin, and TSH. “The most common bleeding disorders associated with heavy menstrual bleeding include platelet function disorders and von Willebrand.”

Up to half of teen girls with menorrhagia who visit a hematologist or multidisciplinary clinic receive a diagnosis of a bleeding disorder, Dr. Hertweck said. And up to half of those with menorrhagia at menarche may have von Willebrand, as do one in six adolescents who go to the emergency department because of heavy menstrual bleeding.
 

 

 

Von Willebrand syndrome

Von Willebrand syndrome is a deficiency or dysfunction of von Willebrand factor (vWF), a protein with binding sites for platelets, collagen, and factor VIII that “serves as a bridge between platelets and injury sites in vessel walls” and “protects factor VIII from rapid proteolytic degradation,” Dr. Hertweck said. Von Willebrand syndrome is the most common inherited congenital bleeding disorder. Although acquired von Willebrand syndrome is rare, it has grown in incidence among those with complex cardiovascular, hematologic, or immunologic disorders.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

Not only do you need to know the normal features of adolescent menstruation to identify what’s abnormal, but you also need to teach your patients what’s typical, according to S. Paige Hertweck, MD, chief of gynecology at Norton Children’s Hospital in Louisville, Ky.

“Remember to use the menstrual cycle as a vital sign,” Dr. Hertweck told attendees at the American Academy of Pediatrics annual meeting. “Even within the first year of menarche, most girls have a period at least every 90 days, so work up those who don’t.”

The median age of menarche is 12.4 years, typically beginning within 2-3 years of breast budding at Tanner Stage 4 breast development, she said. By 15 years of age, 98% of girls have begun menstruation.

Girls’ cycles typically last 21-45 days, an average of 32.2 days during their first year of menstruation, with flow for 7 days or less, requiring an average of 3-6 pads and/or tampons per day. Dr. Hertweck recommends you write down these features of normal menstruation so that your patients can tell you when their cycle is abnormal or menses doesn’t return.

“Cycle length is more variable for teens versus women 20-40 years old,” she said. However, “it’s not true that ‘anything goes’ for cycle length” in teens, she added. “Cycles that are consistently outside the range of 21-45 days are statistically uncommon.” Hence the need to evaluate causes of amenorrhea in girls whose cycles exceed 90 days.

Possible causes of amenorrhea include pregnancy, polycystic ovary syndrome, thyroid abnormalities, hyperprolactinemia, primary ovarian insufficiency, or hypogonadal amenorrhea, typically stimulated by the first instance of anorexia, Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, or a gluten intolerance.
 

Primary amenorrhea

Dr. Hertweck listed five benchmarks that indicate primary amenorrhea requiring evaluation. Those indicators include girls who have no menarche by age 15 years or within 3 years of breast budding, no breast development by age 13 years, or no menses by age 14 years with hirsutism or with a history of excessive exercise or of an eating disorder.

You can start by examining what normal menstruation relies on: an intact central nervous system with a functioning pituitary, an ovarian response, and a normal uterus, cervix, and vagina. You should check the patient’s follicle-stimulating hormone, thyroid-stimulating hormone, and prolactin levels to assess CNS functioning, and estradiol levels to assess ovarian response. A genital exam with a pelvic ultrasound can reveal any possible defects in the uterus, cervix, or vagina.

The presence of breasts without a uterus indicates normal estrogen production, so the missing uterus could be a congenital defect or result from androgen insensitivity, Dr. Hertweck explained. In those without breasts, gonadal dysgenesis or gonadal enzymatic deficiency may explain no estrogen production. If the patient has both breasts and a uterus, you should rule out pregnancy first and then track CNS changes via FSH, TSH, and prolactin levels.
 

Premature ovarian insufficiency

Approximately 1% of females experience premature ovarian insufficiency, which can be diagnosed as early as age 14 years and should be suspected in a patient with a uterus but without breasts who has low estradiol levels, CNS failure identified by a high FSH level, and gonadal failure.

Formal diagnosis requires two separate instances of FSH elevation, and chromosomal testing should be done to rule out gonadal dysgenesis. You also should test the serum anti-Müllerian hormone biomarker (readings above 8 are concerning) and look for two possible causes. The FMR1 (Fragile X) premutation carrier status could be a cause, or presence of 21-hydroxylase and/or adrenal antibodies indicate autoimmune polyglandular syndrome.

Catching premature ovarian insufficiency early enough may allow patients to preserve some fertility if they still have oocytes present. Aside from this, girls will need hormone replacement therapy to fulfill developmental emotional and physical needs, such as bone growth and overall health. Despite a history of treating teens with premature ovarian insufficiency like adults, you should follow the practice guidelines specific to adolescents by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists committee opinion statement (Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:193-7).
 

Menorrhagia: heavy menstrual bleeding

Even though average blood loss is estimated at 30 mL per period, that number means little in clinical practice because patients cannot measure the actual amount of menses. Better indicators of abnormally greater flow include flow lasting longer than 7 days, finding clots larger than a quarter, changing menstrual products every 1-2 hours, leaking onto clothing such that patients need to take extra clothes to school, and any heavy periods that occur with easy bruising or with a family history of bleeding disorders.

First-line treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in teens is hormonal contraception, either combination oral contraceptive pills, the transdermal patch, or the intravaginal ring, which can be combined with other therapies.

An alternative for those under age 18 (per Food and Drug Administration labeling) is oral tranexamic acid, found in a crossover trial with an oral contraceptive pill to be just as effective at reducing average blood loss and improving quality of life, but with fewer side effects and better compliance. Before prescribing anything for heavy menstrual bleeding, however, you must consider possible causes and rule some out that require different management.

Aside from pregnancy, one potential cause of menorrhagia is infection such as chlamydia or gonorrhea, which should be considered even in those with a negative sexual history, Dr. Hertweck said. Other possible causes include an immature hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis, polycystic ovary syndrome (even with low hemoglobin), malignancy with a hormone-producing tumor, hypothalamic dysfunction (often stimulated by eating disorders, obesity, rapid weight loss, or gluten intolerance), or coagulopathy.

“Teens with menorrhagia may need to be screened for a bleeding disorder,” Dr. Hertweck said. At a minimum, she recommends checking complete blood count, ferritin, and TSH. “The most common bleeding disorders associated with heavy menstrual bleeding include platelet function disorders and von Willebrand.”

Up to half of teen girls with menorrhagia who visit a hematologist or multidisciplinary clinic receive a diagnosis of a bleeding disorder, Dr. Hertweck said. And up to half of those with menorrhagia at menarche may have von Willebrand, as do one in six adolescents who go to the emergency department because of heavy menstrual bleeding.
 

 

 

Von Willebrand syndrome

Von Willebrand syndrome is a deficiency or dysfunction of von Willebrand factor (vWF), a protein with binding sites for platelets, collagen, and factor VIII that “serves as a bridge between platelets and injury sites in vessel walls” and “protects factor VIII from rapid proteolytic degradation,” Dr. Hertweck said. Von Willebrand syndrome is the most common inherited congenital bleeding disorder. Although acquired von Willebrand syndrome is rare, it has grown in incidence among those with complex cardiovascular, hematologic, or immunologic disorders.

 

Not only do you need to know the normal features of adolescent menstruation to identify what’s abnormal, but you also need to teach your patients what’s typical, according to S. Paige Hertweck, MD, chief of gynecology at Norton Children’s Hospital in Louisville, Ky.

“Remember to use the menstrual cycle as a vital sign,” Dr. Hertweck told attendees at the American Academy of Pediatrics annual meeting. “Even within the first year of menarche, most girls have a period at least every 90 days, so work up those who don’t.”

The median age of menarche is 12.4 years, typically beginning within 2-3 years of breast budding at Tanner Stage 4 breast development, she said. By 15 years of age, 98% of girls have begun menstruation.

Girls’ cycles typically last 21-45 days, an average of 32.2 days during their first year of menstruation, with flow for 7 days or less, requiring an average of 3-6 pads and/or tampons per day. Dr. Hertweck recommends you write down these features of normal menstruation so that your patients can tell you when their cycle is abnormal or menses doesn’t return.

“Cycle length is more variable for teens versus women 20-40 years old,” she said. However, “it’s not true that ‘anything goes’ for cycle length” in teens, she added. “Cycles that are consistently outside the range of 21-45 days are statistically uncommon.” Hence the need to evaluate causes of amenorrhea in girls whose cycles exceed 90 days.

Possible causes of amenorrhea include pregnancy, polycystic ovary syndrome, thyroid abnormalities, hyperprolactinemia, primary ovarian insufficiency, or hypogonadal amenorrhea, typically stimulated by the first instance of anorexia, Crohn’s disease, celiac disease, or a gluten intolerance.
 

Primary amenorrhea

Dr. Hertweck listed five benchmarks that indicate primary amenorrhea requiring evaluation. Those indicators include girls who have no menarche by age 15 years or within 3 years of breast budding, no breast development by age 13 years, or no menses by age 14 years with hirsutism or with a history of excessive exercise or of an eating disorder.

You can start by examining what normal menstruation relies on: an intact central nervous system with a functioning pituitary, an ovarian response, and a normal uterus, cervix, and vagina. You should check the patient’s follicle-stimulating hormone, thyroid-stimulating hormone, and prolactin levels to assess CNS functioning, and estradiol levels to assess ovarian response. A genital exam with a pelvic ultrasound can reveal any possible defects in the uterus, cervix, or vagina.

The presence of breasts without a uterus indicates normal estrogen production, so the missing uterus could be a congenital defect or result from androgen insensitivity, Dr. Hertweck explained. In those without breasts, gonadal dysgenesis or gonadal enzymatic deficiency may explain no estrogen production. If the patient has both breasts and a uterus, you should rule out pregnancy first and then track CNS changes via FSH, TSH, and prolactin levels.
 

Premature ovarian insufficiency

Approximately 1% of females experience premature ovarian insufficiency, which can be diagnosed as early as age 14 years and should be suspected in a patient with a uterus but without breasts who has low estradiol levels, CNS failure identified by a high FSH level, and gonadal failure.

Formal diagnosis requires two separate instances of FSH elevation, and chromosomal testing should be done to rule out gonadal dysgenesis. You also should test the serum anti-Müllerian hormone biomarker (readings above 8 are concerning) and look for two possible causes. The FMR1 (Fragile X) premutation carrier status could be a cause, or presence of 21-hydroxylase and/or adrenal antibodies indicate autoimmune polyglandular syndrome.

Catching premature ovarian insufficiency early enough may allow patients to preserve some fertility if they still have oocytes present. Aside from this, girls will need hormone replacement therapy to fulfill developmental emotional and physical needs, such as bone growth and overall health. Despite a history of treating teens with premature ovarian insufficiency like adults, you should follow the practice guidelines specific to adolescents by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists committee opinion statement (Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:193-7).
 

Menorrhagia: heavy menstrual bleeding

Even though average blood loss is estimated at 30 mL per period, that number means little in clinical practice because patients cannot measure the actual amount of menses. Better indicators of abnormally greater flow include flow lasting longer than 7 days, finding clots larger than a quarter, changing menstrual products every 1-2 hours, leaking onto clothing such that patients need to take extra clothes to school, and any heavy periods that occur with easy bruising or with a family history of bleeding disorders.

First-line treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding in teens is hormonal contraception, either combination oral contraceptive pills, the transdermal patch, or the intravaginal ring, which can be combined with other therapies.

An alternative for those under age 18 (per Food and Drug Administration labeling) is oral tranexamic acid, found in a crossover trial with an oral contraceptive pill to be just as effective at reducing average blood loss and improving quality of life, but with fewer side effects and better compliance. Before prescribing anything for heavy menstrual bleeding, however, you must consider possible causes and rule some out that require different management.

Aside from pregnancy, one potential cause of menorrhagia is infection such as chlamydia or gonorrhea, which should be considered even in those with a negative sexual history, Dr. Hertweck said. Other possible causes include an immature hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis, polycystic ovary syndrome (even with low hemoglobin), malignancy with a hormone-producing tumor, hypothalamic dysfunction (often stimulated by eating disorders, obesity, rapid weight loss, or gluten intolerance), or coagulopathy.

“Teens with menorrhagia may need to be screened for a bleeding disorder,” Dr. Hertweck said. At a minimum, she recommends checking complete blood count, ferritin, and TSH. “The most common bleeding disorders associated with heavy menstrual bleeding include platelet function disorders and von Willebrand.”

Up to half of teen girls with menorrhagia who visit a hematologist or multidisciplinary clinic receive a diagnosis of a bleeding disorder, Dr. Hertweck said. And up to half of those with menorrhagia at menarche may have von Willebrand, as do one in six adolescents who go to the emergency department because of heavy menstrual bleeding.
 

 

 

Von Willebrand syndrome

Von Willebrand syndrome is a deficiency or dysfunction of von Willebrand factor (vWF), a protein with binding sites for platelets, collagen, and factor VIII that “serves as a bridge between platelets and injury sites in vessel walls” and “protects factor VIII from rapid proteolytic degradation,” Dr. Hertweck said. Von Willebrand syndrome is the most common inherited congenital bleeding disorder. Although acquired von Willebrand syndrome is rare, it has grown in incidence among those with complex cardiovascular, hematologic, or immunologic disorders.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM AAP 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Return to Activities After Patellofemoral Arthroplasty

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 09/19/2019 - 13:20

Take-Home Points

  • PFA improved knee function and pain scores in patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis.
  • The majority (84.2%) of patients undergoing PFA were female.
  • Regardless of age or gender, 72.2% of patients returned to their desired preoperative activity after PFA, and 52.8% returned at the same or higher level.
  • The rate of conversion from PFA to TKA was 6.3%.
  • PFA is an alternative to TKA in active patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis.

Compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), single-compartment knee arthroplasty may provide better physiologic function, faster recovery, and higher rates of return to activities in patients with unicompartmental knee disease.1-3 In 1955, McKeever4 introduced patellar arthroplasty for surgical management of isolated patellofemoral arthritis. In 1979, Lubinus5 improved on the technique and design by adding a femoral component. Since then, implants and techniques have been developed to effect better clinical outcomes. Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) has many advantages over TKA in the treatment of patellofemoral arthritis. PFA is less invasive, requires shorter tourniquet times, has faster recovery, and spares the tibiofemoral compartment, leaving more native bone for potential conversion to TKA. Regarding activity and function, the resurfacing arthroplasty (vs TKA) allows maintenance of nearly normal knee kinematics.

Despite these advantages, the broader orthopedic surgery community has only cautiously accepted PFA. The procedure has high complication rates. Persistent instability, malalignment, wear, impingement, and tibiofemoral arthritis progression can occur after PFA.6 Although first-generation PFA prostheses often failed because of mechanical problems, loosening, maltracking, or instability,7 the most common indication for PFA revision has been, according to a recent large retrospective study,8 unexplained pain. More than 10 to 15 years after PFA, tibiofemoral arthritis may be the primary mechanism of failure.9 Nevertheless, compared with standard TKA for isolated patellofemoral arthritis, modern PFA does not have significantly different clinical outcomes, including complication and revision rates.6Numerous patient factors influence functional prognosis before and after knee arthroplasty, regardless of surgical technique and implant used. Age, comorbidities, athletic status, mental health, pain, functional limitations, excessive caution, “artificial joint”–related worries, and rehabilitation protocol all influence function.10 Return to activity and other quality-of-life indices are important aspects of postoperative patient satisfaction.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to describe functional status after PFA for patellofemoral arthritis. We identified 48 consecutive PFAs (39 patients) performed by a team of 2 orthopedic surgeons (specialists in treating patellofemoral pathology) between 2009 and 2014.

Three validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used to determine preoperative (baseline) and postoperative functional status: Kujala score, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. The Kujala score is a measure of knee function specific to the patellofemoral joint; the Lysholm score focuses on activities related to the knee; and the IKDC score is a general measure of knee function. Charts were reviewed to extract patients’ clinical data, including preoperative outcome scores, medical history, physical examination data, intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative course. By telephone, patients answered questions about their postoperative clinical course and completed final follow-up questionnaires. They were also asked which sporting or fitness activity they had preferred before surgery and whether they were able to return to that activity after surgery.

Statistical analysis included the study population’s descriptive statistics. Means and SDs were reported for continuous variables, and frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables. Paired t tests were used to analyze changes in PROM scores. For comparison of differences between characteristics of patients who did and did not return to their previous activity level, independent-samples t tests were used for continuous variables. Chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests were used to compare discrete variables. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ .05. All analyses were performed with SPSS Version 22.0 (IBM).

 

 

Results

Table 1.
Thirty-nine patients underwent PFA at our institution between 2009 and 2014. Mean age was 51.6 years. Of these patients, 84.2% were female, 28.6% had a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or higher, and 23.4% had PFA for posttraumatic arthritis related to prior patellofemoral instability. Table 1 lists the study cohort’s demographic data.

Table 2.
Table 2 lists self-reported activities limited by the affected knee before surgery, and Table 3 lists activity levels after surgery. Return to previous preferred activity was reported by 72.2% of patients, and 52.8% of patients reported returning to the same activity level or to a higher level. There were no differences in age (P = .978) or sex (P = .232) between patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level and patients who did not.
Table 3.
However, mean BMI was significantly (P = .016) higher in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level (28.6 kg/m2) than in patients who did not (23.7 kg/m2). Although the rate of posttraumatic arthritis (26%) was higher than the rate of primary osteoarthritis (19%) in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level, this difference was not statistically significant (P = .724).

Postoperative knee-specific PROM scores and general pain score (reported by the patient on a scale of 0-10) were statistically significantly improved (P < .001 for all measures) over preoperative scores (Table 4).
Table 4.
Mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 5-57 months). Kujala score improved a mean of 19.5 points; Lysholm score, 28.9 points; and IKDC score, 23.5 points. Mean general pain score improved from 6.3 before surgery to 2.8 after surgery. All PROM and pain score improvements were substantially larger than the minimal clinically important differences. Postoperative PROM scores and general pain score were significantly more improved in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level than in patients who did not (P < .05 for all measures).

After surgery, 1 patient (2.6%) developed a pulmonary embolus, which was successfully identified and treated without incident. Five patients (10.4%) had another surgery on the same knee. Three patients (6.3%) underwent conversion to TKA: 1 for continued symptoms in the setting of newly diagnosed inflammatory arthritis, 1 for arthritic pain, and 1 for patellofemoral instability. Two patients (4.2%) underwent irrigation and débridement: 1 for hematoma and 1 for suspected (culture-negative) infection.

Discussion

Historically, the literature evaluating knee arthroplasty outcomes has focused on implant survivorship, pain relief, and patient satisfaction. Since the advent of partial knee arthroplasty options, more attention has been given to functional outcomes and return to activities after single-compartment knee resurfacing. TKA remains the gold standard by which newer, less invasive surgical options are measured. In a large prospective study, 97% of patients (age, >55 years) who had TKA for patellofemoral arthritis reported good or excellent clinical results, the majority being excellent.11 Post-TKA functional status and activity levels may not be rated as highly. After TKA, many patients switch to lower impact sports or reduce or stop their participation in sports.12 A small study of competitive adult tennis players found high levels of post-TKA satisfaction, ability to resume playing tennis, pain relief, and increased or continued enjoyment in playing.13 In a study of 355 patients (417 knees) who had underwent TKA, improvement in Knee Society function score showed a moderate correlation to an increase in weighted activity score (R = 0.362).14

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) is becoming a popular treatment option for single-compartment tibiofemoral arthritis. A systematic review of 18 original studies of patients with knee osteoarthritis found that overall return to sports varied from 36% to 89% after TKA and from 75% to 100% after UKA.15 In another study, return-to-sports rates were similar for UKA (87%) and TKA (83%); the only significant difference was UKA patients returned quicker.16 The authors of a large meta-analysis conceded that significant heterogeneity of data prevented them from drawing definitive conclusions, but UKA patients seemed to return to low- and high-impact sports 2 weeks faster than their TKA counterparts.10 Overall, UKA and TKA patients (age, 51-71 years) had comparable return-to-sports rates at an average of 4 years after surgery.10 A smaller study corroborated faster return to sports for UKA over TKA patients and also found that, compared with TKA patients, UKA patients participated in sports more regularly and over a longer period.17 On the other hand, Walton and colleagues18 found similar return-to-sports rates but higher frequency of and satisfaction with sports participation in UKA over TKA patients.

A large retrospective study found no differences in rates of return to sports after TKA, UKA, patellar resurfacing, hip resurfacing, and total hip arthroplasty.19 Pain was the most common barrier to return. UKA patients who returned to sports tended to be younger than those who did not.20 Naal and colleagues3 found that 95% of UKA patients returned to their activities—hiking, walking, cycling, and swimming being most common. Although 90.3% of patients said surgery maintained or improved their ability to participate in sports, participation in high-impact sports (eg, running) decreased after surgery.

Outcomes of PFA vary because of evolving patient selection, implant design, surgical technique, and return-to-activity expectations.21,22 Most PFA outcome studies focus on implant survivorship, complication rates, and postoperative knee scores.23-28 PFA studies focused on return to activities are limited. Kooijman and colleagues7 and Mertl and colleagues29 reported good or excellent clinical results of PFA in 86% and 82% of patients, respectively. Neither study included a comprehensive analysis of postoperative functional status. Similarly, De Cloedt and colleagues30 reported good PFA outcomes in 43% of patients with degenerative joint disease and in 83% of patients with instability. Specific activity status was not described. Dahm and colleagues31 and Farr and colleagues32 suggested postoperative pain resolution motivates some PFA patients not only to resume preoperative activities but to start participating in new, higher level activities after pain has subsided. However, the studies did not examine the characteristics of patients who returned to baseline activities and did not examine return-to-sports rates.

 

 

Study Strengths and Limitations

Our study focused on the PFA patient population of a surgical team of 2 fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons (specialists in treating patellofemoral pathology). Although generalization of our findings to other surgeons and different implants may be limited, the study design standardized treatment in a way that makes these findings more reliable. The 100% follow-up strengthens these findings as well. Last, though the patient population was relatively small, it was consistent with or larger than the PFA patient groups studied previously.

Conclusion

In this study, PROM and pain scores were significantly improved after PFA. That almost 75% of patients returned to their preferred activities and >50% of patients returned at the same or a higher activity level provides useful information for preoperative discussions with patients who want to remain active after PFA. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the longevity and durability of PFA, particularly in active patients.

References

1. Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC. Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;(273):151-156.

2. Kozinn SC, Scott R. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71(1):145-150.

3. Naal FD, Fischer M, Preuss A, et al. Return to sports and recreational activity after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(10):1688-1695.

4. McKeever DC. Patellar prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1955;37(5):1074-1084.

5. Lubinus HH. Patella glide bearing total replacement. Orthopedics. 1979;2(2):119-127.

6. Dy CJ, Franco N, Ma Y, Mazumdar M, McCarthy MM, Gonzalez Della Valle A. Complications after patello-femoral versus total knee replacement in the treatment of isolated patello-femoral osteoarthritis. A meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(11):2174-2190.

7. Kooijman HJ, Driessen AP, van Horn JR. Long-term results of patellofemoral arthroplasty. A report of 56 arthroplasties with 17 years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85(6):836-840.

8. Baker PN, Refaie R, Gregg P, Deehan D. Revision following patello-femoral arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(10):2047-2053.

9. Lonner JH, Bloomfield MR. The clinical outcome of patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2013;44(3):271-280.

10. Papalia R, Del Buono A, Zampogna B, Maffulli N, Denaro V. Sport activity following joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Br Med Bull. 2012;101:81-103.

11. Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, Hungerford DS. Total knee arthroplasty for patellofemoral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(11):1977-1981.

12. Chatterji U, Ashworth MJ, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ. Effect of total knee arthroplasty on recreational and sporting activity. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75(6):405-408.

13. Mont MA, Rajadhyaksha AD, Marxen JL, Silberstein CE, Hungerford DS. Tennis after total knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30(2):163-166.

14. Marker DR, Mont MA, Seyler TM, McGrath MS, Kolisek FR, Bonutti PM. Does functional improvement following TKA correlate to increased sports activity? Iowa Orthop J. 2009;29:11-16.

15. Witjes S, Gouttebarge V, Kuijer PP, van Geenen RC, Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GM. Return to sports and physical activity after total and unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2016;46(2):269-292.

16. Ho JC, Stitzlein RN, Green CJ, Stoner T, Froimson MI. Return to sports activity following UKA and TKA. J Knee Surg. 2016;29(3):254-259.

17. Hopper GP, Leach WJ. Participation in sporting activities following knee replacement: total versus unicompartmental. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16(10):973-979.

18. Walton NP, Jahromi I, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ, Angel KR, Campbell DG. Patient-perceived outcomes and return to sport and work: TKA versus mini-incision unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2006;19(2):112-116.

19. Wylde V, Blom A, Dieppe P, Hewlett S, Learmonth I. Return to sport after joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(7):920-923.

20. Pietschmann MF, Wohlleb L, Weber P, et al. Sports activities after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Oxford III—what can we expect? Int Orthop. 2013;37(1):31-37.

21. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2010;33(9):653.

22. Lustig S. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014;100(1 suppl):S35-S43.

23. Krajca-Radcliffe JB, Coker TP. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. A 2- to 18-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;(330):143-151.

24. Mihalko WM, Boachie-Adjei Y, Spang JT, Fulkerson JP, Arendt EA, Saleh KJ. Controversies and techniques in the surgical management of patellofemoral arthritis. Instr Course Lect. 2008;57:365-380.

25. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: pros, cons, and design considerations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(428):158-165.

26. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: the impact of design on outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39(3):347-354.

27. Farr J 2nd, Barrett D. Optimizing patellofemoral arthroplasty. Knee. 2008;15(5):339-347.

28. Leadbetter WB, Seyler TM, Ragland PS, Mont MA. Indications, contraindications, and pitfalls of patellofemoral arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(suppl 4):122-137.

29. Mertl P, Van FT, Bonhomme P, Vives P. Femoropatellar osteoarthritis treated by prosthesis. Retrospective study of 50 implants [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1997;83(8):712-718.

30. De Cloedt P, Legaye J, Lokietek W. Femoro-patellar prosthesis. A retrospective study of 45 consecutive cases with a follow-up of 3-12 years [in French]. Acta Orthop Belg. 1999;65(2):170-175.

31. Dahm DL, Al-Rayashi W, Dajani K, Shah JP, Levy BA, Stuart MJ. Patellofemoral arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty in patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Am J Orthop. 2010;39(10):487-491.

32. Farr J, Arendt E, Dahm D, Daynes J. Patellofemoral arthroplasty in the athlete. Clin Sports Med. 2014;33(3):547-552.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 46(6)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E353-E357
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Author and Disclosure Information

Authors’ Disclosure Statement: The authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Take-Home Points

  • PFA improved knee function and pain scores in patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis.
  • The majority (84.2%) of patients undergoing PFA were female.
  • Regardless of age or gender, 72.2% of patients returned to their desired preoperative activity after PFA, and 52.8% returned at the same or higher level.
  • The rate of conversion from PFA to TKA was 6.3%.
  • PFA is an alternative to TKA in active patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis.

Compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), single-compartment knee arthroplasty may provide better physiologic function, faster recovery, and higher rates of return to activities in patients with unicompartmental knee disease.1-3 In 1955, McKeever4 introduced patellar arthroplasty for surgical management of isolated patellofemoral arthritis. In 1979, Lubinus5 improved on the technique and design by adding a femoral component. Since then, implants and techniques have been developed to effect better clinical outcomes. Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) has many advantages over TKA in the treatment of patellofemoral arthritis. PFA is less invasive, requires shorter tourniquet times, has faster recovery, and spares the tibiofemoral compartment, leaving more native bone for potential conversion to TKA. Regarding activity and function, the resurfacing arthroplasty (vs TKA) allows maintenance of nearly normal knee kinematics.

Despite these advantages, the broader orthopedic surgery community has only cautiously accepted PFA. The procedure has high complication rates. Persistent instability, malalignment, wear, impingement, and tibiofemoral arthritis progression can occur after PFA.6 Although first-generation PFA prostheses often failed because of mechanical problems, loosening, maltracking, or instability,7 the most common indication for PFA revision has been, according to a recent large retrospective study,8 unexplained pain. More than 10 to 15 years after PFA, tibiofemoral arthritis may be the primary mechanism of failure.9 Nevertheless, compared with standard TKA for isolated patellofemoral arthritis, modern PFA does not have significantly different clinical outcomes, including complication and revision rates.6Numerous patient factors influence functional prognosis before and after knee arthroplasty, regardless of surgical technique and implant used. Age, comorbidities, athletic status, mental health, pain, functional limitations, excessive caution, “artificial joint”–related worries, and rehabilitation protocol all influence function.10 Return to activity and other quality-of-life indices are important aspects of postoperative patient satisfaction.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to describe functional status after PFA for patellofemoral arthritis. We identified 48 consecutive PFAs (39 patients) performed by a team of 2 orthopedic surgeons (specialists in treating patellofemoral pathology) between 2009 and 2014.

Three validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used to determine preoperative (baseline) and postoperative functional status: Kujala score, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. The Kujala score is a measure of knee function specific to the patellofemoral joint; the Lysholm score focuses on activities related to the knee; and the IKDC score is a general measure of knee function. Charts were reviewed to extract patients’ clinical data, including preoperative outcome scores, medical history, physical examination data, intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative course. By telephone, patients answered questions about their postoperative clinical course and completed final follow-up questionnaires. They were also asked which sporting or fitness activity they had preferred before surgery and whether they were able to return to that activity after surgery.

Statistical analysis included the study population’s descriptive statistics. Means and SDs were reported for continuous variables, and frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables. Paired t tests were used to analyze changes in PROM scores. For comparison of differences between characteristics of patients who did and did not return to their previous activity level, independent-samples t tests were used for continuous variables. Chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests were used to compare discrete variables. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ .05. All analyses were performed with SPSS Version 22.0 (IBM).

 

 

Results

Table 1.
Thirty-nine patients underwent PFA at our institution between 2009 and 2014. Mean age was 51.6 years. Of these patients, 84.2% were female, 28.6% had a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or higher, and 23.4% had PFA for posttraumatic arthritis related to prior patellofemoral instability. Table 1 lists the study cohort’s demographic data.

Table 2.
Table 2 lists self-reported activities limited by the affected knee before surgery, and Table 3 lists activity levels after surgery. Return to previous preferred activity was reported by 72.2% of patients, and 52.8% of patients reported returning to the same activity level or to a higher level. There were no differences in age (P = .978) or sex (P = .232) between patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level and patients who did not.
Table 3.
However, mean BMI was significantly (P = .016) higher in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level (28.6 kg/m2) than in patients who did not (23.7 kg/m2). Although the rate of posttraumatic arthritis (26%) was higher than the rate of primary osteoarthritis (19%) in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level, this difference was not statistically significant (P = .724).

Postoperative knee-specific PROM scores and general pain score (reported by the patient on a scale of 0-10) were statistically significantly improved (P < .001 for all measures) over preoperative scores (Table 4).
Table 4.
Mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 5-57 months). Kujala score improved a mean of 19.5 points; Lysholm score, 28.9 points; and IKDC score, 23.5 points. Mean general pain score improved from 6.3 before surgery to 2.8 after surgery. All PROM and pain score improvements were substantially larger than the minimal clinically important differences. Postoperative PROM scores and general pain score were significantly more improved in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level than in patients who did not (P < .05 for all measures).

After surgery, 1 patient (2.6%) developed a pulmonary embolus, which was successfully identified and treated without incident. Five patients (10.4%) had another surgery on the same knee. Three patients (6.3%) underwent conversion to TKA: 1 for continued symptoms in the setting of newly diagnosed inflammatory arthritis, 1 for arthritic pain, and 1 for patellofemoral instability. Two patients (4.2%) underwent irrigation and débridement: 1 for hematoma and 1 for suspected (culture-negative) infection.

Discussion

Historically, the literature evaluating knee arthroplasty outcomes has focused on implant survivorship, pain relief, and patient satisfaction. Since the advent of partial knee arthroplasty options, more attention has been given to functional outcomes and return to activities after single-compartment knee resurfacing. TKA remains the gold standard by which newer, less invasive surgical options are measured. In a large prospective study, 97% of patients (age, >55 years) who had TKA for patellofemoral arthritis reported good or excellent clinical results, the majority being excellent.11 Post-TKA functional status and activity levels may not be rated as highly. After TKA, many patients switch to lower impact sports or reduce or stop their participation in sports.12 A small study of competitive adult tennis players found high levels of post-TKA satisfaction, ability to resume playing tennis, pain relief, and increased or continued enjoyment in playing.13 In a study of 355 patients (417 knees) who had underwent TKA, improvement in Knee Society function score showed a moderate correlation to an increase in weighted activity score (R = 0.362).14

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) is becoming a popular treatment option for single-compartment tibiofemoral arthritis. A systematic review of 18 original studies of patients with knee osteoarthritis found that overall return to sports varied from 36% to 89% after TKA and from 75% to 100% after UKA.15 In another study, return-to-sports rates were similar for UKA (87%) and TKA (83%); the only significant difference was UKA patients returned quicker.16 The authors of a large meta-analysis conceded that significant heterogeneity of data prevented them from drawing definitive conclusions, but UKA patients seemed to return to low- and high-impact sports 2 weeks faster than their TKA counterparts.10 Overall, UKA and TKA patients (age, 51-71 years) had comparable return-to-sports rates at an average of 4 years after surgery.10 A smaller study corroborated faster return to sports for UKA over TKA patients and also found that, compared with TKA patients, UKA patients participated in sports more regularly and over a longer period.17 On the other hand, Walton and colleagues18 found similar return-to-sports rates but higher frequency of and satisfaction with sports participation in UKA over TKA patients.

A large retrospective study found no differences in rates of return to sports after TKA, UKA, patellar resurfacing, hip resurfacing, and total hip arthroplasty.19 Pain was the most common barrier to return. UKA patients who returned to sports tended to be younger than those who did not.20 Naal and colleagues3 found that 95% of UKA patients returned to their activities—hiking, walking, cycling, and swimming being most common. Although 90.3% of patients said surgery maintained or improved their ability to participate in sports, participation in high-impact sports (eg, running) decreased after surgery.

Outcomes of PFA vary because of evolving patient selection, implant design, surgical technique, and return-to-activity expectations.21,22 Most PFA outcome studies focus on implant survivorship, complication rates, and postoperative knee scores.23-28 PFA studies focused on return to activities are limited. Kooijman and colleagues7 and Mertl and colleagues29 reported good or excellent clinical results of PFA in 86% and 82% of patients, respectively. Neither study included a comprehensive analysis of postoperative functional status. Similarly, De Cloedt and colleagues30 reported good PFA outcomes in 43% of patients with degenerative joint disease and in 83% of patients with instability. Specific activity status was not described. Dahm and colleagues31 and Farr and colleagues32 suggested postoperative pain resolution motivates some PFA patients not only to resume preoperative activities but to start participating in new, higher level activities after pain has subsided. However, the studies did not examine the characteristics of patients who returned to baseline activities and did not examine return-to-sports rates.

 

 

Study Strengths and Limitations

Our study focused on the PFA patient population of a surgical team of 2 fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons (specialists in treating patellofemoral pathology). Although generalization of our findings to other surgeons and different implants may be limited, the study design standardized treatment in a way that makes these findings more reliable. The 100% follow-up strengthens these findings as well. Last, though the patient population was relatively small, it was consistent with or larger than the PFA patient groups studied previously.

Conclusion

In this study, PROM and pain scores were significantly improved after PFA. That almost 75% of patients returned to their preferred activities and >50% of patients returned at the same or a higher activity level provides useful information for preoperative discussions with patients who want to remain active after PFA. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the longevity and durability of PFA, particularly in active patients.

Take-Home Points

  • PFA improved knee function and pain scores in patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis.
  • The majority (84.2%) of patients undergoing PFA were female.
  • Regardless of age or gender, 72.2% of patients returned to their desired preoperative activity after PFA, and 52.8% returned at the same or higher level.
  • The rate of conversion from PFA to TKA was 6.3%.
  • PFA is an alternative to TKA in active patients with isolated patellofemoral arthritis.

Compared with total knee arthroplasty (TKA), single-compartment knee arthroplasty may provide better physiologic function, faster recovery, and higher rates of return to activities in patients with unicompartmental knee disease.1-3 In 1955, McKeever4 introduced patellar arthroplasty for surgical management of isolated patellofemoral arthritis. In 1979, Lubinus5 improved on the technique and design by adding a femoral component. Since then, implants and techniques have been developed to effect better clinical outcomes. Patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) has many advantages over TKA in the treatment of patellofemoral arthritis. PFA is less invasive, requires shorter tourniquet times, has faster recovery, and spares the tibiofemoral compartment, leaving more native bone for potential conversion to TKA. Regarding activity and function, the resurfacing arthroplasty (vs TKA) allows maintenance of nearly normal knee kinematics.

Despite these advantages, the broader orthopedic surgery community has only cautiously accepted PFA. The procedure has high complication rates. Persistent instability, malalignment, wear, impingement, and tibiofemoral arthritis progression can occur after PFA.6 Although first-generation PFA prostheses often failed because of mechanical problems, loosening, maltracking, or instability,7 the most common indication for PFA revision has been, according to a recent large retrospective study,8 unexplained pain. More than 10 to 15 years after PFA, tibiofemoral arthritis may be the primary mechanism of failure.9 Nevertheless, compared with standard TKA for isolated patellofemoral arthritis, modern PFA does not have significantly different clinical outcomes, including complication and revision rates.6Numerous patient factors influence functional prognosis before and after knee arthroplasty, regardless of surgical technique and implant used. Age, comorbidities, athletic status, mental health, pain, functional limitations, excessive caution, “artificial joint”–related worries, and rehabilitation protocol all influence function.10 Return to activity and other quality-of-life indices are important aspects of postoperative patient satisfaction.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study to describe functional status after PFA for patellofemoral arthritis. We identified 48 consecutive PFAs (39 patients) performed by a team of 2 orthopedic surgeons (specialists in treating patellofemoral pathology) between 2009 and 2014.

Three validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were used to determine preoperative (baseline) and postoperative functional status: Kujala score, Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score. The Kujala score is a measure of knee function specific to the patellofemoral joint; the Lysholm score focuses on activities related to the knee; and the IKDC score is a general measure of knee function. Charts were reviewed to extract patients’ clinical data, including preoperative outcome scores, medical history, physical examination data, intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative course. By telephone, patients answered questions about their postoperative clinical course and completed final follow-up questionnaires. They were also asked which sporting or fitness activity they had preferred before surgery and whether they were able to return to that activity after surgery.

Statistical analysis included the study population’s descriptive statistics. Means and SDs were reported for continuous variables, and frequencies and percentages were reported for categorical variables. Paired t tests were used to analyze changes in PROM scores. For comparison of differences between characteristics of patients who did and did not return to their previous activity level, independent-samples t tests were used for continuous variables. Chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests were used to compare discrete variables. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ .05. All analyses were performed with SPSS Version 22.0 (IBM).

 

 

Results

Table 1.
Thirty-nine patients underwent PFA at our institution between 2009 and 2014. Mean age was 51.6 years. Of these patients, 84.2% were female, 28.6% had a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 or higher, and 23.4% had PFA for posttraumatic arthritis related to prior patellofemoral instability. Table 1 lists the study cohort’s demographic data.

Table 2.
Table 2 lists self-reported activities limited by the affected knee before surgery, and Table 3 lists activity levels after surgery. Return to previous preferred activity was reported by 72.2% of patients, and 52.8% of patients reported returning to the same activity level or to a higher level. There were no differences in age (P = .978) or sex (P = .232) between patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level and patients who did not.
Table 3.
However, mean BMI was significantly (P = .016) higher in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level (28.6 kg/m2) than in patients who did not (23.7 kg/m2). Although the rate of posttraumatic arthritis (26%) was higher than the rate of primary osteoarthritis (19%) in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level, this difference was not statistically significant (P = .724).

Postoperative knee-specific PROM scores and general pain score (reported by the patient on a scale of 0-10) were statistically significantly improved (P < .001 for all measures) over preoperative scores (Table 4).
Table 4.
Mean follow-up was 26 months (range, 5-57 months). Kujala score improved a mean of 19.5 points; Lysholm score, 28.9 points; and IKDC score, 23.5 points. Mean general pain score improved from 6.3 before surgery to 2.8 after surgery. All PROM and pain score improvements were substantially larger than the minimal clinically important differences. Postoperative PROM scores and general pain score were significantly more improved in patients who returned to the same or a higher activity level than in patients who did not (P < .05 for all measures).

After surgery, 1 patient (2.6%) developed a pulmonary embolus, which was successfully identified and treated without incident. Five patients (10.4%) had another surgery on the same knee. Three patients (6.3%) underwent conversion to TKA: 1 for continued symptoms in the setting of newly diagnosed inflammatory arthritis, 1 for arthritic pain, and 1 for patellofemoral instability. Two patients (4.2%) underwent irrigation and débridement: 1 for hematoma and 1 for suspected (culture-negative) infection.

Discussion

Historically, the literature evaluating knee arthroplasty outcomes has focused on implant survivorship, pain relief, and patient satisfaction. Since the advent of partial knee arthroplasty options, more attention has been given to functional outcomes and return to activities after single-compartment knee resurfacing. TKA remains the gold standard by which newer, less invasive surgical options are measured. In a large prospective study, 97% of patients (age, >55 years) who had TKA for patellofemoral arthritis reported good or excellent clinical results, the majority being excellent.11 Post-TKA functional status and activity levels may not be rated as highly. After TKA, many patients switch to lower impact sports or reduce or stop their participation in sports.12 A small study of competitive adult tennis players found high levels of post-TKA satisfaction, ability to resume playing tennis, pain relief, and increased or continued enjoyment in playing.13 In a study of 355 patients (417 knees) who had underwent TKA, improvement in Knee Society function score showed a moderate correlation to an increase in weighted activity score (R = 0.362).14

Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) is becoming a popular treatment option for single-compartment tibiofemoral arthritis. A systematic review of 18 original studies of patients with knee osteoarthritis found that overall return to sports varied from 36% to 89% after TKA and from 75% to 100% after UKA.15 In another study, return-to-sports rates were similar for UKA (87%) and TKA (83%); the only significant difference was UKA patients returned quicker.16 The authors of a large meta-analysis conceded that significant heterogeneity of data prevented them from drawing definitive conclusions, but UKA patients seemed to return to low- and high-impact sports 2 weeks faster than their TKA counterparts.10 Overall, UKA and TKA patients (age, 51-71 years) had comparable return-to-sports rates at an average of 4 years after surgery.10 A smaller study corroborated faster return to sports for UKA over TKA patients and also found that, compared with TKA patients, UKA patients participated in sports more regularly and over a longer period.17 On the other hand, Walton and colleagues18 found similar return-to-sports rates but higher frequency of and satisfaction with sports participation in UKA over TKA patients.

A large retrospective study found no differences in rates of return to sports after TKA, UKA, patellar resurfacing, hip resurfacing, and total hip arthroplasty.19 Pain was the most common barrier to return. UKA patients who returned to sports tended to be younger than those who did not.20 Naal and colleagues3 found that 95% of UKA patients returned to their activities—hiking, walking, cycling, and swimming being most common. Although 90.3% of patients said surgery maintained or improved their ability to participate in sports, participation in high-impact sports (eg, running) decreased after surgery.

Outcomes of PFA vary because of evolving patient selection, implant design, surgical technique, and return-to-activity expectations.21,22 Most PFA outcome studies focus on implant survivorship, complication rates, and postoperative knee scores.23-28 PFA studies focused on return to activities are limited. Kooijman and colleagues7 and Mertl and colleagues29 reported good or excellent clinical results of PFA in 86% and 82% of patients, respectively. Neither study included a comprehensive analysis of postoperative functional status. Similarly, De Cloedt and colleagues30 reported good PFA outcomes in 43% of patients with degenerative joint disease and in 83% of patients with instability. Specific activity status was not described. Dahm and colleagues31 and Farr and colleagues32 suggested postoperative pain resolution motivates some PFA patients not only to resume preoperative activities but to start participating in new, higher level activities after pain has subsided. However, the studies did not examine the characteristics of patients who returned to baseline activities and did not examine return-to-sports rates.

 

 

Study Strengths and Limitations

Our study focused on the PFA patient population of a surgical team of 2 fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons (specialists in treating patellofemoral pathology). Although generalization of our findings to other surgeons and different implants may be limited, the study design standardized treatment in a way that makes these findings more reliable. The 100% follow-up strengthens these findings as well. Last, though the patient population was relatively small, it was consistent with or larger than the PFA patient groups studied previously.

Conclusion

In this study, PROM and pain scores were significantly improved after PFA. That almost 75% of patients returned to their preferred activities and >50% of patients returned at the same or a higher activity level provides useful information for preoperative discussions with patients who want to remain active after PFA. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate the longevity and durability of PFA, particularly in active patients.

References

1. Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC. Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;(273):151-156.

2. Kozinn SC, Scott R. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71(1):145-150.

3. Naal FD, Fischer M, Preuss A, et al. Return to sports and recreational activity after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(10):1688-1695.

4. McKeever DC. Patellar prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1955;37(5):1074-1084.

5. Lubinus HH. Patella glide bearing total replacement. Orthopedics. 1979;2(2):119-127.

6. Dy CJ, Franco N, Ma Y, Mazumdar M, McCarthy MM, Gonzalez Della Valle A. Complications after patello-femoral versus total knee replacement in the treatment of isolated patello-femoral osteoarthritis. A meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(11):2174-2190.

7. Kooijman HJ, Driessen AP, van Horn JR. Long-term results of patellofemoral arthroplasty. A report of 56 arthroplasties with 17 years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85(6):836-840.

8. Baker PN, Refaie R, Gregg P, Deehan D. Revision following patello-femoral arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(10):2047-2053.

9. Lonner JH, Bloomfield MR. The clinical outcome of patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2013;44(3):271-280.

10. Papalia R, Del Buono A, Zampogna B, Maffulli N, Denaro V. Sport activity following joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Br Med Bull. 2012;101:81-103.

11. Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, Hungerford DS. Total knee arthroplasty for patellofemoral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(11):1977-1981.

12. Chatterji U, Ashworth MJ, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ. Effect of total knee arthroplasty on recreational and sporting activity. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75(6):405-408.

13. Mont MA, Rajadhyaksha AD, Marxen JL, Silberstein CE, Hungerford DS. Tennis after total knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30(2):163-166.

14. Marker DR, Mont MA, Seyler TM, McGrath MS, Kolisek FR, Bonutti PM. Does functional improvement following TKA correlate to increased sports activity? Iowa Orthop J. 2009;29:11-16.

15. Witjes S, Gouttebarge V, Kuijer PP, van Geenen RC, Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GM. Return to sports and physical activity after total and unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2016;46(2):269-292.

16. Ho JC, Stitzlein RN, Green CJ, Stoner T, Froimson MI. Return to sports activity following UKA and TKA. J Knee Surg. 2016;29(3):254-259.

17. Hopper GP, Leach WJ. Participation in sporting activities following knee replacement: total versus unicompartmental. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16(10):973-979.

18. Walton NP, Jahromi I, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ, Angel KR, Campbell DG. Patient-perceived outcomes and return to sport and work: TKA versus mini-incision unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2006;19(2):112-116.

19. Wylde V, Blom A, Dieppe P, Hewlett S, Learmonth I. Return to sport after joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(7):920-923.

20. Pietschmann MF, Wohlleb L, Weber P, et al. Sports activities after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Oxford III—what can we expect? Int Orthop. 2013;37(1):31-37.

21. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2010;33(9):653.

22. Lustig S. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014;100(1 suppl):S35-S43.

23. Krajca-Radcliffe JB, Coker TP. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. A 2- to 18-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;(330):143-151.

24. Mihalko WM, Boachie-Adjei Y, Spang JT, Fulkerson JP, Arendt EA, Saleh KJ. Controversies and techniques in the surgical management of patellofemoral arthritis. Instr Course Lect. 2008;57:365-380.

25. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: pros, cons, and design considerations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(428):158-165.

26. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: the impact of design on outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39(3):347-354.

27. Farr J 2nd, Barrett D. Optimizing patellofemoral arthroplasty. Knee. 2008;15(5):339-347.

28. Leadbetter WB, Seyler TM, Ragland PS, Mont MA. Indications, contraindications, and pitfalls of patellofemoral arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(suppl 4):122-137.

29. Mertl P, Van FT, Bonhomme P, Vives P. Femoropatellar osteoarthritis treated by prosthesis. Retrospective study of 50 implants [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1997;83(8):712-718.

30. De Cloedt P, Legaye J, Lokietek W. Femoro-patellar prosthesis. A retrospective study of 45 consecutive cases with a follow-up of 3-12 years [in French]. Acta Orthop Belg. 1999;65(2):170-175.

31. Dahm DL, Al-Rayashi W, Dajani K, Shah JP, Levy BA, Stuart MJ. Patellofemoral arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty in patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Am J Orthop. 2010;39(10):487-491.

32. Farr J, Arendt E, Dahm D, Daynes J. Patellofemoral arthroplasty in the athlete. Clin Sports Med. 2014;33(3):547-552.

References

1. Laurencin CT, Zelicof SB, Scott RD, Ewald FC. Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty in the same patient. A comparative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;(273):151-156.

2. Kozinn SC, Scott R. Unicondylar knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71(1):145-150.

3. Naal FD, Fischer M, Preuss A, et al. Return to sports and recreational activity after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(10):1688-1695.

4. McKeever DC. Patellar prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1955;37(5):1074-1084.

5. Lubinus HH. Patella glide bearing total replacement. Orthopedics. 1979;2(2):119-127.

6. Dy CJ, Franco N, Ma Y, Mazumdar M, McCarthy MM, Gonzalez Della Valle A. Complications after patello-femoral versus total knee replacement in the treatment of isolated patello-femoral osteoarthritis. A meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(11):2174-2190.

7. Kooijman HJ, Driessen AP, van Horn JR. Long-term results of patellofemoral arthroplasty. A report of 56 arthroplasties with 17 years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85(6):836-840.

8. Baker PN, Refaie R, Gregg P, Deehan D. Revision following patello-femoral arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(10):2047-2053.

9. Lonner JH, Bloomfield MR. The clinical outcome of patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 2013;44(3):271-280.

10. Papalia R, Del Buono A, Zampogna B, Maffulli N, Denaro V. Sport activity following joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Br Med Bull. 2012;101:81-103.

11. Mont MA, Haas S, Mullick T, Hungerford DS. Total knee arthroplasty for patellofemoral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(11):1977-1981.

12. Chatterji U, Ashworth MJ, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ. Effect of total knee arthroplasty on recreational and sporting activity. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75(6):405-408.

13. Mont MA, Rajadhyaksha AD, Marxen JL, Silberstein CE, Hungerford DS. Tennis after total knee arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med. 2002;30(2):163-166.

14. Marker DR, Mont MA, Seyler TM, McGrath MS, Kolisek FR, Bonutti PM. Does functional improvement following TKA correlate to increased sports activity? Iowa Orthop J. 2009;29:11-16.

15. Witjes S, Gouttebarge V, Kuijer PP, van Geenen RC, Poolman RW, Kerkhoffs GM. Return to sports and physical activity after total and unicondylar knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2016;46(2):269-292.

16. Ho JC, Stitzlein RN, Green CJ, Stoner T, Froimson MI. Return to sports activity following UKA and TKA. J Knee Surg. 2016;29(3):254-259.

17. Hopper GP, Leach WJ. Participation in sporting activities following knee replacement: total versus unicompartmental. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008;16(10):973-979.

18. Walton NP, Jahromi I, Lewis PL, Dobson PJ, Angel KR, Campbell DG. Patient-perceived outcomes and return to sport and work: TKA versus mini-incision unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2006;19(2):112-116.

19. Wylde V, Blom A, Dieppe P, Hewlett S, Learmonth I. Return to sport after joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(7):920-923.

20. Pietschmann MF, Wohlleb L, Weber P, et al. Sports activities after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty Oxford III—what can we expect? Int Orthop. 2013;37(1):31-37.

21. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2010;33(9):653.

22. Lustig S. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014;100(1 suppl):S35-S43.

23. Krajca-Radcliffe JB, Coker TP. Patellofemoral arthroplasty. A 2- to 18-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;(330):143-151.

24. Mihalko WM, Boachie-Adjei Y, Spang JT, Fulkerson JP, Arendt EA, Saleh KJ. Controversies and techniques in the surgical management of patellofemoral arthritis. Instr Course Lect. 2008;57:365-380.

25. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: pros, cons, and design considerations. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(428):158-165.

26. Lonner JH. Patellofemoral arthroplasty: the impact of design on outcomes. Orthop Clin North Am. 2008;39(3):347-354.

27. Farr J 2nd, Barrett D. Optimizing patellofemoral arthroplasty. Knee. 2008;15(5):339-347.

28. Leadbetter WB, Seyler TM, Ragland PS, Mont MA. Indications, contraindications, and pitfalls of patellofemoral arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(suppl 4):122-137.

29. Mertl P, Van FT, Bonhomme P, Vives P. Femoropatellar osteoarthritis treated by prosthesis. Retrospective study of 50 implants [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1997;83(8):712-718.

30. De Cloedt P, Legaye J, Lokietek W. Femoro-patellar prosthesis. A retrospective study of 45 consecutive cases with a follow-up of 3-12 years [in French]. Acta Orthop Belg. 1999;65(2):170-175.

31. Dahm DL, Al-Rayashi W, Dajani K, Shah JP, Levy BA, Stuart MJ. Patellofemoral arthroplasty versus total knee arthroplasty in patients with isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Am J Orthop. 2010;39(10):487-491.

32. Farr J, Arendt E, Dahm D, Daynes J. Patellofemoral arthroplasty in the athlete. Clin Sports Med. 2014;33(3):547-552.

Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 46(6)
Issue
The American Journal of Orthopedics - 46(6)
Page Number
E353-E357
Page Number
E353-E357
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Article PDF Media

Genotype-guided warfarin dosing reduced adverse events in arthroplasty patients

Questions of practicality remain
Article Type
Changed
Wed, 03/13/2019 - 14:31

 

Genotype-guided warfarin dosing reduced anticoagulation-related adverse events by almost 4% compared with a clinically based warfarin-dosing regimen in a randomized trial of 1,650 elderly patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.

The difference in the composite endpoint (major bleeding within 30 days, international normalized ratio [INR] of 4 or greater within 30 days, venous thromboembolism within 60 days, or death within 30 days) in the Genetic Informatics Trial of Warfarin to Prevent Deep Vein Thrombosis (GIFT) trial was mainly driven by a significant difference in episodes of elevated INR, reported Brian F. Gage, MD, and his colleagues (JAMA 2017;318[12]:1115-1124. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11469).

A total of 1,597 patients completed the trial. Of 808 patients in the genotype-guided group, 10.8% met one of the endpoints. Of 789 in the clinically guided warfarin dosing group, 14.7% met at least 1 of the endpoints. There were no deaths in the study.

“Widespread use of genotype-guided dosing will depend on reimbursement, regulations, and logistics. Although several commercial platforms for warfarin-related genes have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, routine genotyping is not yet recommended,” wrote Dr. Gage of Washington University, St. Louis, and his coauthors.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services used its Coverage with Evidence Development program to fund genotyping in this trial and will review the results to determine future coverage, the researchers added.

In GIFT, patients were randomized to an 11-day regimen of warfarin guided either by a clinical algorithm or by their individual genotype. The team tested for four polymorphisms known to affect warfarin metabolism: VKORC1-1639G>A, CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and CYP4F2 V433M. The treatment goal was an INR of 1.8-2. After 11 days, physicians could administer warfarin according to their own judgment.

The absolute difference of 3.9% in the composite endpoint was largely driven by a 2.8% absolute difference in the rate of an INR of 4 or greater. The rate difference between the two groups was 0.8% for major bleeding, and 0.7% for VTE.

About 41% of the cohort was considered to be at high risk of bleeding complications, and this group accrued the highest benefit from genotype-based dosing. Among them, the composite endpoint was 11.5% compared with 15.2% in the clinical algorithm group – an absolute difference of 3.76%.

The benefit was consistent among black patients, and those with CYP2C9.

By day 90, one VTE had occurred in each group. An intracranial hemorrhage occurred in one patient in the clinically guided group, 2 months after stopping warfarin.

The clinical benefit of genotype-based dosing influenced 90-day outcomes as well, with the composite endpoint occurring in 11% of the genotype group and 15% of the clinically guided group (absolute difference 3.9%).

Among the 1,588 patients who had their percentage of time in the therapeutic range (PTTR) calculated, genotyping improved PTTR time by 3.4% overall. The effect was especially strong from days 4 to 14, when it improved PTTR by 5.7% relative to clinical guidance.

Three other studies have examined the effect of a genotype-based warfarin dosing regimen, Dr. Gage and his coauthors noted: Two found no benefit, and a third found that such guidance improved INR control. GIFT has several advantages over those trials, which the authors said lend credence to its results.

“Compared with previous studies, this trial was larger, used genotype-guided dosing for a longer duration, and incorporated more genes into the dosing algorithm …The longer period of genotype-guided dosing likely prevented cases of supratherapeutic INR that were common in these trials,” they wrote.

Dr. Gage reported no financial disclosures, but several coauthors reported ties with pharmaceutical and imaging companies.

Body

 

Warfarin is the most commonly used anticoagulant in the world, and a significant cause of emergency department visits and hospitalizations, especially among older patients. Walking the fine line between dosing too little and too much is not an easy task – especially since warfarin response is influenced by diet, comorbidities, interactions with other medications and – as studies over the last 20 years have confirmed – many genetic variants.

Also, the practicality of genotyping every patient who needs anticoagulation therapy must be questioned. Based on the results of GIFT, 26 patients would need to be genotyped to prevent one event, typically an INR of 4 or greater. Although the cost of genotyping continues to decline, health insurers and publicly funded health systems have not yet been convinced that genotype-guided warfarin prescribing is a cost-effective strategy.

The benefits of genotyping would likely be less in patients with atrial fibrillation, for example, as they run a lower risk of VTE than do arthroplasty patients. The GIFT surgeries were all elective, so there was plenty of time to get back genotyping results before starting warfarin. That is a luxury not afforded to many patients in need of anticoagulation.

It’s possible, however, that the benefits of genotyping might be larger in the real world. GIFT was conducted at academic medical centers and used a clinical dosing algorithm as comparator. As a result, adverse event rates were likely lower in the comparison group than would be expected in other clinical settings with less-intense INR monitoring or empirically based initiation regimens.

Still, GIFT’s results are gaining global attention. Based on prepublication results of the GIFT trial, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC), an international research network that develops consensus recommendations about the use of pharmacogenomic test results, recently published guidelines about genotype-guided dosing for warfarin. The group now recommends using genotype-guided warfarin dosing based on CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and VKORC1 variants for adult patients of non-African ancestry. It also recommends that patients with combinations of high-risk variants would benefit from an alternative anticoagulant strategy, because of likely greater risks of poor INR control and bleeding.

A single pharmacogenomic test covering many common variants relevant to multiple prescribing decisions over time is far more likely to be a cost-effective approach; however, there is no evidence for this proposition. Until then, it might be simpler and less expensive to use clinical dosing algorithms to reduce the risks of anticoagulation.
 

Jon D. Emery, PhD, is the Herman Professor of Primary Care Cancer Research at the University of Melbourne and Western Health, Melbourne. He made these remarks in an accompanying editorial (JAMA 2017;318;110-2 doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11465 ).

Publications
Topics
Sections
Body

 

Warfarin is the most commonly used anticoagulant in the world, and a significant cause of emergency department visits and hospitalizations, especially among older patients. Walking the fine line between dosing too little and too much is not an easy task – especially since warfarin response is influenced by diet, comorbidities, interactions with other medications and – as studies over the last 20 years have confirmed – many genetic variants.

Also, the practicality of genotyping every patient who needs anticoagulation therapy must be questioned. Based on the results of GIFT, 26 patients would need to be genotyped to prevent one event, typically an INR of 4 or greater. Although the cost of genotyping continues to decline, health insurers and publicly funded health systems have not yet been convinced that genotype-guided warfarin prescribing is a cost-effective strategy.

The benefits of genotyping would likely be less in patients with atrial fibrillation, for example, as they run a lower risk of VTE than do arthroplasty patients. The GIFT surgeries were all elective, so there was plenty of time to get back genotyping results before starting warfarin. That is a luxury not afforded to many patients in need of anticoagulation.

It’s possible, however, that the benefits of genotyping might be larger in the real world. GIFT was conducted at academic medical centers and used a clinical dosing algorithm as comparator. As a result, adverse event rates were likely lower in the comparison group than would be expected in other clinical settings with less-intense INR monitoring or empirically based initiation regimens.

Still, GIFT’s results are gaining global attention. Based on prepublication results of the GIFT trial, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC), an international research network that develops consensus recommendations about the use of pharmacogenomic test results, recently published guidelines about genotype-guided dosing for warfarin. The group now recommends using genotype-guided warfarin dosing based on CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and VKORC1 variants for adult patients of non-African ancestry. It also recommends that patients with combinations of high-risk variants would benefit from an alternative anticoagulant strategy, because of likely greater risks of poor INR control and bleeding.

A single pharmacogenomic test covering many common variants relevant to multiple prescribing decisions over time is far more likely to be a cost-effective approach; however, there is no evidence for this proposition. Until then, it might be simpler and less expensive to use clinical dosing algorithms to reduce the risks of anticoagulation.
 

Jon D. Emery, PhD, is the Herman Professor of Primary Care Cancer Research at the University of Melbourne and Western Health, Melbourne. He made these remarks in an accompanying editorial (JAMA 2017;318;110-2 doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11465 ).

Body

 

Warfarin is the most commonly used anticoagulant in the world, and a significant cause of emergency department visits and hospitalizations, especially among older patients. Walking the fine line between dosing too little and too much is not an easy task – especially since warfarin response is influenced by diet, comorbidities, interactions with other medications and – as studies over the last 20 years have confirmed – many genetic variants.

Also, the practicality of genotyping every patient who needs anticoagulation therapy must be questioned. Based on the results of GIFT, 26 patients would need to be genotyped to prevent one event, typically an INR of 4 or greater. Although the cost of genotyping continues to decline, health insurers and publicly funded health systems have not yet been convinced that genotype-guided warfarin prescribing is a cost-effective strategy.

The benefits of genotyping would likely be less in patients with atrial fibrillation, for example, as they run a lower risk of VTE than do arthroplasty patients. The GIFT surgeries were all elective, so there was plenty of time to get back genotyping results before starting warfarin. That is a luxury not afforded to many patients in need of anticoagulation.

It’s possible, however, that the benefits of genotyping might be larger in the real world. GIFT was conducted at academic medical centers and used a clinical dosing algorithm as comparator. As a result, adverse event rates were likely lower in the comparison group than would be expected in other clinical settings with less-intense INR monitoring or empirically based initiation regimens.

Still, GIFT’s results are gaining global attention. Based on prepublication results of the GIFT trial, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC), an international research network that develops consensus recommendations about the use of pharmacogenomic test results, recently published guidelines about genotype-guided dosing for warfarin. The group now recommends using genotype-guided warfarin dosing based on CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and VKORC1 variants for adult patients of non-African ancestry. It also recommends that patients with combinations of high-risk variants would benefit from an alternative anticoagulant strategy, because of likely greater risks of poor INR control and bleeding.

A single pharmacogenomic test covering many common variants relevant to multiple prescribing decisions over time is far more likely to be a cost-effective approach; however, there is no evidence for this proposition. Until then, it might be simpler and less expensive to use clinical dosing algorithms to reduce the risks of anticoagulation.
 

Jon D. Emery, PhD, is the Herman Professor of Primary Care Cancer Research at the University of Melbourne and Western Health, Melbourne. He made these remarks in an accompanying editorial (JAMA 2017;318;110-2 doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11465 ).

Title
Questions of practicality remain
Questions of practicality remain

 

Genotype-guided warfarin dosing reduced anticoagulation-related adverse events by almost 4% compared with a clinically based warfarin-dosing regimen in a randomized trial of 1,650 elderly patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.

The difference in the composite endpoint (major bleeding within 30 days, international normalized ratio [INR] of 4 or greater within 30 days, venous thromboembolism within 60 days, or death within 30 days) in the Genetic Informatics Trial of Warfarin to Prevent Deep Vein Thrombosis (GIFT) trial was mainly driven by a significant difference in episodes of elevated INR, reported Brian F. Gage, MD, and his colleagues (JAMA 2017;318[12]:1115-1124. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11469).

A total of 1,597 patients completed the trial. Of 808 patients in the genotype-guided group, 10.8% met one of the endpoints. Of 789 in the clinically guided warfarin dosing group, 14.7% met at least 1 of the endpoints. There were no deaths in the study.

“Widespread use of genotype-guided dosing will depend on reimbursement, regulations, and logistics. Although several commercial platforms for warfarin-related genes have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, routine genotyping is not yet recommended,” wrote Dr. Gage of Washington University, St. Louis, and his coauthors.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services used its Coverage with Evidence Development program to fund genotyping in this trial and will review the results to determine future coverage, the researchers added.

In GIFT, patients were randomized to an 11-day regimen of warfarin guided either by a clinical algorithm or by their individual genotype. The team tested for four polymorphisms known to affect warfarin metabolism: VKORC1-1639G>A, CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and CYP4F2 V433M. The treatment goal was an INR of 1.8-2. After 11 days, physicians could administer warfarin according to their own judgment.

The absolute difference of 3.9% in the composite endpoint was largely driven by a 2.8% absolute difference in the rate of an INR of 4 or greater. The rate difference between the two groups was 0.8% for major bleeding, and 0.7% for VTE.

About 41% of the cohort was considered to be at high risk of bleeding complications, and this group accrued the highest benefit from genotype-based dosing. Among them, the composite endpoint was 11.5% compared with 15.2% in the clinical algorithm group – an absolute difference of 3.76%.

The benefit was consistent among black patients, and those with CYP2C9.

By day 90, one VTE had occurred in each group. An intracranial hemorrhage occurred in one patient in the clinically guided group, 2 months after stopping warfarin.

The clinical benefit of genotype-based dosing influenced 90-day outcomes as well, with the composite endpoint occurring in 11% of the genotype group and 15% of the clinically guided group (absolute difference 3.9%).

Among the 1,588 patients who had their percentage of time in the therapeutic range (PTTR) calculated, genotyping improved PTTR time by 3.4% overall. The effect was especially strong from days 4 to 14, when it improved PTTR by 5.7% relative to clinical guidance.

Three other studies have examined the effect of a genotype-based warfarin dosing regimen, Dr. Gage and his coauthors noted: Two found no benefit, and a third found that such guidance improved INR control. GIFT has several advantages over those trials, which the authors said lend credence to its results.

“Compared with previous studies, this trial was larger, used genotype-guided dosing for a longer duration, and incorporated more genes into the dosing algorithm …The longer period of genotype-guided dosing likely prevented cases of supratherapeutic INR that were common in these trials,” they wrote.

Dr. Gage reported no financial disclosures, but several coauthors reported ties with pharmaceutical and imaging companies.

 

Genotype-guided warfarin dosing reduced anticoagulation-related adverse events by almost 4% compared with a clinically based warfarin-dosing regimen in a randomized trial of 1,650 elderly patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.

The difference in the composite endpoint (major bleeding within 30 days, international normalized ratio [INR] of 4 or greater within 30 days, venous thromboembolism within 60 days, or death within 30 days) in the Genetic Informatics Trial of Warfarin to Prevent Deep Vein Thrombosis (GIFT) trial was mainly driven by a significant difference in episodes of elevated INR, reported Brian F. Gage, MD, and his colleagues (JAMA 2017;318[12]:1115-1124. doi: 10.1001/jama.2017.11469).

A total of 1,597 patients completed the trial. Of 808 patients in the genotype-guided group, 10.8% met one of the endpoints. Of 789 in the clinically guided warfarin dosing group, 14.7% met at least 1 of the endpoints. There were no deaths in the study.

“Widespread use of genotype-guided dosing will depend on reimbursement, regulations, and logistics. Although several commercial platforms for warfarin-related genes have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, routine genotyping is not yet recommended,” wrote Dr. Gage of Washington University, St. Louis, and his coauthors.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services used its Coverage with Evidence Development program to fund genotyping in this trial and will review the results to determine future coverage, the researchers added.

In GIFT, patients were randomized to an 11-day regimen of warfarin guided either by a clinical algorithm or by their individual genotype. The team tested for four polymorphisms known to affect warfarin metabolism: VKORC1-1639G>A, CYP2C9*2, CYP2C9*3, and CYP4F2 V433M. The treatment goal was an INR of 1.8-2. After 11 days, physicians could administer warfarin according to their own judgment.

The absolute difference of 3.9% in the composite endpoint was largely driven by a 2.8% absolute difference in the rate of an INR of 4 or greater. The rate difference between the two groups was 0.8% for major bleeding, and 0.7% for VTE.

About 41% of the cohort was considered to be at high risk of bleeding complications, and this group accrued the highest benefit from genotype-based dosing. Among them, the composite endpoint was 11.5% compared with 15.2% in the clinical algorithm group – an absolute difference of 3.76%.

The benefit was consistent among black patients, and those with CYP2C9.

By day 90, one VTE had occurred in each group. An intracranial hemorrhage occurred in one patient in the clinically guided group, 2 months after stopping warfarin.

The clinical benefit of genotype-based dosing influenced 90-day outcomes as well, with the composite endpoint occurring in 11% of the genotype group and 15% of the clinically guided group (absolute difference 3.9%).

Among the 1,588 patients who had their percentage of time in the therapeutic range (PTTR) calculated, genotyping improved PTTR time by 3.4% overall. The effect was especially strong from days 4 to 14, when it improved PTTR by 5.7% relative to clinical guidance.

Three other studies have examined the effect of a genotype-based warfarin dosing regimen, Dr. Gage and his coauthors noted: Two found no benefit, and a third found that such guidance improved INR control. GIFT has several advantages over those trials, which the authors said lend credence to its results.

“Compared with previous studies, this trial was larger, used genotype-guided dosing for a longer duration, and incorporated more genes into the dosing algorithm …The longer period of genotype-guided dosing likely prevented cases of supratherapeutic INR that were common in these trials,” they wrote.

Dr. Gage reported no financial disclosures, but several coauthors reported ties with pharmaceutical and imaging companies.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Presurgical genotyping can guide warfarin dosing and reduce anticoagulation-related adverse events.

Major finding: Genotype-guided dosing reduced adverse events – primarily elevated INRs – by almost 4% compared to clinically based warfarin dosing.

Data source: A randomized trial comprising 1,650 elderly patients undergoing elective knee or hip arthroplasty.

Disclosures: Dr. Gage had no financial disclosures, but several of his coauthors noted relationships with pharmaceutical and imaging companies.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.

New persistent opioid use common after cancer surgery

Article Type
Changed
Thu, 12/15/2022 - 17:51

 

New and persistent opioid use is a common complication of surgery in patients with early-stage cancer, according to results of a retrospective cohort study.

The risk of new persistent opioid use was 10.4% (95% confidence interval, 10.1%-10.7%) among patients undergoing curative-intent cancer surgery, according to the report, which was based on examination of 68,463 deidentified insurance claims from employer health plans from 2010 to 2014.

“This problem requires changes to prescribing guidelines and patient counseling during the surveillance and survivorship phases of care,” wrote Jay Soong-Jin Lee, MD, and his colleagues at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (J Clin Oncol. 2017 Oct 19. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.1363).

One year after the surgery, patients who developed new persistent opioid use were still filling prescriptions at high daily opioid doses, equivalent to six hydrocodone 5-mg tablets per day, according Dr. Lee and his colleagues.

“This dose is similar to intermittent and chronic opioid users [in the insurance claim data], suggesting that patients with new persistent opioid use may transition to chronic opioid use,” they said in the study report.

Adjuvant chemotherapy was a “strong risk factor” for new persistent opioid use, they added, though use was still common among patients who had no adjuvant chemotherapy. Rates of new persistent opioid use ranged from 15% to 21% for adjuvant therapy patient groups, compared with 7%-11% for no advjuvant therapy, data show.

Previous studies suggested a 6%-8% risk of new persistent opioid use among surgical patients, but those studies either did not focus on cancer patients or excluded them entirely, Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted.

Strategies are needed to combat new persistent opioid use after curative-intent surgery, they added.

They recommended further study to develop evidence-based guidelines to reduce excessive opioid prescribing and screening tools to identify at-risk patients (e.g., those with psychosocial factors).

Surgeons should be more active in counseling patients on the potential risks of opioids and how to keep use to a minimum after surgery, they added.

“Given the high risk of new persistent opioid use in this population, physicians should consider universal precautions … including educating patients on safe use, storage, and disposal,” they wrote.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

New and persistent opioid use is a common complication of surgery in patients with early-stage cancer, according to results of a retrospective cohort study.

The risk of new persistent opioid use was 10.4% (95% confidence interval, 10.1%-10.7%) among patients undergoing curative-intent cancer surgery, according to the report, which was based on examination of 68,463 deidentified insurance claims from employer health plans from 2010 to 2014.

“This problem requires changes to prescribing guidelines and patient counseling during the surveillance and survivorship phases of care,” wrote Jay Soong-Jin Lee, MD, and his colleagues at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (J Clin Oncol. 2017 Oct 19. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.1363).

One year after the surgery, patients who developed new persistent opioid use were still filling prescriptions at high daily opioid doses, equivalent to six hydrocodone 5-mg tablets per day, according Dr. Lee and his colleagues.

“This dose is similar to intermittent and chronic opioid users [in the insurance claim data], suggesting that patients with new persistent opioid use may transition to chronic opioid use,” they said in the study report.

Adjuvant chemotherapy was a “strong risk factor” for new persistent opioid use, they added, though use was still common among patients who had no adjuvant chemotherapy. Rates of new persistent opioid use ranged from 15% to 21% for adjuvant therapy patient groups, compared with 7%-11% for no advjuvant therapy, data show.

Previous studies suggested a 6%-8% risk of new persistent opioid use among surgical patients, but those studies either did not focus on cancer patients or excluded them entirely, Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted.

Strategies are needed to combat new persistent opioid use after curative-intent surgery, they added.

They recommended further study to develop evidence-based guidelines to reduce excessive opioid prescribing and screening tools to identify at-risk patients (e.g., those with psychosocial factors).

Surgeons should be more active in counseling patients on the potential risks of opioids and how to keep use to a minimum after surgery, they added.

“Given the high risk of new persistent opioid use in this population, physicians should consider universal precautions … including educating patients on safe use, storage, and disposal,” they wrote.

 

New and persistent opioid use is a common complication of surgery in patients with early-stage cancer, according to results of a retrospective cohort study.

The risk of new persistent opioid use was 10.4% (95% confidence interval, 10.1%-10.7%) among patients undergoing curative-intent cancer surgery, according to the report, which was based on examination of 68,463 deidentified insurance claims from employer health plans from 2010 to 2014.

“This problem requires changes to prescribing guidelines and patient counseling during the surveillance and survivorship phases of care,” wrote Jay Soong-Jin Lee, MD, and his colleagues at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (J Clin Oncol. 2017 Oct 19. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.1363).

One year after the surgery, patients who developed new persistent opioid use were still filling prescriptions at high daily opioid doses, equivalent to six hydrocodone 5-mg tablets per day, according Dr. Lee and his colleagues.

“This dose is similar to intermittent and chronic opioid users [in the insurance claim data], suggesting that patients with new persistent opioid use may transition to chronic opioid use,” they said in the study report.

Adjuvant chemotherapy was a “strong risk factor” for new persistent opioid use, they added, though use was still common among patients who had no adjuvant chemotherapy. Rates of new persistent opioid use ranged from 15% to 21% for adjuvant therapy patient groups, compared with 7%-11% for no advjuvant therapy, data show.

Previous studies suggested a 6%-8% risk of new persistent opioid use among surgical patients, but those studies either did not focus on cancer patients or excluded them entirely, Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted.

Strategies are needed to combat new persistent opioid use after curative-intent surgery, they added.

They recommended further study to develop evidence-based guidelines to reduce excessive opioid prescribing and screening tools to identify at-risk patients (e.g., those with psychosocial factors).

Surgeons should be more active in counseling patients on the potential risks of opioids and how to keep use to a minimum after surgery, they added.

“Given the high risk of new persistent opioid use in this population, physicians should consider universal precautions … including educating patients on safe use, storage, and disposal,” they wrote.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

FROM JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Prescribing guidelines and patient counseling need to change to combat new persistent opioid use, which authors confirmed is a common problem in patients undergoing surgery for early-stage cancer.

Major finding: The risk of new persistent opioid use was 10.4% (95% CI, 10.1%-10.7%) among patients undergoing curative-intent cancer surgery.

Data source: Retrospective cohort study based on examination of deidentified insurance claims from employer health plans from 2010 to 2014.

Disclosures: First author Jay Soong-Jin Lee, MD, had no relationships to disclose. Coauthors reported relationships with Neuros Medical and Merck and Anesthesia Associates of Ann Arbor.

Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica

Young female hematologic cancer survivors have increased infertility risk

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:09

 

– Young women who were survivors of hematologic cancer were more likely to have a diagnosis of infertility than cancer-free women, according to a large population-based study.

Using Ontario, Canada, universal health care databases, Maria Velez, MD, and her colleagues compared young female hematologic cancer survivors with age-matched women who were cancer-free, finding that 20.4% of the cancer survivors and 15% of the cancer-free women had an infertility diagnosis (P less than .001).

juststock
“This study highlights the importance of reproductive health counseling in female adolescent and young adults diagnosed with hematologic cancer, including consideration of fertility preservation,” Dr. Velez said at the annual meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

The matched cohort study used the Ontario Cancer Registry and identified 1,226 women aged 16-34 years who had been recurrence free for at least 5 years after a hematologic malignancy such that it captured cancer diagnoses made between 1992 and 2005. Each of these women was matched with four randomly selected, cancer-free women (n = 4,293) by the investigators, who took each woman’s age, location and socioeconomic status into account.

Then, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan database was queried to see which women in each group had claims billed under a diagnosis of infertility, denoted by ICD-9 code 628. Dr. Velez said that, for the survivor group, the investigators began tallying infertility diagnoses a full year after treatment was completed.

Pooling all types of hematologic cancer and adjusting for socioeconomic status, the overall relative risk for infertility was 1.35 for hematologic cancer survivors (95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.54; P less than .001).*

Dr. Velez and her colleagues also compared relative risk by type of hematologic cancer. The relative risk for infertility was 1.35 for survivors of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 371); 1.30 for Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 731); and 1.71 for leukemia (n = 124). These were all statistically significant elevations in RR.

In the survivor group, the mean age at cancer diagnosis was 25.7 years, and patients were followed for a median 16.2 years. The mean age of infertility diagnosis for cancer survivors – 33 years – was not significantly different from that of the cancer-free group (32.8 years).

Dr. Velez and her colleagues also examined whether parity at the time of diagnosis was a factor. Cancer survivors who were nulliparous had a pooled relative risk of 1.35 for infertility, compared with the cancer-free women (P less than .001)*. A significantly elevated relative risk was seen for each individual cancer, except for leukemia. Dr. Velez said that this was likely a statistical artifact of the relatively small number of women who had this diagnosis.

The relative risk of an infertility diagnosis for women who were parous at the time of diagnosis was 1.21, a nonsignificant difference (95% CI, 0.80-1.83; P = .37). No individual diagnosis in this group carried a significantly elevated relative risk for infertility.

It’s difficult to know why parity might make a difference in risk of an infertility diagnosis, Dr. Velez said. There might be “nonbiologic” reasons, such as a difference in motivation to seek care for infertility or in desire for pregnancy, she said.

Strengths of the study included the large sample size and the population-based cohort design. The study was the first to use the ICD-9 code of infertility in cancer research, Dr. Velez said. Also, the relatively recent study period meant that patients received more modern cancer treatment regimens, making the data more relevant than some older Scandinavian studies that reached back into the 1960s, said Dr. Velez of the department of obstetrics and gynecology, in the division of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ont.

The study did not track the treatment regimen patients received, so it does not shed light on which chemotherapy regimens might be less gonadotoxic over time. The results are a call to include “the effect of cancer treatment on ovarian reserve as a secondary outcome” in clinical trials for cancer therapies, Dr. Velez said.

The study was conducted through the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and funded by the Faculty of Health Sciences at Queen's University. Dr. Velez reported that she has no financial disclosures.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Young women who were survivors of hematologic cancer were more likely to have a diagnosis of infertility than cancer-free women, according to a large population-based study.

Using Ontario, Canada, universal health care databases, Maria Velez, MD, and her colleagues compared young female hematologic cancer survivors with age-matched women who were cancer-free, finding that 20.4% of the cancer survivors and 15% of the cancer-free women had an infertility diagnosis (P less than .001).

juststock
“This study highlights the importance of reproductive health counseling in female adolescent and young adults diagnosed with hematologic cancer, including consideration of fertility preservation,” Dr. Velez said at the annual meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

The matched cohort study used the Ontario Cancer Registry and identified 1,226 women aged 16-34 years who had been recurrence free for at least 5 years after a hematologic malignancy such that it captured cancer diagnoses made between 1992 and 2005. Each of these women was matched with four randomly selected, cancer-free women (n = 4,293) by the investigators, who took each woman’s age, location and socioeconomic status into account.

Then, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan database was queried to see which women in each group had claims billed under a diagnosis of infertility, denoted by ICD-9 code 628. Dr. Velez said that, for the survivor group, the investigators began tallying infertility diagnoses a full year after treatment was completed.

Pooling all types of hematologic cancer and adjusting for socioeconomic status, the overall relative risk for infertility was 1.35 for hematologic cancer survivors (95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.54; P less than .001).*

Dr. Velez and her colleagues also compared relative risk by type of hematologic cancer. The relative risk for infertility was 1.35 for survivors of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 371); 1.30 for Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 731); and 1.71 for leukemia (n = 124). These were all statistically significant elevations in RR.

In the survivor group, the mean age at cancer diagnosis was 25.7 years, and patients were followed for a median 16.2 years. The mean age of infertility diagnosis for cancer survivors – 33 years – was not significantly different from that of the cancer-free group (32.8 years).

Dr. Velez and her colleagues also examined whether parity at the time of diagnosis was a factor. Cancer survivors who were nulliparous had a pooled relative risk of 1.35 for infertility, compared with the cancer-free women (P less than .001)*. A significantly elevated relative risk was seen for each individual cancer, except for leukemia. Dr. Velez said that this was likely a statistical artifact of the relatively small number of women who had this diagnosis.

The relative risk of an infertility diagnosis for women who were parous at the time of diagnosis was 1.21, a nonsignificant difference (95% CI, 0.80-1.83; P = .37). No individual diagnosis in this group carried a significantly elevated relative risk for infertility.

It’s difficult to know why parity might make a difference in risk of an infertility diagnosis, Dr. Velez said. There might be “nonbiologic” reasons, such as a difference in motivation to seek care for infertility or in desire for pregnancy, she said.

Strengths of the study included the large sample size and the population-based cohort design. The study was the first to use the ICD-9 code of infertility in cancer research, Dr. Velez said. Also, the relatively recent study period meant that patients received more modern cancer treatment regimens, making the data more relevant than some older Scandinavian studies that reached back into the 1960s, said Dr. Velez of the department of obstetrics and gynecology, in the division of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ont.

The study did not track the treatment regimen patients received, so it does not shed light on which chemotherapy regimens might be less gonadotoxic over time. The results are a call to include “the effect of cancer treatment on ovarian reserve as a secondary outcome” in clinical trials for cancer therapies, Dr. Velez said.

The study was conducted through the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and funded by the Faculty of Health Sciences at Queen's University. Dr. Velez reported that she has no financial disclosures.

 

– Young women who were survivors of hematologic cancer were more likely to have a diagnosis of infertility than cancer-free women, according to a large population-based study.

Using Ontario, Canada, universal health care databases, Maria Velez, MD, and her colleagues compared young female hematologic cancer survivors with age-matched women who were cancer-free, finding that 20.4% of the cancer survivors and 15% of the cancer-free women had an infertility diagnosis (P less than .001).

juststock
“This study highlights the importance of reproductive health counseling in female adolescent and young adults diagnosed with hematologic cancer, including consideration of fertility preservation,” Dr. Velez said at the annual meeting of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

The matched cohort study used the Ontario Cancer Registry and identified 1,226 women aged 16-34 years who had been recurrence free for at least 5 years after a hematologic malignancy such that it captured cancer diagnoses made between 1992 and 2005. Each of these women was matched with four randomly selected, cancer-free women (n = 4,293) by the investigators, who took each woman’s age, location and socioeconomic status into account.

Then, the Ontario Health Insurance Plan database was queried to see which women in each group had claims billed under a diagnosis of infertility, denoted by ICD-9 code 628. Dr. Velez said that, for the survivor group, the investigators began tallying infertility diagnoses a full year after treatment was completed.

Pooling all types of hematologic cancer and adjusting for socioeconomic status, the overall relative risk for infertility was 1.35 for hematologic cancer survivors (95% confidence interval, 1.19-1.54; P less than .001).*

Dr. Velez and her colleagues also compared relative risk by type of hematologic cancer. The relative risk for infertility was 1.35 for survivors of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 371); 1.30 for Hodgkin lymphoma (n = 731); and 1.71 for leukemia (n = 124). These were all statistically significant elevations in RR.

In the survivor group, the mean age at cancer diagnosis was 25.7 years, and patients were followed for a median 16.2 years. The mean age of infertility diagnosis for cancer survivors – 33 years – was not significantly different from that of the cancer-free group (32.8 years).

Dr. Velez and her colleagues also examined whether parity at the time of diagnosis was a factor. Cancer survivors who were nulliparous had a pooled relative risk of 1.35 for infertility, compared with the cancer-free women (P less than .001)*. A significantly elevated relative risk was seen for each individual cancer, except for leukemia. Dr. Velez said that this was likely a statistical artifact of the relatively small number of women who had this diagnosis.

The relative risk of an infertility diagnosis for women who were parous at the time of diagnosis was 1.21, a nonsignificant difference (95% CI, 0.80-1.83; P = .37). No individual diagnosis in this group carried a significantly elevated relative risk for infertility.

It’s difficult to know why parity might make a difference in risk of an infertility diagnosis, Dr. Velez said. There might be “nonbiologic” reasons, such as a difference in motivation to seek care for infertility or in desire for pregnancy, she said.

Strengths of the study included the large sample size and the population-based cohort design. The study was the first to use the ICD-9 code of infertility in cancer research, Dr. Velez said. Also, the relatively recent study period meant that patients received more modern cancer treatment regimens, making the data more relevant than some older Scandinavian studies that reached back into the 1960s, said Dr. Velez of the department of obstetrics and gynecology, in the division of reproductive endocrinology and infertility at Queen’s University, Kingston, Ont.

The study did not track the treatment regimen patients received, so it does not shed light on which chemotherapy regimens might be less gonadotoxic over time. The results are a call to include “the effect of cancer treatment on ovarian reserve as a secondary outcome” in clinical trials for cancer therapies, Dr. Velez said.

The study was conducted through the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and funded by the Faculty of Health Sciences at Queen's University. Dr. Velez reported that she has no financial disclosures.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT ASRM 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Female survivors of hematologic cancers had increased risk of infertility.

Major finding: Young women who survived hematologic cancer had a 20.4% risk of infertility, compared with 15% among cancer-free controls (P less than .001). The overall relative risk for infertility among hematologic cancer survivors was 1.35.

Data source: Prospective, age-matched cohort study of 1,226 cancer survivors and 4,293 cancer-free controls.

Disclosures: Dr. Velez reported that she had no disclosures. The Institute for Clinical Evaluative Services in Toronto funded the study.

Disqus Comments
Default

Warfarin may protect against cancer

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 13:42

 

Warfarin, the most frequently used anticoagulant worldwide, may be associated with a lower incidence of cancer incidence across a broad range of cancer types, according to results of a large, retrospective population-based cohort study.

Compared with non-users, warfarin users had a significantly lower rate of cancer overall (age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], .84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.86) and in common organ-specific cancer sites, according to the study, which included nearly 1.3 million individuals over 50 years of age in the Norwegian National Registry.

©bbbrrn/Thinkstockphotos.com
This “remarkable association” between warfarin and lower cancer incidence comes at a time when many patients are actually being transitioned away from warfarin, given its well-known dosing challenges, study authors wrote (JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Nov 6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.5512).

“An unintended consequence of this switch to new oral anticoagulants may be an increased incidence of cancer, which is an important consideration for public health,” Gry S. Haaland, MD, Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Norway and her colleagues wrote in the report.

The study included population registry data on nearly 1.3 million Norwegians, correlated with more data from a prescription database and cancer registry in that country.

While there was no correlation between warfarin use and colon cancer, there were significantly reduced age- and sex-adjusted IRRs associated with other common organ-specific sites such as lung (.80); prostate (.69); and breast (.90), Dr. Haaland and her colleagues reported.

A subgroup analysis of the 33,313 patients (35.8%) with atrial fibrillation showed a significantly lower IRR for all cancer sites (IRR, .625) and most prevalent sites (compared with nonusers): IRR for prostate was.60; lung was.39; and the IRR for female breast cancer was .72.

The potential anticancer effects of warfarin have been suggested in various experimental cancer models. In particular, warfarin at doses not reaching anticoagulation levels has been shown to inhibits AXL receptor tyrosine kinase–dependent tumorigenesis, the authors said.

Beyond those models, there have been “conflicting conclusions” in the medical literature regarding whether warfarin protects against cancer, they added.

While some studies have shown no such association, Dr. Haaland and colleagues say they used a “stricter definition” of warfarin use that included at least 6 months of a warfarin prescription. Moreover, they only counted cancer cases that were diagnosed at least 2 years after the first prescription.

“Our data indicate that warfarin provides a possible cancer protection, a finding that may have important implications for choosing medications for patients who need anticoagulation,” the authors concluded.

However, further study is needed to better understand the mechanisms by which warfarin exerts this protective effect, they added.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

Warfarin, the most frequently used anticoagulant worldwide, may be associated with a lower incidence of cancer incidence across a broad range of cancer types, according to results of a large, retrospective population-based cohort study.

Compared with non-users, warfarin users had a significantly lower rate of cancer overall (age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], .84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.86) and in common organ-specific cancer sites, according to the study, which included nearly 1.3 million individuals over 50 years of age in the Norwegian National Registry.

©bbbrrn/Thinkstockphotos.com
This “remarkable association” between warfarin and lower cancer incidence comes at a time when many patients are actually being transitioned away from warfarin, given its well-known dosing challenges, study authors wrote (JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Nov 6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.5512).

“An unintended consequence of this switch to new oral anticoagulants may be an increased incidence of cancer, which is an important consideration for public health,” Gry S. Haaland, MD, Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Norway and her colleagues wrote in the report.

The study included population registry data on nearly 1.3 million Norwegians, correlated with more data from a prescription database and cancer registry in that country.

While there was no correlation between warfarin use and colon cancer, there were significantly reduced age- and sex-adjusted IRRs associated with other common organ-specific sites such as lung (.80); prostate (.69); and breast (.90), Dr. Haaland and her colleagues reported.

A subgroup analysis of the 33,313 patients (35.8%) with atrial fibrillation showed a significantly lower IRR for all cancer sites (IRR, .625) and most prevalent sites (compared with nonusers): IRR for prostate was.60; lung was.39; and the IRR for female breast cancer was .72.

The potential anticancer effects of warfarin have been suggested in various experimental cancer models. In particular, warfarin at doses not reaching anticoagulation levels has been shown to inhibits AXL receptor tyrosine kinase–dependent tumorigenesis, the authors said.

Beyond those models, there have been “conflicting conclusions” in the medical literature regarding whether warfarin protects against cancer, they added.

While some studies have shown no such association, Dr. Haaland and colleagues say they used a “stricter definition” of warfarin use that included at least 6 months of a warfarin prescription. Moreover, they only counted cancer cases that were diagnosed at least 2 years after the first prescription.

“Our data indicate that warfarin provides a possible cancer protection, a finding that may have important implications for choosing medications for patients who need anticoagulation,” the authors concluded.

However, further study is needed to better understand the mechanisms by which warfarin exerts this protective effect, they added.

 

Warfarin, the most frequently used anticoagulant worldwide, may be associated with a lower incidence of cancer incidence across a broad range of cancer types, according to results of a large, retrospective population-based cohort study.

Compared with non-users, warfarin users had a significantly lower rate of cancer overall (age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], .84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.86) and in common organ-specific cancer sites, according to the study, which included nearly 1.3 million individuals over 50 years of age in the Norwegian National Registry.

©bbbrrn/Thinkstockphotos.com
This “remarkable association” between warfarin and lower cancer incidence comes at a time when many patients are actually being transitioned away from warfarin, given its well-known dosing challenges, study authors wrote (JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Nov 6. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.5512).

“An unintended consequence of this switch to new oral anticoagulants may be an increased incidence of cancer, which is an important consideration for public health,” Gry S. Haaland, MD, Department of Biomedicine, University of Bergen, Norway and her colleagues wrote in the report.

The study included population registry data on nearly 1.3 million Norwegians, correlated with more data from a prescription database and cancer registry in that country.

While there was no correlation between warfarin use and colon cancer, there were significantly reduced age- and sex-adjusted IRRs associated with other common organ-specific sites such as lung (.80); prostate (.69); and breast (.90), Dr. Haaland and her colleagues reported.

A subgroup analysis of the 33,313 patients (35.8%) with atrial fibrillation showed a significantly lower IRR for all cancer sites (IRR, .625) and most prevalent sites (compared with nonusers): IRR for prostate was.60; lung was.39; and the IRR for female breast cancer was .72.

The potential anticancer effects of warfarin have been suggested in various experimental cancer models. In particular, warfarin at doses not reaching anticoagulation levels has been shown to inhibits AXL receptor tyrosine kinase–dependent tumorigenesis, the authors said.

Beyond those models, there have been “conflicting conclusions” in the medical literature regarding whether warfarin protects against cancer, they added.

While some studies have shown no such association, Dr. Haaland and colleagues say they used a “stricter definition” of warfarin use that included at least 6 months of a warfarin prescription. Moreover, they only counted cancer cases that were diagnosed at least 2 years after the first prescription.

“Our data indicate that warfarin provides a possible cancer protection, a finding that may have important implications for choosing medications for patients who need anticoagulation,” the authors concluded.

However, further study is needed to better understand the mechanisms by which warfarin exerts this protective effect, they added.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

FROM JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Warfarin may have broad anticancer effects, a finding which could have implications for choice of anticoagulant.

Major finding: Compared with warfarin non-users, warfarin users had a significantly lower rate of cancer overall (age- and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.84) and in common organ-specific cancer sites.

Data source: A retrospective population-based cohort study of nearly 1.3 million individuals over 50 years of age in the Norwegian National Registry.

Disclosures: James B. Lorens, PhD, reported ownership interest in BerGenBio ASA.

Disqus Comments
Default

The pediatrician detective and high lead levels

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/18/2019 - 17:09

 

I am not going to tell you about the dangers of lead, as it is well known and publicized, but I will tell you my family’s story with lead.

In 2012, 1 year after my younger daughter was born, I took her for her 1-year checkup. As I would do with any of my pediatric patients at this age, I took her for a lead level check. Never during my residency training or my first few years of practice as a pediatrician have I encountered a positive lead level. So when I opened the lab result sheet, I thought I would be shredding it the next moment. Well, that didn’t happen. It turned out that her lead level was 7 mcg/dL! Not too high, but detectable. The only question that kept on coming back over the next month or so was a big WHY? Why my child? Now my older daughter’s lead level was normal at her 1-year visit. We had just moved into a new house before my youngest daughter was born. I thought, it has to do with the house, and since my 1-year-old was putting everything in her mouth at this stage, then she must be getting the lead that way.

Dr. Diala Faddoul
But my older daughter isn’t doing that, she was beyond that oral stage, so hopefully her lead level would be just fine. But it wasn’t. In fact, her lead level was even higher. The house we moved into at that time was built in the 1980s, so it was a fairly new house, and it was one of a series of houses in the same compound. I knocked on the door of my neighbor, who had a 3-year-old girl at the time. She kindly agreed to test her daughter’s lead level, which came back within normal limits. My nanny brought her daughter along to play with my children on a daily basis. She was not spared the poke; her lead level was fine. It also turned out that my lead level and my husband’s level were elevated as well, even more than our daughter’s levels, at 18 and 20 mcg/dL.

So it was not the house or the wall pipes that were contaminated with lead. It was not our food that we cooked, otherwise my nanny’s daughter would have had a high lead level, as she ate the same food we ate almost daily. Our family did not travel recently. So what was it that my family had or ate that my neighbor or nanny’s child did not?

The answer was thyme. It is an herb that we mix with olive oil and spread on dough – I call it Lebanese pizza. That is one thing that my nanny and her child never ate, but we did. It was a long painful month of investigation, elimination, and anxiety. I called the public health department in Phoenix and they stated that lots of imported spices were contaminated with lead. There were two theories as to why this might happen. The first one is that the spice dealers would add lead to increase the weight of the spices to get more money. The second is that the spice fields were close to factories that used lead in their manufacturing, and somehow the lead would contaminate the nearby fields where the spices grew.

The type of thyme we used was bought in Syria and packaged in Lebanon. It was not the pure organic type that we usually got from our grandparents in our southern Lebanese village. This packaged thyme had lot of nuts added to it to give it more flavor.

The public health department official asked that I send her some samples of all the spices that I had. I packed up to ten different spice bags including the thyme. Two weeks later she called me, stating that the lead level allowable in spices must be less than 10, and that our thyme’s lead level was 900!

We got rid of all the spices, and have never eaten that packaged spice again. My kids’ lead levels dropped nicely afterward and back to normal. That is our story with lead. Now it seems like a mini-detective story and even fun, but the anxiety that I experienced until we figured out the cause was not!


Dr. Faddoul is a private practice pediatrician in La Canada Flintridge, Calif.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 

I am not going to tell you about the dangers of lead, as it is well known and publicized, but I will tell you my family’s story with lead.

In 2012, 1 year after my younger daughter was born, I took her for her 1-year checkup. As I would do with any of my pediatric patients at this age, I took her for a lead level check. Never during my residency training or my first few years of practice as a pediatrician have I encountered a positive lead level. So when I opened the lab result sheet, I thought I would be shredding it the next moment. Well, that didn’t happen. It turned out that her lead level was 7 mcg/dL! Not too high, but detectable. The only question that kept on coming back over the next month or so was a big WHY? Why my child? Now my older daughter’s lead level was normal at her 1-year visit. We had just moved into a new house before my youngest daughter was born. I thought, it has to do with the house, and since my 1-year-old was putting everything in her mouth at this stage, then she must be getting the lead that way.

Dr. Diala Faddoul
But my older daughter isn’t doing that, she was beyond that oral stage, so hopefully her lead level would be just fine. But it wasn’t. In fact, her lead level was even higher. The house we moved into at that time was built in the 1980s, so it was a fairly new house, and it was one of a series of houses in the same compound. I knocked on the door of my neighbor, who had a 3-year-old girl at the time. She kindly agreed to test her daughter’s lead level, which came back within normal limits. My nanny brought her daughter along to play with my children on a daily basis. She was not spared the poke; her lead level was fine. It also turned out that my lead level and my husband’s level were elevated as well, even more than our daughter’s levels, at 18 and 20 mcg/dL.

So it was not the house or the wall pipes that were contaminated with lead. It was not our food that we cooked, otherwise my nanny’s daughter would have had a high lead level, as she ate the same food we ate almost daily. Our family did not travel recently. So what was it that my family had or ate that my neighbor or nanny’s child did not?

The answer was thyme. It is an herb that we mix with olive oil and spread on dough – I call it Lebanese pizza. That is one thing that my nanny and her child never ate, but we did. It was a long painful month of investigation, elimination, and anxiety. I called the public health department in Phoenix and they stated that lots of imported spices were contaminated with lead. There were two theories as to why this might happen. The first one is that the spice dealers would add lead to increase the weight of the spices to get more money. The second is that the spice fields were close to factories that used lead in their manufacturing, and somehow the lead would contaminate the nearby fields where the spices grew.

The type of thyme we used was bought in Syria and packaged in Lebanon. It was not the pure organic type that we usually got from our grandparents in our southern Lebanese village. This packaged thyme had lot of nuts added to it to give it more flavor.

The public health department official asked that I send her some samples of all the spices that I had. I packed up to ten different spice bags including the thyme. Two weeks later she called me, stating that the lead level allowable in spices must be less than 10, and that our thyme’s lead level was 900!

We got rid of all the spices, and have never eaten that packaged spice again. My kids’ lead levels dropped nicely afterward and back to normal. That is our story with lead. Now it seems like a mini-detective story and even fun, but the anxiety that I experienced until we figured out the cause was not!


Dr. Faddoul is a private practice pediatrician in La Canada Flintridge, Calif.

 

I am not going to tell you about the dangers of lead, as it is well known and publicized, but I will tell you my family’s story with lead.

In 2012, 1 year after my younger daughter was born, I took her for her 1-year checkup. As I would do with any of my pediatric patients at this age, I took her for a lead level check. Never during my residency training or my first few years of practice as a pediatrician have I encountered a positive lead level. So when I opened the lab result sheet, I thought I would be shredding it the next moment. Well, that didn’t happen. It turned out that her lead level was 7 mcg/dL! Not too high, but detectable. The only question that kept on coming back over the next month or so was a big WHY? Why my child? Now my older daughter’s lead level was normal at her 1-year visit. We had just moved into a new house before my youngest daughter was born. I thought, it has to do with the house, and since my 1-year-old was putting everything in her mouth at this stage, then she must be getting the lead that way.

Dr. Diala Faddoul
But my older daughter isn’t doing that, she was beyond that oral stage, so hopefully her lead level would be just fine. But it wasn’t. In fact, her lead level was even higher. The house we moved into at that time was built in the 1980s, so it was a fairly new house, and it was one of a series of houses in the same compound. I knocked on the door of my neighbor, who had a 3-year-old girl at the time. She kindly agreed to test her daughter’s lead level, which came back within normal limits. My nanny brought her daughter along to play with my children on a daily basis. She was not spared the poke; her lead level was fine. It also turned out that my lead level and my husband’s level were elevated as well, even more than our daughter’s levels, at 18 and 20 mcg/dL.

So it was not the house or the wall pipes that were contaminated with lead. It was not our food that we cooked, otherwise my nanny’s daughter would have had a high lead level, as she ate the same food we ate almost daily. Our family did not travel recently. So what was it that my family had or ate that my neighbor or nanny’s child did not?

The answer was thyme. It is an herb that we mix with olive oil and spread on dough – I call it Lebanese pizza. That is one thing that my nanny and her child never ate, but we did. It was a long painful month of investigation, elimination, and anxiety. I called the public health department in Phoenix and they stated that lots of imported spices were contaminated with lead. There were two theories as to why this might happen. The first one is that the spice dealers would add lead to increase the weight of the spices to get more money. The second is that the spice fields were close to factories that used lead in their manufacturing, and somehow the lead would contaminate the nearby fields where the spices grew.

The type of thyme we used was bought in Syria and packaged in Lebanon. It was not the pure organic type that we usually got from our grandparents in our southern Lebanese village. This packaged thyme had lot of nuts added to it to give it more flavor.

The public health department official asked that I send her some samples of all the spices that I had. I packed up to ten different spice bags including the thyme. Two weeks later she called me, stating that the lead level allowable in spices must be less than 10, and that our thyme’s lead level was 900!

We got rid of all the spices, and have never eaten that packaged spice again. My kids’ lead levels dropped nicely afterward and back to normal. That is our story with lead. Now it seems like a mini-detective story and even fun, but the anxiety that I experienced until we figured out the cause was not!


Dr. Faddoul is a private practice pediatrician in La Canada Flintridge, Calif.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Hiatal hernia repair more common at time of sleeve gastrectomy, compared with RYGB

Article Type
Changed
Wed, 01/02/2019 - 10:01

 

– Concomitant hiatal hernia repair is significantly more common at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, compared with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, according to a retrospective analysis.

“GERD [gastroesophageal reflux disease] is common in patients with a high body mass index,” lead study author Dino Spaniolas, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “In fact, 35%-40% of patients who undergo bariatric surgery are diagnosed with a hiatal hernia, and the majority of them are diagnosed during surgery.”

Dr. Dino Spaniolas
Dr. Spaniolas, a bariatric surgeon and the associate director of the Stony Brook (N.Y.) University Bariatric and Metabolic Weight Loss Center, noted that, while the popularity of sleeve gastrectomy has progressively increased over time nationwide, the effect of different bariatric procedures on GERD-related outcomes after bariatric surgery is not that well understood. “A lot of studies have assessed GERD objectively or subjectively before and after surgery,” he said. “For the most part, gastric bypass has a positive effect, but the sleeve gastrectomy results are less clear.”

In an effort to assess the differences in practice patterns in the performance of hiatal hernia repair during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), the researchers evaluated the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program public use files from 2015. They limited the analysis to LSG and LRYGB and also excluded revision procedures and patients with a history of foregut surgery.

In all, 130,686 patients were included in the study. Their mean age was 45 years, 79% were female, 75% were Caucasian, and their mean body mass index was 45.7 kg/m2. Most (70%) underwent LSG, while the remainder underwent LRYGB.

At baseline, a greater proportion of the LRYGB patients had a history of GERD than did LSG patients (37.2% vs. 28.6%, respectively; P less than .0001). They were also more likely to have hypertension (54.1% vs. 47.9%; P less than .0001), hyperlipidemia (29.9% vs. 23.2%; P less than .0001), and diabetes (35.5% vs. 23.3%; P less than .0001). Overall, about 15% of patients had a concomitant hiatal hernia repair in addition to their bariatric surgery.

Next, the investigators found what Dr. Spaniolas termed “the GERD paradox”: Although the LRYGB patients were more likely to have GERD before surgery, they were much less likely to undergo a hiatal hernia repair in addition to their bariatric procedure. Specifically, concomitant hiatal hernia repair was performed in 21% of LSG patients, compared with only 10.8% of LRYGB patients (P less than .0001). After investigators controlled for baseline BMI, preoperative GERD, and other patient characteristics, they found that LSG patients were 2.14 times more likely to undergo concomitant hiatal hernia repair, compared with LRYGB patients.

“This is a retrospective review, but nevertheless, I think we can conclude that these findings suggest that concomitant hiatal hernia repair is significantly more common after LSG, compared with LRYGB, despite having less GERD preoperatively,” Dr. Spaniolas said. “This suggests that there is a nationwide difference in the intraoperative management of hiatal hernia based on the type of planned bariatric procedure. This practice pattern needs to be considered while retrospectively assessing GERD-related outcomes of bariatric surgery in the future.”

Dr. Spaniolas disclosed that he has received research support from Merck and that he is a consultant for Mallinckrodt.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– Concomitant hiatal hernia repair is significantly more common at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, compared with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, according to a retrospective analysis.

“GERD [gastroesophageal reflux disease] is common in patients with a high body mass index,” lead study author Dino Spaniolas, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “In fact, 35%-40% of patients who undergo bariatric surgery are diagnosed with a hiatal hernia, and the majority of them are diagnosed during surgery.”

Dr. Dino Spaniolas
Dr. Spaniolas, a bariatric surgeon and the associate director of the Stony Brook (N.Y.) University Bariatric and Metabolic Weight Loss Center, noted that, while the popularity of sleeve gastrectomy has progressively increased over time nationwide, the effect of different bariatric procedures on GERD-related outcomes after bariatric surgery is not that well understood. “A lot of studies have assessed GERD objectively or subjectively before and after surgery,” he said. “For the most part, gastric bypass has a positive effect, but the sleeve gastrectomy results are less clear.”

In an effort to assess the differences in practice patterns in the performance of hiatal hernia repair during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), the researchers evaluated the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program public use files from 2015. They limited the analysis to LSG and LRYGB and also excluded revision procedures and patients with a history of foregut surgery.

In all, 130,686 patients were included in the study. Their mean age was 45 years, 79% were female, 75% were Caucasian, and their mean body mass index was 45.7 kg/m2. Most (70%) underwent LSG, while the remainder underwent LRYGB.

At baseline, a greater proportion of the LRYGB patients had a history of GERD than did LSG patients (37.2% vs. 28.6%, respectively; P less than .0001). They were also more likely to have hypertension (54.1% vs. 47.9%; P less than .0001), hyperlipidemia (29.9% vs. 23.2%; P less than .0001), and diabetes (35.5% vs. 23.3%; P less than .0001). Overall, about 15% of patients had a concomitant hiatal hernia repair in addition to their bariatric surgery.

Next, the investigators found what Dr. Spaniolas termed “the GERD paradox”: Although the LRYGB patients were more likely to have GERD before surgery, they were much less likely to undergo a hiatal hernia repair in addition to their bariatric procedure. Specifically, concomitant hiatal hernia repair was performed in 21% of LSG patients, compared with only 10.8% of LRYGB patients (P less than .0001). After investigators controlled for baseline BMI, preoperative GERD, and other patient characteristics, they found that LSG patients were 2.14 times more likely to undergo concomitant hiatal hernia repair, compared with LRYGB patients.

“This is a retrospective review, but nevertheless, I think we can conclude that these findings suggest that concomitant hiatal hernia repair is significantly more common after LSG, compared with LRYGB, despite having less GERD preoperatively,” Dr. Spaniolas said. “This suggests that there is a nationwide difference in the intraoperative management of hiatal hernia based on the type of planned bariatric procedure. This practice pattern needs to be considered while retrospectively assessing GERD-related outcomes of bariatric surgery in the future.”

Dr. Spaniolas disclosed that he has received research support from Merck and that he is a consultant for Mallinckrodt.

 

– Concomitant hiatal hernia repair is significantly more common at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, compared with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, according to a retrospective analysis.

“GERD [gastroesophageal reflux disease] is common in patients with a high body mass index,” lead study author Dino Spaniolas, MD, said at the annual clinical congress of the American College of Surgeons. “In fact, 35%-40% of patients who undergo bariatric surgery are diagnosed with a hiatal hernia, and the majority of them are diagnosed during surgery.”

Dr. Dino Spaniolas
Dr. Spaniolas, a bariatric surgeon and the associate director of the Stony Brook (N.Y.) University Bariatric and Metabolic Weight Loss Center, noted that, while the popularity of sleeve gastrectomy has progressively increased over time nationwide, the effect of different bariatric procedures on GERD-related outcomes after bariatric surgery is not that well understood. “A lot of studies have assessed GERD objectively or subjectively before and after surgery,” he said. “For the most part, gastric bypass has a positive effect, but the sleeve gastrectomy results are less clear.”

In an effort to assess the differences in practice patterns in the performance of hiatal hernia repair during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), the researchers evaluated the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program public use files from 2015. They limited the analysis to LSG and LRYGB and also excluded revision procedures and patients with a history of foregut surgery.

In all, 130,686 patients were included in the study. Their mean age was 45 years, 79% were female, 75% were Caucasian, and their mean body mass index was 45.7 kg/m2. Most (70%) underwent LSG, while the remainder underwent LRYGB.

At baseline, a greater proportion of the LRYGB patients had a history of GERD than did LSG patients (37.2% vs. 28.6%, respectively; P less than .0001). They were also more likely to have hypertension (54.1% vs. 47.9%; P less than .0001), hyperlipidemia (29.9% vs. 23.2%; P less than .0001), and diabetes (35.5% vs. 23.3%; P less than .0001). Overall, about 15% of patients had a concomitant hiatal hernia repair in addition to their bariatric surgery.

Next, the investigators found what Dr. Spaniolas termed “the GERD paradox”: Although the LRYGB patients were more likely to have GERD before surgery, they were much less likely to undergo a hiatal hernia repair in addition to their bariatric procedure. Specifically, concomitant hiatal hernia repair was performed in 21% of LSG patients, compared with only 10.8% of LRYGB patients (P less than .0001). After investigators controlled for baseline BMI, preoperative GERD, and other patient characteristics, they found that LSG patients were 2.14 times more likely to undergo concomitant hiatal hernia repair, compared with LRYGB patients.

“This is a retrospective review, but nevertheless, I think we can conclude that these findings suggest that concomitant hiatal hernia repair is significantly more common after LSG, compared with LRYGB, despite having less GERD preoperatively,” Dr. Spaniolas said. “This suggests that there is a nationwide difference in the intraoperative management of hiatal hernia based on the type of planned bariatric procedure. This practice pattern needs to be considered while retrospectively assessing GERD-related outcomes of bariatric surgery in the future.”

Dr. Spaniolas disclosed that he has received research support from Merck and that he is a consultant for Mallinckrodt.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Click for Credit Status
Ready
Sections
Article Source

AT THE ACS CLINICAL CONGRESS

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: LSG patients are more likely to undergo concomitant hiatal hernia repair, compared with LRYGB patients.

Major finding: According to multivariate analysis, LSG patients were more likely to undergo concomitant HH repair (odds ratio, 2.14).

Study details: A retrospective analysis of 130,686 patients who underwent bariatric surgery in 2015.

Disclosures: Dr. Spaniolas disclosed that he has received research support from Merck and that he is a consultant for Mallinckrodt.

Disqus Comments
Default

Sickle cell patients suffer discrimination, poor care – and shorter lives

Article Type
Changed
Fri, 01/04/2019 - 10:11

 



For more than a year, NeDina Brocks-Capla avoided one room in her large, brightly colored San Francisco house – the bathroom on the second floor.

“It was really hard to bathe in here, and I found myself not wanting to touch the walls,” she explained. The bathroom is where Ms. Brocks-Capla’s son Kareem Jones died in 2013 at age 36, from sickle cell disease.

It’s not just the loss of her son that upsets Ms. Brocks-Capla; she believes that if Mr. Jones had gotten the proper medical care, he might still be alive today.

Sickle cell disease is an inherited disorder that causes some red blood cells to bend into a crescent shape. The misshapen, inflexible cells clog the blood vessels, preventing blood from circulating oxygen properly, which can cause chronic pain, multiorgan failure, and stroke. About 100,000 people in the United States have sickle cell disease, and most of them are African American.

Patients and experts alike say it’s no surprise then that while life expectancy for almost every major malady is improving, patients with sickle cell disease can expect to die younger than they did 20 years ago. In 1994, life expectancy for sickle cell patients was 42 for men and 48 for women. By 2005, life expectancy had dipped to 38 for men and 42 for women.

Sickle cell disease is “a microcosm of how issues of race, ethnicity and identity come into conflict with issues of health care,” said Keith Wailoo, PhD, a professor at Princeton University who writes about the history of the disease.

It is also an example of the broader discrimination experienced by African Americans in the medical system. Nearly a third report that they have experienced discrimination when going to the doctor, according to a poll by NPR, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

“One of the national crises in health care is the care for adult sickle cell,” said leading researcher and physician Elliott Vichinsky, MD, who started the sickle cell center at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland in 1978. “This group of people can live much longer with the management we have, and they’re dying because we don’t have access to care.”

Indeed, with the proper care, Dr. Vichinsky’s center and the handful of other specialty clinics like it across the country have been able to increase life expectancy for sickle cell patients well into their 60s.

Dr. Vichinsky’s patient Derek Perkins, 45, knows he has already beaten the odds. He sits in an exam room decorated with cartoon characters at Children’s Hospital Oakland, but this is the adult sickle cell clinic. He’s been Dr. Vichinsky’s patient since childhood.

“Without the sickle cell clinic here in Oakland, I don’t know what I would do. I don’t know anywhere else I could go,” Mr. Perkins said.

When Mr. Perkins was 27, he once ended up at a different hospital where doctors misdiagnosed his crisis. He went into a coma and was near death before his mother insisted he be transferred.

“Dr. Vichinsky was able to get me here to Children’s Hospital, and he found out what was wrong and within 18 hours – all I needed was an emergency blood transfusion and I was awake,” Mr. Perkins recalled.

Kareem Jones lived just across the bay from Mr. Perkins, but he had a profoundly different experience.

Mr. Jones’ mother, Ms. Brocks-Capla, said her son received excellent medical care as a child, but once he turned 18 and aged out of his pediatric program, it felt like falling off a cliff. Mr. Jones was sent to a clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, but it was open only for a half-day, one day each week. If he was sick any other day, he had two options: leave a voicemail for a clinic nurse or go to the emergency room. “That’s not comprehensive care – that’s not consistent care for a disease of this type,” said Ms. Brocks-Capla.

Ms. Brocks-Capla is a retired supervisor at a worker’s compensation firm. She knew how to navigate the health care system, but she couldn’t get her son the care he needed. Like most sickle cell patients, Mr. Jones had frequent pain crises. Usually he ended up in the emergency department where, Ms. Brocks-Capla said, the doctors didn’t seem to know much about sickle cell disease.

When she tried to explain her son’s pain to the doctors and nurses, she recalled, “they say have a seat. ‘He can’t have a seat! Can’t you see him?’ ”

Studies have found that sickle cell patients have to wait up to 50% longer for help in the emergency department than do other pain patients. The opioid crisis has made things even worse, Dr. Vichinsky added, as patients in terrible pain are likely to be seen as drug seekers with addiction problems rather than patients in need.

Despite his illness, Mr. Jones fought to have a normal life. He lived with his girlfriend, had a daughter, and worked as much as he could between pain crises. He was an avid San Francisco Giants fan.

For years, he took hydroxyurea, but it had side effects, and after a while Mr. Jones had to stop taking it. “And that was it, because you know there isn’t any other medication out there,” said Ms. Brocks-Capla.

Indeed, hydroxyurea, which the Food and Drug Administration first approved in 1967 as a cancer drug, was the only drug on the market to treat sickle cell during Mr. Jones’ lifetime. In July, the FDA approved a second drug, Endari (L-glutamine oral powder), specifically to treat patients with sickle cell disease.

Funding by the federal government and private foundations for the disease pales in comparison to other disorders. Cystic fibrosis offers a good comparison. It is another inherited disorder that requires complex care and most often occurs in Caucasians. Cystic fibrosis gets 7-11 times more funding per patient than does sickle cell disease, according to a 2013 study in the journal Blood. From 2010 to 2013 alone, the FDA approved five new drugs for the treatment of cystic fibrosis.

“There’s no question in my mind that class and color are major factors in impairing their survival. Without question,” Dr. Vichinsky said of sickle cell patients. “The death rate is increasing. The quality of care is going down.”

Without a new medication, Mr. Jones got progressively worse. At 36, his kidneys began to fail, and he had to go on dialysis. He ended up in the hospital, with the worst pain of his life. The doctors stabilized him and gave him pain meds but did not diagnose the underlying cause of the crisis. He was released to his mother’s care, still in incredible pain.

At home, Ms. Brocks-Capla ran him a warm bath to try to soothe his pain and went downstairs to get him a change of clothes. As she came back up the stairs, she heard loud banging against the bathroom walls.

“So I run into the bathroom and he’s having a seizure. And I didn’t know what to do. I was like, ‘Oh come on, come on. Don’t do this. Don’t do this to me.’ ”

She called 911. The paramedics came but couldn’t revive him. “He died here with me,” she said.

It turned out Mr. Jones had a series of small strokes. His organs were in failure, something Ms. Brocks-Capla said the hospital missed. She believes his death could have been prevented with consistent care – the kind he got as a child. Dr. Vichinsky thinks she is probably right.

“I would say 40% or more of the deaths I’ve had recently have been preventable – I mean totally preventable,” he said, but he got to the cases too late. “It makes me so angry. I’ve spent my life trying to help these people, and the harder part is you can change this – this isn’t a knowledge issue. It’s an access issue.”

Dr. Vichinsky’s center and others like it have made major advances in screening patients for the early signs of organ failure and intervening to prevent premature death. Patients at these clinics live 2 decades longer than the average sickle cell patient.

Good care for sickle cell requires time and training for physicians, but it often doesn’t pay well, because many patients are on Medicaid or other government insurance programs. The result is that most adult sickle cell patients still struggle even to access treatments that have been around for decades, Dr. Vichinsky said.

The phenomenon is nothing new — the disease that used to be known as sickle cell anemia has had a long and sordid past. It was first identified in 1910 and helped launch the field of molecular biology. But most of the research was used to study science rather than improving care for sickle cell patients, Dr. Vichinsky said.

In the 1960s and 1970s, sickle cell became a lightning rod for the civil rights movement. At the time, the average patient died before age 20. The Black Panther Party took up the cause and began testing people at its “survival conferences” across the country.

 

 

“I’m sure we tested over four-and-a-half-thousand people for sickle cell anemia last night – and I think that the voter registration is running neck and neck with it,” Black Panther Party Chairman Bobby Seale told news crews at an event in Oakland in 1972.

The movement grew, and Washington listened. “It is a sad and shameful fact that the causes of this disease have been largely neglected throughout our history,” President Richard Nixon told Congress in 1971. “We cannot rewrite this record of neglect, but we can reverse it. To this end, this administration is increasing its budget for research and treatment of sickle cell disease.”

For a while, funding did increase, newborn screening took hold, and by the 1990s, life expectancy had doubled, with patients living into their 40s. But over time, funding waned, clinics closed, and life expectancy started dropping again.

Dr. Vichinsky pushes against that trend for patients like Derek Perkins. The father of four looks healthy and robust, but like most sickle cell patients, he has episodes of extreme pain and has problems with his kidneys, heart, hips, and breathing. Keeping him thriving requires regular checkups and constant monitoring for potential problems.

“The program Dr. Vichinsky is running here, I feel I owe my life to [it],” said Mr. Perkins. “If it wasn’t for him and the things that he did for me, my family wouldn’t have me.”
 

Kaiser Health News is a national health policy news service that is part of the nonpartisan Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. KHN’s coverage of children’s health care issues is supported in part by a grant from The Heising-Simons Foundation.

Publications
Topics
Sections

 



For more than a year, NeDina Brocks-Capla avoided one room in her large, brightly colored San Francisco house – the bathroom on the second floor.

“It was really hard to bathe in here, and I found myself not wanting to touch the walls,” she explained. The bathroom is where Ms. Brocks-Capla’s son Kareem Jones died in 2013 at age 36, from sickle cell disease.

It’s not just the loss of her son that upsets Ms. Brocks-Capla; she believes that if Mr. Jones had gotten the proper medical care, he might still be alive today.

Sickle cell disease is an inherited disorder that causes some red blood cells to bend into a crescent shape. The misshapen, inflexible cells clog the blood vessels, preventing blood from circulating oxygen properly, which can cause chronic pain, multiorgan failure, and stroke. About 100,000 people in the United States have sickle cell disease, and most of them are African American.

Patients and experts alike say it’s no surprise then that while life expectancy for almost every major malady is improving, patients with sickle cell disease can expect to die younger than they did 20 years ago. In 1994, life expectancy for sickle cell patients was 42 for men and 48 for women. By 2005, life expectancy had dipped to 38 for men and 42 for women.

Sickle cell disease is “a microcosm of how issues of race, ethnicity and identity come into conflict with issues of health care,” said Keith Wailoo, PhD, a professor at Princeton University who writes about the history of the disease.

It is also an example of the broader discrimination experienced by African Americans in the medical system. Nearly a third report that they have experienced discrimination when going to the doctor, according to a poll by NPR, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

“One of the national crises in health care is the care for adult sickle cell,” said leading researcher and physician Elliott Vichinsky, MD, who started the sickle cell center at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland in 1978. “This group of people can live much longer with the management we have, and they’re dying because we don’t have access to care.”

Indeed, with the proper care, Dr. Vichinsky’s center and the handful of other specialty clinics like it across the country have been able to increase life expectancy for sickle cell patients well into their 60s.

Dr. Vichinsky’s patient Derek Perkins, 45, knows he has already beaten the odds. He sits in an exam room decorated with cartoon characters at Children’s Hospital Oakland, but this is the adult sickle cell clinic. He’s been Dr. Vichinsky’s patient since childhood.

“Without the sickle cell clinic here in Oakland, I don’t know what I would do. I don’t know anywhere else I could go,” Mr. Perkins said.

When Mr. Perkins was 27, he once ended up at a different hospital where doctors misdiagnosed his crisis. He went into a coma and was near death before his mother insisted he be transferred.

“Dr. Vichinsky was able to get me here to Children’s Hospital, and he found out what was wrong and within 18 hours – all I needed was an emergency blood transfusion and I was awake,” Mr. Perkins recalled.

Kareem Jones lived just across the bay from Mr. Perkins, but he had a profoundly different experience.

Mr. Jones’ mother, Ms. Brocks-Capla, said her son received excellent medical care as a child, but once he turned 18 and aged out of his pediatric program, it felt like falling off a cliff. Mr. Jones was sent to a clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, but it was open only for a half-day, one day each week. If he was sick any other day, he had two options: leave a voicemail for a clinic nurse or go to the emergency room. “That’s not comprehensive care – that’s not consistent care for a disease of this type,” said Ms. Brocks-Capla.

Ms. Brocks-Capla is a retired supervisor at a worker’s compensation firm. She knew how to navigate the health care system, but she couldn’t get her son the care he needed. Like most sickle cell patients, Mr. Jones had frequent pain crises. Usually he ended up in the emergency department where, Ms. Brocks-Capla said, the doctors didn’t seem to know much about sickle cell disease.

When she tried to explain her son’s pain to the doctors and nurses, she recalled, “they say have a seat. ‘He can’t have a seat! Can’t you see him?’ ”

Studies have found that sickle cell patients have to wait up to 50% longer for help in the emergency department than do other pain patients. The opioid crisis has made things even worse, Dr. Vichinsky added, as patients in terrible pain are likely to be seen as drug seekers with addiction problems rather than patients in need.

Despite his illness, Mr. Jones fought to have a normal life. He lived with his girlfriend, had a daughter, and worked as much as he could between pain crises. He was an avid San Francisco Giants fan.

For years, he took hydroxyurea, but it had side effects, and after a while Mr. Jones had to stop taking it. “And that was it, because you know there isn’t any other medication out there,” said Ms. Brocks-Capla.

Indeed, hydroxyurea, which the Food and Drug Administration first approved in 1967 as a cancer drug, was the only drug on the market to treat sickle cell during Mr. Jones’ lifetime. In July, the FDA approved a second drug, Endari (L-glutamine oral powder), specifically to treat patients with sickle cell disease.

Funding by the federal government and private foundations for the disease pales in comparison to other disorders. Cystic fibrosis offers a good comparison. It is another inherited disorder that requires complex care and most often occurs in Caucasians. Cystic fibrosis gets 7-11 times more funding per patient than does sickle cell disease, according to a 2013 study in the journal Blood. From 2010 to 2013 alone, the FDA approved five new drugs for the treatment of cystic fibrosis.

“There’s no question in my mind that class and color are major factors in impairing their survival. Without question,” Dr. Vichinsky said of sickle cell patients. “The death rate is increasing. The quality of care is going down.”

Without a new medication, Mr. Jones got progressively worse. At 36, his kidneys began to fail, and he had to go on dialysis. He ended up in the hospital, with the worst pain of his life. The doctors stabilized him and gave him pain meds but did not diagnose the underlying cause of the crisis. He was released to his mother’s care, still in incredible pain.

At home, Ms. Brocks-Capla ran him a warm bath to try to soothe his pain and went downstairs to get him a change of clothes. As she came back up the stairs, she heard loud banging against the bathroom walls.

“So I run into the bathroom and he’s having a seizure. And I didn’t know what to do. I was like, ‘Oh come on, come on. Don’t do this. Don’t do this to me.’ ”

She called 911. The paramedics came but couldn’t revive him. “He died here with me,” she said.

It turned out Mr. Jones had a series of small strokes. His organs were in failure, something Ms. Brocks-Capla said the hospital missed. She believes his death could have been prevented with consistent care – the kind he got as a child. Dr. Vichinsky thinks she is probably right.

“I would say 40% or more of the deaths I’ve had recently have been preventable – I mean totally preventable,” he said, but he got to the cases too late. “It makes me so angry. I’ve spent my life trying to help these people, and the harder part is you can change this – this isn’t a knowledge issue. It’s an access issue.”

Dr. Vichinsky’s center and others like it have made major advances in screening patients for the early signs of organ failure and intervening to prevent premature death. Patients at these clinics live 2 decades longer than the average sickle cell patient.

Good care for sickle cell requires time and training for physicians, but it often doesn’t pay well, because many patients are on Medicaid or other government insurance programs. The result is that most adult sickle cell patients still struggle even to access treatments that have been around for decades, Dr. Vichinsky said.

The phenomenon is nothing new — the disease that used to be known as sickle cell anemia has had a long and sordid past. It was first identified in 1910 and helped launch the field of molecular biology. But most of the research was used to study science rather than improving care for sickle cell patients, Dr. Vichinsky said.

In the 1960s and 1970s, sickle cell became a lightning rod for the civil rights movement. At the time, the average patient died before age 20. The Black Panther Party took up the cause and began testing people at its “survival conferences” across the country.

 

 

“I’m sure we tested over four-and-a-half-thousand people for sickle cell anemia last night – and I think that the voter registration is running neck and neck with it,” Black Panther Party Chairman Bobby Seale told news crews at an event in Oakland in 1972.

The movement grew, and Washington listened. “It is a sad and shameful fact that the causes of this disease have been largely neglected throughout our history,” President Richard Nixon told Congress in 1971. “We cannot rewrite this record of neglect, but we can reverse it. To this end, this administration is increasing its budget for research and treatment of sickle cell disease.”

For a while, funding did increase, newborn screening took hold, and by the 1990s, life expectancy had doubled, with patients living into their 40s. But over time, funding waned, clinics closed, and life expectancy started dropping again.

Dr. Vichinsky pushes against that trend for patients like Derek Perkins. The father of four looks healthy and robust, but like most sickle cell patients, he has episodes of extreme pain and has problems with his kidneys, heart, hips, and breathing. Keeping him thriving requires regular checkups and constant monitoring for potential problems.

“The program Dr. Vichinsky is running here, I feel I owe my life to [it],” said Mr. Perkins. “If it wasn’t for him and the things that he did for me, my family wouldn’t have me.”
 

Kaiser Health News is a national health policy news service that is part of the nonpartisan Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. KHN’s coverage of children’s health care issues is supported in part by a grant from The Heising-Simons Foundation.

 



For more than a year, NeDina Brocks-Capla avoided one room in her large, brightly colored San Francisco house – the bathroom on the second floor.

“It was really hard to bathe in here, and I found myself not wanting to touch the walls,” she explained. The bathroom is where Ms. Brocks-Capla’s son Kareem Jones died in 2013 at age 36, from sickle cell disease.

It’s not just the loss of her son that upsets Ms. Brocks-Capla; she believes that if Mr. Jones had gotten the proper medical care, he might still be alive today.

Sickle cell disease is an inherited disorder that causes some red blood cells to bend into a crescent shape. The misshapen, inflexible cells clog the blood vessels, preventing blood from circulating oxygen properly, which can cause chronic pain, multiorgan failure, and stroke. About 100,000 people in the United States have sickle cell disease, and most of them are African American.

Patients and experts alike say it’s no surprise then that while life expectancy for almost every major malady is improving, patients with sickle cell disease can expect to die younger than they did 20 years ago. In 1994, life expectancy for sickle cell patients was 42 for men and 48 for women. By 2005, life expectancy had dipped to 38 for men and 42 for women.

Sickle cell disease is “a microcosm of how issues of race, ethnicity and identity come into conflict with issues of health care,” said Keith Wailoo, PhD, a professor at Princeton University who writes about the history of the disease.

It is also an example of the broader discrimination experienced by African Americans in the medical system. Nearly a third report that they have experienced discrimination when going to the doctor, according to a poll by NPR, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

“One of the national crises in health care is the care for adult sickle cell,” said leading researcher and physician Elliott Vichinsky, MD, who started the sickle cell center at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital Oakland in 1978. “This group of people can live much longer with the management we have, and they’re dying because we don’t have access to care.”

Indeed, with the proper care, Dr. Vichinsky’s center and the handful of other specialty clinics like it across the country have been able to increase life expectancy for sickle cell patients well into their 60s.

Dr. Vichinsky’s patient Derek Perkins, 45, knows he has already beaten the odds. He sits in an exam room decorated with cartoon characters at Children’s Hospital Oakland, but this is the adult sickle cell clinic. He’s been Dr. Vichinsky’s patient since childhood.

“Without the sickle cell clinic here in Oakland, I don’t know what I would do. I don’t know anywhere else I could go,” Mr. Perkins said.

When Mr. Perkins was 27, he once ended up at a different hospital where doctors misdiagnosed his crisis. He went into a coma and was near death before his mother insisted he be transferred.

“Dr. Vichinsky was able to get me here to Children’s Hospital, and he found out what was wrong and within 18 hours – all I needed was an emergency blood transfusion and I was awake,” Mr. Perkins recalled.

Kareem Jones lived just across the bay from Mr. Perkins, but he had a profoundly different experience.

Mr. Jones’ mother, Ms. Brocks-Capla, said her son received excellent medical care as a child, but once he turned 18 and aged out of his pediatric program, it felt like falling off a cliff. Mr. Jones was sent to a clinic at San Francisco General Hospital, but it was open only for a half-day, one day each week. If he was sick any other day, he had two options: leave a voicemail for a clinic nurse or go to the emergency room. “That’s not comprehensive care – that’s not consistent care for a disease of this type,” said Ms. Brocks-Capla.

Ms. Brocks-Capla is a retired supervisor at a worker’s compensation firm. She knew how to navigate the health care system, but she couldn’t get her son the care he needed. Like most sickle cell patients, Mr. Jones had frequent pain crises. Usually he ended up in the emergency department where, Ms. Brocks-Capla said, the doctors didn’t seem to know much about sickle cell disease.

When she tried to explain her son’s pain to the doctors and nurses, she recalled, “they say have a seat. ‘He can’t have a seat! Can’t you see him?’ ”

Studies have found that sickle cell patients have to wait up to 50% longer for help in the emergency department than do other pain patients. The opioid crisis has made things even worse, Dr. Vichinsky added, as patients in terrible pain are likely to be seen as drug seekers with addiction problems rather than patients in need.

Despite his illness, Mr. Jones fought to have a normal life. He lived with his girlfriend, had a daughter, and worked as much as he could between pain crises. He was an avid San Francisco Giants fan.

For years, he took hydroxyurea, but it had side effects, and after a while Mr. Jones had to stop taking it. “And that was it, because you know there isn’t any other medication out there,” said Ms. Brocks-Capla.

Indeed, hydroxyurea, which the Food and Drug Administration first approved in 1967 as a cancer drug, was the only drug on the market to treat sickle cell during Mr. Jones’ lifetime. In July, the FDA approved a second drug, Endari (L-glutamine oral powder), specifically to treat patients with sickle cell disease.

Funding by the federal government and private foundations for the disease pales in comparison to other disorders. Cystic fibrosis offers a good comparison. It is another inherited disorder that requires complex care and most often occurs in Caucasians. Cystic fibrosis gets 7-11 times more funding per patient than does sickle cell disease, according to a 2013 study in the journal Blood. From 2010 to 2013 alone, the FDA approved five new drugs for the treatment of cystic fibrosis.

“There’s no question in my mind that class and color are major factors in impairing their survival. Without question,” Dr. Vichinsky said of sickle cell patients. “The death rate is increasing. The quality of care is going down.”

Without a new medication, Mr. Jones got progressively worse. At 36, his kidneys began to fail, and he had to go on dialysis. He ended up in the hospital, with the worst pain of his life. The doctors stabilized him and gave him pain meds but did not diagnose the underlying cause of the crisis. He was released to his mother’s care, still in incredible pain.

At home, Ms. Brocks-Capla ran him a warm bath to try to soothe his pain and went downstairs to get him a change of clothes. As she came back up the stairs, she heard loud banging against the bathroom walls.

“So I run into the bathroom and he’s having a seizure. And I didn’t know what to do. I was like, ‘Oh come on, come on. Don’t do this. Don’t do this to me.’ ”

She called 911. The paramedics came but couldn’t revive him. “He died here with me,” she said.

It turned out Mr. Jones had a series of small strokes. His organs were in failure, something Ms. Brocks-Capla said the hospital missed. She believes his death could have been prevented with consistent care – the kind he got as a child. Dr. Vichinsky thinks she is probably right.

“I would say 40% or more of the deaths I’ve had recently have been preventable – I mean totally preventable,” he said, but he got to the cases too late. “It makes me so angry. I’ve spent my life trying to help these people, and the harder part is you can change this – this isn’t a knowledge issue. It’s an access issue.”

Dr. Vichinsky’s center and others like it have made major advances in screening patients for the early signs of organ failure and intervening to prevent premature death. Patients at these clinics live 2 decades longer than the average sickle cell patient.

Good care for sickle cell requires time and training for physicians, but it often doesn’t pay well, because many patients are on Medicaid or other government insurance programs. The result is that most adult sickle cell patients still struggle even to access treatments that have been around for decades, Dr. Vichinsky said.

The phenomenon is nothing new — the disease that used to be known as sickle cell anemia has had a long and sordid past. It was first identified in 1910 and helped launch the field of molecular biology. But most of the research was used to study science rather than improving care for sickle cell patients, Dr. Vichinsky said.

In the 1960s and 1970s, sickle cell became a lightning rod for the civil rights movement. At the time, the average patient died before age 20. The Black Panther Party took up the cause and began testing people at its “survival conferences” across the country.

 

 

“I’m sure we tested over four-and-a-half-thousand people for sickle cell anemia last night – and I think that the voter registration is running neck and neck with it,” Black Panther Party Chairman Bobby Seale told news crews at an event in Oakland in 1972.

The movement grew, and Washington listened. “It is a sad and shameful fact that the causes of this disease have been largely neglected throughout our history,” President Richard Nixon told Congress in 1971. “We cannot rewrite this record of neglect, but we can reverse it. To this end, this administration is increasing its budget for research and treatment of sickle cell disease.”

For a while, funding did increase, newborn screening took hold, and by the 1990s, life expectancy had doubled, with patients living into their 40s. But over time, funding waned, clinics closed, and life expectancy started dropping again.

Dr. Vichinsky pushes against that trend for patients like Derek Perkins. The father of four looks healthy and robust, but like most sickle cell patients, he has episodes of extreme pain and has problems with his kidneys, heart, hips, and breathing. Keeping him thriving requires regular checkups and constant monitoring for potential problems.

“The program Dr. Vichinsky is running here, I feel I owe my life to [it],” said Mr. Perkins. “If it wasn’t for him and the things that he did for me, my family wouldn’t have me.”
 

Kaiser Health News is a national health policy news service that is part of the nonpartisan Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. KHN’s coverage of children’s health care issues is supported in part by a grant from The Heising-Simons Foundation.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default

Weight recidivism after bariatric surgery: What constitutes failure?

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 11/06/2017 - 10:35

 

– A standard definition of bariatric surgery failure based on weight regain is needed to assess long-term outcomes in place of the seemingly arbitrary thresholds now in use, according to discussion generated by long-term outcome studies presented at Obesity Week 2017.

Ted Bosworth/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Michael C. Morrell
In one of two studies evaluating weight recidivism in long-term follow-up after bariatric surgery, failure rates at 10 years ranged from 25% to more than 70% according to the definition used, reported to Michael C. Morell, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the Gundersen Medical Foundation, Encinitas, CA.

In another study, presented by Colin Martyn, MD, a general surgery resident at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, the bariatric surgery failure rate at 11 years was characterized as an “alarming” 33.9%. In this study, bariatric surgery was considered a failure if the patient did not maintain excess weight loss (EWL) of 50% or greater.

The problem with this definition, like many others, is that “it fails to recognize that there could be significant health benefits and improvements in quality of life with less weight loss,” according to Philip Schauer, MD, director of the Cleveland Clinic Bariatric and Metabolic Institute. As the invited discussant for the data presented by Dr. Martyn, Dr. Schauer acknowledged that 50% EWL has been used by others as the dividing line between success and failure, but he called it “obsolete.”

This definition was one of several applied to weight recidivism in the study presented by Dr. Morell. Others included weight regain of more than 25% EWL over the postoperative nadir, an increase in body mass index to more than 35 kg/m2 after achieving a lower BMI, and a postsurgical BMI increase of more than 5 mg/m2. Not surprisingly, weight recidivism “varied widely with regard to the definitions used,” Dr. Morell reported.

Dr. Morell’s study involved evaluation of 1,766 patients with at least 1 year of follow-up after bariatric procedure. Most (1,490 patients) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass. After 2 years of follow-up, 93% achieved at least the 50% EWL threshold of treatment success, but Dr. Morell reported that the proportion above this or any threshold progressively diminished over time. For a definition of treatment success, Dr. Morell favors maintenance of at least 20% total weight loss as a threshold of long-term clinical success, a threshold met by 75% of patients at 5 years, in his analysis.

Ted Bosworth/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Colin Martyn
In the meta-analysis presented by Dr. Martyn, nine published studies with at least 7 years of follow-up were included. These involved a cumulative 345 patients followed for at least 7 years with diminishing numbers followed up to 11 years. Using the at least 50% EWL as the definition of treatment success, the overall failure rate was 27.8% at 7 years but climbed to 33.9% at 11 years.

As has been shown in these studies and reported previously, the regaining of weight over time after bariatric surgery is common and progressive, but both studies ignited controversy about what measure is meaningful for declaring that bariatric surgery has failed over the long term. None of the current thresholds for failure are based on evidence that clinical benefit has been lost. Rather, it appears that these are simply accepted conventions.

“It bothers me to hear the word failure in these presentations, because I think the paradigm is changing from success and failure to that of treating chronic disease,” said Stacy Brethauer, MD, a staff surgeon in the Cleveland Clinic Digestive Disease Institute. Dr. Brethauer, the moderator of the session at Obesity Week where both long-term follow-up papers were presented, agreed that the at least 50% EWL benchmark is “flawed.” He suggested that more clinically meaningful methods of evaluating long-term outcome are needed for both clinical and research purposes.

The discussant of Dr. Morell’s paper, Samer G. Mattar, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, also called for metrics based on clinical benefit rather than on weight alone.

“I would caution against this overall emphasis that we seem to place on weight gain and weight loss as a benchmark and predominant objective for what we do,” he said. “Our nonsurgeon colleagues have repeatedly demonstrated clinical benefits from total body weight loss of 10% or even 5%. So let’s not beat up ourselves over trying to maintain a greater than 50% EWL in all our patients.”

 

AGA created the Obesity Practice Guide to help gastroenterologists integrate and operationalize obesity management in their practice for financial success. Learn more at www.gastro.org/obesity.

Meeting/Event
Publications
Topics
Sections
Meeting/Event
Meeting/Event

 

– A standard definition of bariatric surgery failure based on weight regain is needed to assess long-term outcomes in place of the seemingly arbitrary thresholds now in use, according to discussion generated by long-term outcome studies presented at Obesity Week 2017.

Ted Bosworth/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Michael C. Morrell
In one of two studies evaluating weight recidivism in long-term follow-up after bariatric surgery, failure rates at 10 years ranged from 25% to more than 70% according to the definition used, reported to Michael C. Morell, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the Gundersen Medical Foundation, Encinitas, CA.

In another study, presented by Colin Martyn, MD, a general surgery resident at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, the bariatric surgery failure rate at 11 years was characterized as an “alarming” 33.9%. In this study, bariatric surgery was considered a failure if the patient did not maintain excess weight loss (EWL) of 50% or greater.

The problem with this definition, like many others, is that “it fails to recognize that there could be significant health benefits and improvements in quality of life with less weight loss,” according to Philip Schauer, MD, director of the Cleveland Clinic Bariatric and Metabolic Institute. As the invited discussant for the data presented by Dr. Martyn, Dr. Schauer acknowledged that 50% EWL has been used by others as the dividing line between success and failure, but he called it “obsolete.”

This definition was one of several applied to weight recidivism in the study presented by Dr. Morell. Others included weight regain of more than 25% EWL over the postoperative nadir, an increase in body mass index to more than 35 kg/m2 after achieving a lower BMI, and a postsurgical BMI increase of more than 5 mg/m2. Not surprisingly, weight recidivism “varied widely with regard to the definitions used,” Dr. Morell reported.

Dr. Morell’s study involved evaluation of 1,766 patients with at least 1 year of follow-up after bariatric procedure. Most (1,490 patients) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass. After 2 years of follow-up, 93% achieved at least the 50% EWL threshold of treatment success, but Dr. Morell reported that the proportion above this or any threshold progressively diminished over time. For a definition of treatment success, Dr. Morell favors maintenance of at least 20% total weight loss as a threshold of long-term clinical success, a threshold met by 75% of patients at 5 years, in his analysis.

Ted Bosworth/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Colin Martyn
In the meta-analysis presented by Dr. Martyn, nine published studies with at least 7 years of follow-up were included. These involved a cumulative 345 patients followed for at least 7 years with diminishing numbers followed up to 11 years. Using the at least 50% EWL as the definition of treatment success, the overall failure rate was 27.8% at 7 years but climbed to 33.9% at 11 years.

As has been shown in these studies and reported previously, the regaining of weight over time after bariatric surgery is common and progressive, but both studies ignited controversy about what measure is meaningful for declaring that bariatric surgery has failed over the long term. None of the current thresholds for failure are based on evidence that clinical benefit has been lost. Rather, it appears that these are simply accepted conventions.

“It bothers me to hear the word failure in these presentations, because I think the paradigm is changing from success and failure to that of treating chronic disease,” said Stacy Brethauer, MD, a staff surgeon in the Cleveland Clinic Digestive Disease Institute. Dr. Brethauer, the moderator of the session at Obesity Week where both long-term follow-up papers were presented, agreed that the at least 50% EWL benchmark is “flawed.” He suggested that more clinically meaningful methods of evaluating long-term outcome are needed for both clinical and research purposes.

The discussant of Dr. Morell’s paper, Samer G. Mattar, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, also called for metrics based on clinical benefit rather than on weight alone.

“I would caution against this overall emphasis that we seem to place on weight gain and weight loss as a benchmark and predominant objective for what we do,” he said. “Our nonsurgeon colleagues have repeatedly demonstrated clinical benefits from total body weight loss of 10% or even 5%. So let’s not beat up ourselves over trying to maintain a greater than 50% EWL in all our patients.”

 

AGA created the Obesity Practice Guide to help gastroenterologists integrate and operationalize obesity management in their practice for financial success. Learn more at www.gastro.org/obesity.

 

– A standard definition of bariatric surgery failure based on weight regain is needed to assess long-term outcomes in place of the seemingly arbitrary thresholds now in use, according to discussion generated by long-term outcome studies presented at Obesity Week 2017.

Ted Bosworth/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Michael C. Morrell
In one of two studies evaluating weight recidivism in long-term follow-up after bariatric surgery, failure rates at 10 years ranged from 25% to more than 70% according to the definition used, reported to Michael C. Morell, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the Gundersen Medical Foundation, Encinitas, CA.

In another study, presented by Colin Martyn, MD, a general surgery resident at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso, the bariatric surgery failure rate at 11 years was characterized as an “alarming” 33.9%. In this study, bariatric surgery was considered a failure if the patient did not maintain excess weight loss (EWL) of 50% or greater.

The problem with this definition, like many others, is that “it fails to recognize that there could be significant health benefits and improvements in quality of life with less weight loss,” according to Philip Schauer, MD, director of the Cleveland Clinic Bariatric and Metabolic Institute. As the invited discussant for the data presented by Dr. Martyn, Dr. Schauer acknowledged that 50% EWL has been used by others as the dividing line between success and failure, but he called it “obsolete.”

This definition was one of several applied to weight recidivism in the study presented by Dr. Morell. Others included weight regain of more than 25% EWL over the postoperative nadir, an increase in body mass index to more than 35 kg/m2 after achieving a lower BMI, and a postsurgical BMI increase of more than 5 mg/m2. Not surprisingly, weight recidivism “varied widely with regard to the definitions used,” Dr. Morell reported.

Dr. Morell’s study involved evaluation of 1,766 patients with at least 1 year of follow-up after bariatric procedure. Most (1,490 patients) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass. After 2 years of follow-up, 93% achieved at least the 50% EWL threshold of treatment success, but Dr. Morell reported that the proportion above this or any threshold progressively diminished over time. For a definition of treatment success, Dr. Morell favors maintenance of at least 20% total weight loss as a threshold of long-term clinical success, a threshold met by 75% of patients at 5 years, in his analysis.

Ted Bosworth/Frontline Medical News
Dr. Colin Martyn
In the meta-analysis presented by Dr. Martyn, nine published studies with at least 7 years of follow-up were included. These involved a cumulative 345 patients followed for at least 7 years with diminishing numbers followed up to 11 years. Using the at least 50% EWL as the definition of treatment success, the overall failure rate was 27.8% at 7 years but climbed to 33.9% at 11 years.

As has been shown in these studies and reported previously, the regaining of weight over time after bariatric surgery is common and progressive, but both studies ignited controversy about what measure is meaningful for declaring that bariatric surgery has failed over the long term. None of the current thresholds for failure are based on evidence that clinical benefit has been lost. Rather, it appears that these are simply accepted conventions.

“It bothers me to hear the word failure in these presentations, because I think the paradigm is changing from success and failure to that of treating chronic disease,” said Stacy Brethauer, MD, a staff surgeon in the Cleveland Clinic Digestive Disease Institute. Dr. Brethauer, the moderator of the session at Obesity Week where both long-term follow-up papers were presented, agreed that the at least 50% EWL benchmark is “flawed.” He suggested that more clinically meaningful methods of evaluating long-term outcome are needed for both clinical and research purposes.

The discussant of Dr. Morell’s paper, Samer G. Mattar, MD, a bariatric surgeon at the Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, also called for metrics based on clinical benefit rather than on weight alone.

“I would caution against this overall emphasis that we seem to place on weight gain and weight loss as a benchmark and predominant objective for what we do,” he said. “Our nonsurgeon colleagues have repeatedly demonstrated clinical benefits from total body weight loss of 10% or even 5%. So let’s not beat up ourselves over trying to maintain a greater than 50% EWL in all our patients.”

 

AGA created the Obesity Practice Guide to help gastroenterologists integrate and operationalize obesity management in their practice for financial success. Learn more at www.gastro.org/obesity.

Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Sections
Article Source

AT OBESITY WEEK 2017

Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Vitals

 

Key clinical point: Many patients regain weight after bariatric surgery, but experts argue over the definition of long-term treatment failure, for which there is no standard.

Major finding: After 5 or more years of follow-up, failure rates range from 25% to 70% depending on definition of unacceptable weight regain.

Data source: A retrospective review.

Disclosures: Dr. Morell and Dr. Martyn reported no financial relationships relevant to this topic.

Disqus Comments
Default