Salem Rehab Mahmoud, El-Deeb A E, Elsergany Mervat, Elsaadany Hanan, El-Khouly Radwa
Physical Medicine, Rheumatology, and Rehabilitation Department, Faculty of Medicine, Tanta University, Geish Street, Tanta, Gharbia, Egypt.
Clin Rheumatol. 2021 Feb;40(2):557-564. doi: 10.1007/s10067-020-05235-9. Epub 2020 Jul 4.
This study was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of intra-articular injection of etanercept and compare it with corticosteroid injection in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.
Fifty patients with RA who suffered from activity in one joint were randomized into two groups, received an intra-articular injection of either etanercept or corticosteroid guided by musculoskeletal ultrasound. All patients were assessed for disease activity by disease activity score (DAS28), functional assessment using the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ), and laboratory investigations (erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein). Joints affected were evaluated for pain by visual analog scale (VAS), tenderness, and swelling scores and by ultrasound for estimation of synovial hypertrophy, synovial effusion, and power Doppler. Follow-up of the patients was done at weeks 1, 4, and 12 after injection by clinical assessment and ultrasound.
There was a significant improvement of joint pain assessed by VAS, tenderness, and swelling scores in the etanercept group at week 1 and week 4 follow-up periods but there were insignificant changes at week 12. There was a significant decrease in synovial effusion at week 1 and week 4 and in power Doppler at week 1 but no significant change was noticed in synovial hypertrophy during the follow-up periods. In comparison of the two groups, etanercept has shown better results on joint scores at week 1; however, glucocorticoid had more sustained effects. No major or life-threatening side effects were noticed following intra-articular injection of etanercept.
Intra-articular injection of etanercept is a safe and promising option; with comparable results to intra-articular injection of corticosteroid; however, its rapid absorption from the synovium may necessitate frequent injections. Key Points • Persistent inflammatory mono-arthritis is a common clinical problem that is often difficult to treat; it is a debilitating and destructive condition. • Intra-articular injection of TNF inhibitors is an encouraging treatment modality in managing refractory mono-arthritis in rheumatoid arthritis.
本研究旨在评估关节腔内注射依那西普的安全性和有效性,并将其与类风湿关节炎(RA)患者的皮质类固醇注射进行比较。
50例有一个关节活动的RA患者被随机分为两组,在肌肉骨骼超声引导下接受关节腔内注射依那西普或皮质类固醇。所有患者通过疾病活动评分(DAS28)评估疾病活动度,使用改良健康评估问卷(MHAQ)进行功能评估,并进行实验室检查(红细胞沉降率和C反应蛋白)。通过视觉模拟量表(VAS)、压痛和肿胀评分评估受累关节的疼痛,并通过超声评估滑膜增生、滑膜积液和能量多普勒。在注射后第1、4和12周通过临床评估和超声对患者进行随访。
在依那西普组,随访第1周和第4周时,通过VAS、压痛和肿胀评分评估的关节疼痛有显著改善,但在第12周时变化不显著。第1周和第4周时滑膜积液显著减少,第1周时能量多普勒显著降低,但随访期间滑膜增生未见显著变化。两组比较,依那西普在第1周时关节评分显示出更好的结果;然而,糖皮质激素的效果更持久。关节腔内注射依那西普后未发现重大或危及生命的副作用。
关节腔内注射依那西普是一种安全且有前景的选择;与关节腔内注射皮质类固醇的效果相当;然而,其从滑膜的快速吸收可能需要频繁注射。要点 • 持续性炎症性单关节炎是常见的临床问题,通常难以治疗;它是一种使人衰弱和具有破坏性的病症。 • 关节腔内注射肿瘤坏死因子抑制剂是治疗类风湿关节炎难治性单关节炎的一种令人鼓舞的治疗方式。