ObjectivesTo establish evidence-based recommendations to guide health professionals using intra-articular therapies (IAT) in adult patients with peripheral arthropathies.MethodsA multidisciplinary international task force established the objectives, users and scope and the need for background information, including systematic literature reviews) and two surveys addressed to healthcare providers and patients throughout Europe. The evidence was discussed in a face-to-face meeting, recommendations were formulated and subsequently voted for anonymously in a three-round Delphi process to obtain the final agreement. The level of evidence was assigned to each recommendation with the Oxford levels of evidence.ResultsRecommendations focus on practical aspects to guide health professionals before, during and after IAT in adult patients with peripheral arthropathies. Five overarching principles and 11 recommendations were established, addressing issues related to patient information, procedure and setting, accuracy, routine and special aseptic care, safety issues and precautions to be addressed in special populations, efficacy and safety of repeated joint injections, use of local anaesthetics and aftercare.ConclusionWe have developed the first evidence and expert opinion-based recommendations to guide health professionals using IAT. We hope that these recommendations will be included in different educational programmes, used by patient associations and put into practice via scientific societies to help improve uniformity and quality of care when performing IAT in peripheral adult joints.

ObjectiveTo summarise the evidence on intra-articular therapies (IAT) to inform the 2020 EULAR recommendations.MethodsAn overview of systematic reviews (SR) including randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) of IAT in adults with arthropathies was performed up to July 2020. Pain, function, and frequency of adverse events were the main efficacy and safety outcomes, respectively. Quality was assessed with the A MeaSurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR)-2 tool.ResultsOf 184 references identified, 16 met the inclusion criteria, and a search of their reference lists identified 16 additional SRs. After quality assessment, 29 were finally included. Of these, 18 focused on knee osteoarthritis (KOA), 6 on hip osteoarthritis (HOA), 3 on shoulder capsulitis (SC), and 3 on rheumatoid arthritis. Overall, hyaluronic acid showed a small effect on pain and function in KOA but not in HOA or shoulder capsulitis. Intra-articular glucocorticoids showed a small effect in pain and function in KOA and function in HOA and SC. Platelet-rich plasma showed benefit in pain and function in KOA but not in HOA. Mesenchymal stem cells behaved similarly. Most SR results were of moderate quality and RCTs included often presented a high risk of bias, mainly due to inadequate blinding and heterogeneous results. All interventions were well tolerated with no clear safety differences.ConclusionsThis overview underlines that most IAT currently used in KOA, HOA, and SC exert small effects and are well tolerated. However, no firm conclusions can be drawn for inflammatory arthritis due to the limited data found.

Objective: The present work was led by a multidisciplinary panel of experts and proposes an extensive review on the use of prescription crystalline glucosamine sulfate (pCGS) in the multimodal treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) applicable in Ukraine and other Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) countries. Methods: A panel of rheumatologists, orthopedic surgeons, and field experts from Ukraine and CIS regions discussed the management of OA. Literature was systematically searched using Medline, EMBASE, CIHNAL, and Cochrane Library databases. The 2-day meeting critically reviewed the available literature, treatment algorithms, pharmacoeconomic aspects, and real-world instances to form a multimodal approach based both on real-life clinical practice and systematic literature research for the management of OA in Ukraine and CIS countries. Expert Opinion: pCGS plays a pivotal role in the stepwise approach to OA treatment. If it is necessary (step 1), the combined use of pCGS with paracetamol and topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been recommended. If symptoms persist, oral NSAIDs and intra-articular (IA) hyaluronic acid or corticosteroids are added to the therapy (step 2) of pCGS in the patients. In case of insufficient relief and severe OA (step 3), pCGS along with oral NSAIDs, IA corticosteroids, and duloxetine have been recommended. Patient stratification with regular monitoring and careful alterations in treatment were advocated. Conclusions: This expert opinion article recommends a modified approach to the existing guidelines incorporating pCGS in treatment modality of OA in Ukraine and CIS countries. Extensive use of pCGS targets early symptomatic relief in OA while limiting the adverse effects due to long-term use of analgesics and NSAIDs.

To assess patient perspective and professional practice of intraarticular therapies (IATs) across Europe, an expert international multidisciplinary panel designed two open web-based surveys: one targeting people who had experienced at least two IATs (44 items); and one targeting health care providers (HCPs) (160 items). Surveys were disseminated via patient and professional associations and social media. A descriptive analysis was performed. The surveys were answered by 200 patients and 186 HCPs from 26 countries, showing that IAT is routinely performed by rheumatologists (97%) and orthopaedic surgeons (89%), with specific training being compulsory in a few countries. The most frequent indications for IAT are arthritis (76%), osteoarthritis (74%), crystal arthritis (71%) and bursitis (70%); the most frequently injected joints are knee (78%) and shoulder (70%); and the most used compounds are glucocorticoids. The majority of HCPs report informing patients about side-effects (73%), benefits (72%), and the nature of the procedure (72%), which coincides with 27% of patients reporting that they had not been informed about benefits or potential complications of IATs; 73% of patients had not been asked whether they wanted an anaesthetic. Few HCPs (10%) obtain written consent (56% get oral consent, being mandatory for 32%), a procedure deemed necessary by 41% of the patients. 50% of patients reported a clear benefit of IAT and 20% experienced complications including pain, impaired mobility, rashes, or swelling. In summary, the practice of IAT is variable across Europe, and although patients perceive it as relatively safe and usually effective procedure, some gaps were identified.