scholarly journals ANALYSIS OF INTERBODY VERSUS POSTEROLATERAL FUSION FOR LUMBAR SPONDYLOSIS

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 290-294
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Góes Medéa de Mendonça ◽  
Carlos Alberto Assunção Filho ◽  
Nelson Astur ◽  
Alberto Ofenhejm Gotfryd ◽  
Ricardo Shigueaki Galhego Umeta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Evaluation ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Posterolateral Fusion ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Spondylosis ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Objective : To evaluate and compare radiographic and clinical evaluation of patients undergoing interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine. Methods : Retrospective study of patients diagnosed with lumbar spondylosis that were surgically treated in the period from 2012 to 2014. The results were observed by clinical evaluation by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for low back and leg pain. We evaluated functional results and quality of life through the application of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires, respectively. The pre and postoperative condition were compared in Group 1 (interbody fusion) and Group 2 (posterolateral fusion), in addition to evaluation of fusion by means of post-operative radiograph. Results : A total of 30 patients of 36 were eligible, 12 in Group 1 and 18 in Group 2. The mean follow-up was 10.1 months. Statistical analysis showed similar scores for back and leg pain VAS, SF-36 function scores and Oswestry between groups with interbody and posterolateral fusion, and compared within these groups regarding the pre- and postoperative condition, and found no statistical significance. The successful fusion was similar in both groups, with 11 of 12 patients in Group 1 showing bone fusion and 17 of 18 in Group 2 showing arthrodesis. Conclusion : No clinical or radiographic differences between patients who underwent posterolateral or interbody fusion were observed. Both methods showed improvement in functional outcome and pain reduction.

Association of Visual Appearance on Outcomes After Hallux Valgus Surgery

2021 ◽  
pp. 107110072110199
Author(s):  
Hakan Bahar ◽  
Kadir Ilker Yildiz
Keyword(s):  
Hallux Valgus ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Functional Improvement ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Visual Appearance ◽  
Chevron Osteotomy ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Functional Scores ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Background: In this study, our aim was to determine the effect of cosmetic improvement on patient satisfaction and functional scores in hallux valgus (HV) surgery. Methods: Preoperative foot photographs of 105 patients who had undergone chevron osteotomy for HV between 2016 and 2018 were taken. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Twenty-four months after surgery, the preoperative foot photographs were shown to patients in group 1 (n = 52) but not to patients in group 2 (n = 53). The groups were then compared using the visual analog scale (VAS), the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society Hallux Metatarsophalangeal-Interphalangeal (AOFAS Hallux MTP-IP), and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores. Both groups were evaluated radiologically with preoperative and postoperative hallux valgus angles and intermetatarsal angles. Results: There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of radiologic parameters either pre- or postoperatively, or AOFAS Hallux MTP-IP scores postoperatively. However, for group 1, the VAS was lower (0.4±0.8 vs 1.8±1.6, P = .003) and both the SF-36 physical functioning (88.3±18.1 vs 79.1±23.2, P = .017) and SF-36 mental health scores were higher (78.8±19 vs 69.2±16.3, P = .022). Conclusion: Visualizing improvement in the cosmetic appearance of the foot appears associated with patients’ perception of subjective pain and functional improvement. We recommend that preoperative foot photographs be taken and recorded. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Alloplastic or Autologous? Bone Chips versus PEEK Cage for Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Koehler ◽  
Christopher Held ◽  
Christian Stetter ◽  
Thomas Westermaier
Keyword(s):  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Posterior Instrumentation ◽  
Degenerative Spondylolisthesis ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Peek Cage ◽  
Cheap Alternative ◽  
Autologous Bone ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Introduction This study was conducted to compare bone-filled intervertebral cages with autologous bone chips for instrumented lumbar interbody fusion in patients with spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Methods Surgery consisted of posterior instrumentation and decompression, diskectomy, and intervertebral fusion using a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage surrounded and filled with spongious bone chips (group 1, n = 57) or spongious bone chips alone (group 2, n = 37). The choice of method was left to the discretion of the surgeon. Postoperative results were prospectively evaluated using a standardized protocol. Radiological assessment included fusion rates and vertebral height, while clinical assessment included the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Results In group 1, a mean of 1.38 ± 0.64 segments were fused. In group 2, a mean of 1.58 ± 0.65 segments were fused. In both groups, the VAS for back pain and leg pain and the ODI improved without significant differences between the two groups. Osseous fusion was documented by computerized tomography in 73% in group 1 and 89% in group 2 after a mean of 18 months. The loss of height was 2.8 ± 4.0% in group 1 and 2.4 ± 5.2% in group 2. Conclusion Regardless of whether a PEEK cage filled with spongious bone chips or spongious bone chips alone were used for lumbar interbody fusion, clinical parameters improved significantly after surgery. There were no significant differences in the rate of bony fusion and loss of height between the two groups. The results of this nonrandomized cohort study indicate that the implantation of autologous spongious bone chips harvested during the decompression procedure is a useful and cheap alternative to an intervertebral cage in patients with degenerative pseudospondylolisthesis.

scholarly journals Impact of Surgical Approach on Clinical Outcomes in the Treatment of Lumbar Pseudarthrosis

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. 786-791 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Kirk Owens ◽  
Mladen Djurasovic ◽  
Charles H. Crawford ◽  
Steven D. Glassman ◽  
John R. Dimar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Linear Regression Analysis ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Surgical Approaches ◽  
Modest Improvement ◽  
Sf 36

Study Design Retrospective comparative cohort. Objective Pseudarthrosis following fusion for degenerative lumbar spine pathologies remains a substantial problem. Current data shows that patients who develop a pseudarthrosis have suboptimal outcomes. This study evaluates if treatment of pseudarthrosis can be affected by surgical approach. Methods Medical records of 63 female and 65 male patients (mean age 50.37) who were treated for nonunion following lumbar fusion were reviewed. Sixty patients underwent posterolateral fusion (PSF), 18 underwent PSF with transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF), 32 underwent anterior and posterior spinal fusion (AP), and 24 underwent anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). Results Significant differences between the treatment groups were observed in length of stay ( p = 0.000), blood loss ( p = 0.000), and operative time ( p = 0.000). In the AP fusion group, minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was reached in 47% of patients for back pain, 28% for leg pain, and 28% for Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). PSF had the highest percentage of patients reaching MCID for Short Form-36 (SF-36) physical composite score at 25%. ALIF and TLIF subgroups reached MCID for ODI in 17% of patients. Linear regression analysis showed that type of surgical approach did not impact change in ODI scores. Conclusion Although not statistically significant, the AP fusion group reached MCID more frequently in all outcomes except SF-36 Physical Component Summary. All surgical approaches examined for treatment of lumbar pseudarthrosis resulted in only poor to modest improvement in ODI. This result further emphasizes the importance of achieving a solid fusion with the index surgery.

scholarly journals Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Technical Note and Preliminary Clinical Experience with 2-Year Follow-Up

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junlong Wu ◽  
Huan Liu ◽  
Shengxiang Ao ◽  
Wenjie Zheng ◽  
Changqing Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Minimal Invasive ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Improvement Rate ◽  
Sf 36

Objective. Endoscopic surgeries have been attempted in the field of lumbar decompression and fusion surgery in the past decade. Percutaneous endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (PELIF) is a new-emerging technique taking advantages of an anatomical (Kambin’s triangle) to achieve simultaneous decompression and fusion under endoscopic visualization. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of PELIF technique with general anesthesia and neuromonitoring.Methods. The authors present the details of PELIF technique with general anesthesia and neuromonitoring. The first 7 consecutive patients treated with minimum of 2 year’s follow-up were included. Clinical outcomes were assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, and the Short Form-36 health survey questionnaire (SF-36) in the immediate preoperative period and during the follow-up period.Results. All patients underwent single-level PELIF surgery successfully and without conversion to open surgery. The average age was 56.0±13.0 years. All patients had Grade I degenerative/isthmic spondylolisthesis and 4 patients coexisted with disc herniation. The mean operative time was 167.5±30.9 minutes, and intraoperative blood loss was 70.0±24.5 ml. Postoperative drainage volume was 24.5±18.3 ml. The differences in the VAS scores for low back pain and leg pain between preoperative and follow-up were significant (P<0.05). The SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS) improved from 38.83±4.17 to 55.67±2.58 (P<0.001). The SF-36 Mental Component Summary (MCS) improved from 43.83±3.13 to 57.50±5.36 (P=0.001). The ODI score improvement rate was 33.7±3.7 %. All cases demonstrated radiopaque graft in the intervertebral disc space consistent with solid arthrodesis.Conclusions. PELIF technique seems to be a promising surgical technique for selected appropriate patients, with the minimal invasive advantages in decreased blood, shortage of ambulation time, and hospital stay, compared with MIS-TLIF. Because of limited Kambin’s triangle space and the exiting nerve root nearby, PELIF is still a challenging technique. Future advancement and development in instrument and cage design are vital for application and popularization of this technique. Prospective, randomized, controlled studies with large sample size on PELIF technique are still needed to prove its safety, efficacy, and minimal invasive advantages.

Outcome after less-invasive decompression of lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomized comparison of unilateral laminotomy, bilateral laminotomy, and laminectomy

2005 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudius Thomé ◽  
Dimitris Zevgaridis ◽  
Olaf Leheta ◽  
Hansjörg Bäzner ◽  
Christiane Pöckler-Schöniger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Walking Distance ◽  
Lumbar Stenosis ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Lumbar Spinal ◽  
A Prospective Study ◽  
Group 1

ObjectRecently, limited decompression procedures have been proposed in the treatment of lumbar stenosis. The authors undertook a prospective study to compare the safety and outcome of unilateral and bilateral laminotomy with laminectomy.MethodsOne hundred twenty consecutive patients with 207 levels of lumbar stenosis without herniated discs or instability were randomized to three treatment groups (bilateral laminotomy [Group 1], unilateral laminotomy [Group 2], and laminectomy [Group 3]). Perioperative parameters and complications were documented. Symptoms and scores, such as visual analog scale (VAS), Roland—Morris Scale, Short Form—36 (SF-36), and patient satisfaction were assessed preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.Adequate decompression was achieved in all patients. The overall complication rate was lowest in patients who had undergone bilateral laminotomy (Group 1). The minimum follow up of 12 months was obtained in 94% of patients. Residual pain was lowest in Group 1 (VAS score 2.3 ± 2.4 and 4 ± 1 in Group 3; p < 0.05 and 3.6 ± 2.7 in Group 2; p < 0.05). The Roland—Morris Scale score improved from 17 ± 4.3 before surgery to 8.1 ± 7, 8.5 ± 7.3, and 10.9 ± 7.5 (Groups 1–3, respectively; p < 0.001 compared with preoperative) corresponding to a dramatic increase in walking distance. Examination of SF-36 scores demonstrated marked improvement, most pronounced in Group 1. The number of repeated operations did not differ among groups. Patient satisfaction was significantly superior in Group 1, with 3, 27, and 26% of patients unsatisfied (in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively; p < 0.01).ConclusionsBilateral and unilateral laminotomy allowed adequate and safe decompression of lumbar stenosis, resulted in a highly significant reduction of symptoms and disability, and improved health-related quality of life. Outcome after unilateral laminotomy was comparable with that after laminectomy. In most outcome parameters, bilateral laminotomy was associated with a significant benefit and thus constitutes a promising treatment alternative.

scholarly journals Are Patient-Reported Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Influenced by Preoperative Mental Health?

2020 ◽  
pp. 219256822091271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graham S. Goh ◽  
Ming Han Lincoln Liow ◽  
Wai-Mun Yue ◽  
Seang-Beng Tan ◽  
John Li-Tat Chen
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Interbody Fusion ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Patient Reported Outcome Measures ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Patient Reported

Study design: This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Objectives: Few studies have described the relationship between mental health and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after minimally invasive spine surgery. Prior studies on open surgery included small cohorts with short follow-ups. Methods: Patients undergoing primary minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for degenerative pathology were retrospectively reviewed and stratified by Short Form (SF-36) Mental Component Summary (MCS): low MCS (<50, n = 436) versus high MCS (≥50, n = 363). PROMs assessed were back pain, leg pain, North American Spine Society Neurogenic Symptoms, Oswestry Disability Index, SF-36 Physical Component Summary, and MCS. Satisfaction, expectation fulfilment, and return to work (RTW) rates also were recorded at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 2 years. Results: Preoperative MCS was 39.4 ± 8.6 and 58.5 ± 5.4 in the low and high MCS groups, respectively ( P < .001). The low MCS group had significantly poorer preoperative PROMs and longer lengths of stay. Despite this, both groups achieved comparable PROMs from 3 months onward. The mean MCS was no longer significantly different by 3 months ( P = .353). The low MCS group had poorer satisfaction ( P = .022) and expectation fulfilment ( P = .020) at final follow-up. RTW rates were initially lower in the low MCS group up to 3 months ( P = .034), but the rates converged from 6 months onward. Conclusions: Despite poorer PROMs preoperatively, patients with poor baseline mental health still achieved comparable results from 3 months up to 2 years after MIS-TLIF. Preoperative optimization of mental health should still be pursued to improve satisfaction and prevent delayed RTW after surgery.

Effect of age on clinical and radiographic outcomes and adverse events following 1-level lumbar arthroplasty after a minimum 2-year follow-up

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard D. Guyer ◽  
Fred H. Geisler ◽  
Scott L. Blumenthal ◽  
Paul C. McAfee ◽  
Bradford B. Mullin
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Similar Clinical Outcome ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Vas Scores ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Object Lumbar arthroplasty is approved in the US for the treatment of degenerative disc disease at 1 level in skeletally mature patients. However, a bias toward older patients (> 45 years of age) who are otherwise indicated for the procedure may exist. In this study, the clinical outcomes of patients from the Charité Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) study were analyzed on the basis of patient age. Methods There were 276 patients enrolled in the IDE study of the Charité Artificial Disc who underwent 1-level arthroplasty at either L4–5 or L5–S1, including 71 nonrandomized and 205 randomized individuals. Patient data were analyzed based on age (18–45 years [217 patients, Group 1] compared with 46–60 years [59 patients, Group 2]). Statistical analyses were performed based on 2-year postoperative improvements in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and visual analog scale (VAS) scores (clinical outcome), as well as range of motion (radiographic outcome), and adverse events. Results There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to level implanted, operative time, blood loss, changes in ODI and VAS scores or any of the 8 component scores of the SF-36, compared with baseline, at all time points throughout the 24-month follow-up period (p > 0.10). Patient satisfaction was equivalent at 24 months, with 87% satisfaction in Group 1 and 85% satisfaction in Group 2 (no statistical difference). In addition, no significant differences were identified with respect to adverse events including approach related, neurological, technique related, or reoperation. Conclusions Although patients > 45 years of age may have comorbidities or contraindications for arthroplasty for a number of reasons, particularly osteopenia, this analysis demonstrates that patients who are indicated for 1-level arthroplasty experience similar clinical outcome, satisfaction, or adverse events compared with their younger counterparts.

scholarly journals Decompression of lumbar canal stenosis with a bilateral interlaminar versus classic laminectomy technique: a prospective randomized study

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. E3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohamed A. R. Soliman ◽  
Ahmed Ali
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Patient Comfort ◽  
Leg Pain ◽  
Neurogenic Claudication ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Lumbar Canal Stenosis ◽  
Canal Stenosis ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

OBJECTIVEThe aim of this study was to compare the radiological and clinical results of bilateral interlaminar canal decompression and classic laminectomy in lumbar canal stenosis (LCS).METHODSTwo hundred eighteen patients with LCS were randomized to surgical treatment with classic laminectomy (group 1) or bilateral interlaminar canal decompression (group 2). Low-back and leg pain were evaluated according to the visual analog scale (VAS) both preoperatively and postoperatively. Disability was evaluated according to the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) preoperatively and at 1 month, 1 year, and 3 years postoperatively. Neurogenic claudication was evaluated using the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The two treatment groups were compared in terms of neurogenic claudication, estimated blood loss (EBL), and intra- and postoperative complications.RESULTSPostoperative low-back and leg pain declined as compared to the preoperative pain. Both groups had significant improvement in VAS, ODI, and ZCQ scores, and the improvements in ODI and back pain VAS scores were significantly better in group 2. The average EBL was 140 ml in group 2 compared to 260 ml in group 1. Nine patients in the laminectomy group developed postoperative instability requiring fusion compared to only 4 cases in the interlaminar group (p = 0.15). Complications frequency did not show any statistical significance between the two groups.CONCLUSIONSBilateral interlaminar decompression is an effective method that provides sufficient canal decompression with decreased instability in cases of LCS and increases patient comfort in the postoperative period.

CD34 immunostain increases sensitivity of the diagnosis of fetal vascular malperfusion in placentas from ex-utero intrapartum treatment

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerzy Stanek
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Treatment Procedure ◽  
Fetal Survival ◽  
Ex Utero Intrapartum Treatment ◽  
Life Threatening ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Cd34 Immunostain ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Diaphragmatic Hernias ◽  
Group 1

AbstractShort CommunicationsEXIT (ex-utero intrapartum treatment) procedure is a fetal survival-increasing modification of cesarean section. Previously we found an increase incidence of fetal vascular malperfusion (FVM) in placentas from EXIT procedures which indicates the underlying stasis of fetal blood flow in such cases. This retrospective analysis analyzes the impact of the recently introduced CD34 immunostain for the FVM diagnosis in placentas from EXIT procedures.Objectives and MethodsA total of 105 placentas from EXIT procedures (48 to airway, 43 to ECMO and 14 to resection) were studied. In 73 older cases, the placental histological diagnosis of segmental FVM was made on H&E stained placental sections only (segmental villous avascularity) (Group 1), while in 32 most recent cases, the CD34 component of a double E-cadherin/CD34 immunostain slides was also routinely used to detect the early FVM (endothelial fragmentation, villous hypovascularity) (Group 2). 23 clinical and 47 independent placental phenotypes were compared by χ2 or ANOVA, where appropriate.ResultsThere was no statistical significance between the groups in rates of segmental villous avascularity (29 vs. 34%), but performing CD34 immunostain resulted in adding and/or upgrading 12 more cases of segmental FVM in Group 2, thus increasing the sensitivity of placental examination for FVM by 37%. There were no other statistically significantly differences in clinical (except for congenital diaphragmatic hernias statistically significantly more common in Group 2, 34 vs 56%, p=0.03) and placental phenotypes, proving the otherwise comparability of the groups.ConclusionsThe use of CD34 immunostain increases the sensitivity of placental examination for FVM by 1/3, which may improve the neonatal management by revealing the increased likelihood of the potentially life-threatening neonatal complications.

scholarly journals POS0888 EPIDEMIOLOGICAL AND CLINICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ANTI-MDA5 PHENOTYPES: DATA FROM A LARGE COHORT (MEDRA5) STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 700.1-700
Author(s):  
E. Trallero-Araguás ◽  
F. Romero ◽  
I. Castellví ◽  
V. Ortiz-Santamaria ◽  
S. Castañeda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Internal Medicine ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Disease Onset ◽  
Amyopathic Dermatomyositis ◽  
Clinically Amyopathic Dermatomyositis ◽  
San Sebastian ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Hospital General ◽  
Group 1

Background:Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies are a heterogenous group of systemic autoimmune diseases. Several phenotypes have been linked to specific autoantibodies. Clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis with rapidly progressive interstitial lung disease, the most severe form of ILD, is associated with the anti-MDA5 antibodies. However not all the patients with dermatomyositis and anti-MDA5 positive antibodies develop this severe condition.Objectives:We aim to define different phenotypes from a large cohort of patients diagnosed with dermatomyositis who were positive to anti-MDA5 antibodies.Methods:We retrospective analyzed the clinical and immunological data of 90 anti-MDA5 patients [50 female, 55.6%, mean (SD) age at diagnosis 47 (15.4) yrs.] with dermatomyositis recruited from a multicenter register in Spain (MEDRA5) including 30 hospitals. All the patients fulfill de International Myositis Classification Criteria (EULAR/ACR) for dermatomyositis (score >90%). Anti-MDA5 were detected by means of commercial immunoblot (EUROIMMUN©). The chi-square test was used to assess the relationships between qualitative variables. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used to compared medians between groups.Results:Sixty-six patients (73.3%) were diagnosed with clinically amyopathic dermatomyositis. Three different phenotypes linked with the anti-MDA5 antibody were identified. Group 1: patients with rapidly-ILD phenotype (28 patients, 31.1%), group 2: antisynthetase-like phenotype (23 patients, 25.5%), and group 3: non-ILD phenotype (39 patients, 43.3%). Clinical and immunological comparison between the groups disclosed that age at disease onset was higher (median, IQR) in patients from group 1 [53 (43-60)] vs. group 2 [46 (40-56)] or group 3 [42(41-51)] (p=0.01); disease onset was more frequent in spring in patients from group 1 (46.5%) than in the rest of the groups (21.7% and 28.9%) (p<0.01). Cancer was detected in 7 patients, only associated with myositis in 3 cases (3 years interval between cancer and dermatomyositis) without significant differences between phenotypes. Vasculitis (one case ANCA positive) was detected in 9 cases (6 limited to skin, 1 renal and 1 intestinal), 6 of them in the group 3 (statistical significance, in comparison with group 1 and 2, p<0.01). Mortality rate was higher in group 1 (51.9%, 16 out of 17 due to refractory respiratory failure) vs group 2 (12.5%) or 3 (0%) (p<0.001). Anti Ro52 positivity was more frequent in group 1 (65.4%) vs. group 2 (25%) or 3 (35.5%) (p<0.017), although it did not reach statistical significance in terms of mortality (p=0.173) or patients admitted in the intensive care unit (p=0.173). Mechanic hands were more frequent in group 2 (40.6%) than in groups 1 (25%) and 3 (34.4%) (p=0.05). Fever was significantly most frequent in group 1(52.6%) than in group 2 (21.1%) and 3 (26.3%) (p=0.001). Other clinical or immunological features such as arthritis, myositis, or the number of characteristic skin lesions among others were not more frequent in one group or another.Conclusion:Three different phenotypes of patients positive to anti-MDA5 were identified. The presence or not of ILD, or the different type (rapidly progressive or not) of ILD were the main feature that allow to differentiate these phenotypes, which are relevant in clinical practice.References:[1]Allenbach Y, Uzunhan Y, Toquet S, et al; French Myositis Network. Different phenotypes in dermatomyositis associated with anti-MDA5 antibody: Study of 121 cases. Neurology. 2020;95: e70-e78.Acknowledgements:List of contributors of MEDRA5 group: Aguilar-García J (Internal Medicine, Hospital Costa del Sol, Marbella), Carrión-Barberá I (Rheumatology, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona), Cobo-Ibañez T (Rheumatology, Hospital Infanta Sofía, San Sebastián de los Reyes), de Escalante-Yangüela B (Internal Medicine, Hospital Clínico Lozano Blesa, Zaragoza), Fonseca-Aizpuru EM (Internal Medicine, Hospital de Cabueñes, Gijón), González-Cubillo L (Intensive Medicine, Hospital Universitario de Cruces, Barakaldo), González-Gay MA (Rheumatology, Hospital Marqués de Valdecilla, Santander), Prieto-González S (Internal Medicine, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona), Ruiz-Román A (Rheumatology, Hospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío, Sevilla), Calero-Paniagua I (Internal Medicine, Hospital Virgen de la Luz, Cuenca), Callejas-Rubio JL (Internal Medicine, Hospital Clínico San Cecilio, Granada), Gil-Vila A (Internal Medicine, Hospital Vall d’Hebron, Barcelona), de Miguel-Campo B (Internal Medicine, Hospital Doce de Octubre, Madrid), García-Sevilla R (Pneumology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante), Iriarte-Fuster A (Internal Medicine, Hospital de Bellvitge, Hospitalet de Llobregat), Jovani-Casano V (Rheumatology, Hospital General Universitario de Alicante, Alicante), Lozano-Rivas N (Rheumatology, Hospital Virgen de la Arritxaca, Murcia), Martín-Gascón M (Internal Medicine, Hospital Morales Meseguer, Murcia), Martinez-González O (Rheumatology, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca, Salamanca), Monteagudo-Jiménez M (Internal Medicine, Hospital Parc Taulí, Sabadell), Mora-Ortega GM (Pneumology, Hospital Universitario Infanta Sofía, San Sebastián de los Reyes), Moral-Moral Pedro (Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitari i Politecnic La Fe, Valencia), Pérez-De Pedro I (Interna Medicine, Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, Málaga), Picazo-Talavera MR (Rheumatology, Hospital del Sureste, Madrid), Rubio-Rivas M (Internal Medicine, Hospital de Bellvitge, Hospitalet de Llobregat)Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document