No abstract

Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research. Patient consent for publication Not required. Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed. This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ's website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

Background: Color Duplex sonography (CDS) of temporal arteries and large vessels (LV) is a recently validated diagnostic methodology for Giant Cell Arteritis (GCA). CDS combined with a fast-track approach (FTA) has improved the early diagnosis of the disease.Objectives: To assess FTA effects on the prevention of permanent visual loss (PVL), relapse and late complications of GCA compared to conventional practice. To assess the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on outcomes of GCA patients assessed with FTA.Methods: GCA patients diagnosed up to June 2020 at the Rheumatology Department, University of Pavia, were included. FTA was implemented since October 2016. FTA consists in the referral within 1 working day of a suspected GCA case to an expert rheumatologist who performs clinical evaluation and CDS.Results: One hundred sixty patients were recruited [female 120 (75%), mean age 72.4 ± 8.2 years]. Sixty-three (39.4%) evaluated with FTA, 97 (60.6%) with conventional approach. FTA patients were older (75.1 ± 7.6 vs. 70.6 ± 8.2 years old; p < 0.001). Median follow-up duration was shorter in the FTA group compared to the conventional one (0.9 vs. 5.0 years; p < 0.001). There was no difference between the two cohorts regarding major vessel district involvement (LV-GCA 17.5% vs. 22.7%; p = 0.4). PVL occurred in 8 (12.7%) FTA patients and 26 (26.8%) conventional ones (p = 0.03). The relative risk of blindness in the conventional group was 2.11 (95% C.I. 1.02–4.36; P = 0.04) as compared to FTA. Median symptom latency of patients experiencing PVL was higher in the conventional group (23 days IQR 12–96 vs. 7 days IQR 4–10, p = 0.02). During COVID-19 there was a significant increase in the occurrence of PVL (40%) including bilateral blindness despite a regularly operating FTA clinic. Cumulative incidence of relapses and time to first relapse did not change after FTA introduction (P = 0.2). No difference in late complications (stenosis/aneurysms) was detected.Conclusions: FTA including CDS evaluation contributed to a substantial reduction of PVL in GCA by shortening the time to diagnosis and treatment initiation. Relapse rate did not change upon FTA introduction, highlighting the need for better disease activity monitoring and treatment strategies optimization based on risk stratification that would predict the occurrence of relapse during glucocorticoid de-escalation.

Objective. Although antisynthetase antibodies (ARS) are the established markers of the so-called antisynthetase syndrome (ASSD), in these patients the concomitant positivity of anti-Ro52 antibodies, reported in up to the 50% of cases, is not rare. Several studies focused on the effect of different ARS specificities on the evolution of ASSD, the most recent showing no effects. On the contrary, the role of co-occurring anti-Ro52 antibodies in ASSD is still debated. We investigated the potential of anti-Ro52 antibodies in identifying a clinical phenotype of ASSD or influencing prognosis, irrespectively to the underlying ARS specificity. Methods. Retrospective analysis of clinical, imaging and laboratory characteristics, therapeutic approaches and outcome at baseline and at last followup, of 60 ASSD patients progressively enrolled at our Hospital. Results. We identified 34 anti-Ro+ and 26 anti-Ro-ASSD patients. Classic triad prevalence at baseline was similar between the two groups, whereas interstitial lung disease (ILD) (p-value=0.01) and myositis (p-value=0.03) were significantly more prevalent in anti-Ro52+ and in anti-Ro52-patients at last follow up, respectively. No differences in therapeutic approaches, oxygen need and ILD patterns were observed. Overall mortality was 25% (15 subjects). No differences in mortality, overall and disease related, between anti-Ro52+ and anti-Ro52-patients were observed (p-value=0.764), despite the more frequent ILD occurrence in anti-Ro52+ patients. Survival curves were not different at any time point . Conclusion. Anti-Ro52 antibodies affect time course and clinical characteristics of ASSD. Although ILD is significantly more associated to anti-Ro52antibodies, no difference in mortality was observed compared to anti-Ro52 negative patients.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo map existing organizational care pathways in clinical centers of expertise that care for pregnant women affected by rare and complex connective tissue diseases (rcCTDs).MethodsAn international working group composed of experts in the field of pregnancy in rcCTDs co-designed a survey focused on organizational aspects related to the patient's pathway before, during and after pregnancy. The survey was deployed to subject experts via referral sampling.ResultsAnswers were collected from 69 centers in 21 countries. Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus and/or antiphospholipid syndrome were followed by more than 90% of centers, while diseases such as IgG4-related diseases were rarely covered. In the majority of centers, a multidisciplinary team was involved, including an obstetrician/gynaecologist in 91.3% of cases and other healthcare professionals less frequently. Respondents indicated that 96.0% of the centers provided routine pre-pregnancy care, while the number of patient visits during pregnancy varied across centers. A formalized care-pathway was described in 49.2% of centers, and 20.3% of centers had a pre-defined protocol for the monitoring of pregnant patients. Access to therapies during pregnancy also was heterogeneous among different centers.ConclusionIn international referral centers, a high level of care is provided to patients with rcCTDs before, during and after pregnancy. No significant discrepancies were found between European and non-European countries. However, this work highlights a potential benefit to streamline the care approaches across countries in order to optimize pregnancy and perinatal outcomes among patients with rcCTDs.

ObjectiveIt is still a matter of debate whether low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (LDASA) should be prescribed to all patients with SLE during pregnancy. This study aimed at investigating the impact of LDASA on pregnancy outcomes in patients with SLE without history of renal involvement and without antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL).MethodsThis is a retrospective analysis of prospectively monitored pregnancies at seven rheumatology centres. Previous/current renal involvement and aPL positivity were the exclusion criteria. Adverse pregnancy outcome (APO) is the composite outcome of the study and included proteinuric pre-eclampsia, preterm delivery <37 weeks, small-for-gestational age infant, low birth weight <2500 g, intrauterine growth restriction and intrauterine fetal death after 12 weeks of gestation of a morphologically normal fetus.Results216 pregnancies in 187 patients were included; 82 pregnancies (38.0%) were exposed to LDASA treatment. No differences in terms of age at conception, disease duration, clinical manifestations, comorbidities and disease flare during pregnancy were observed between patients taking LDASA and those who did not take LDASA during pregnancy. APO was observed in 65 cases (30.1%), including 13 cases (6.1%) of pre-eclampsia. The incidence of all complications was similar in the two groups. However, it is interesting to note that pre-eclampsia had lower frequency in patients taking LDASA versus those not taking LDASA (2.4% vs 8.3%, p=0.14).ConclusionsIn pregnant patients with SLE without renal involvement and were aPL-negative, there is a low risk of severe obstetric complications, such as early pre-eclampsia. LDASA treatment does not provide a statistically significant advantage over these complications. However, a careful individual risk–benefit balance is warranted.

No abstract