Explore the vast range of titles available.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESOsteoarthritis (OA) of the knee affects the aging population and has an associated influence on the health care system. Rigorous studies evaluating radiofrequency ablation for OA-related knee pain are lacking. This study compared long-term clinical safety and effectiveness of cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) with intra-articular steroid (IAS) injection in managing OA-related knee pain. METHODSThis is a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial with 151 subjects with chronic (≥6 months) knee pain that was unresponsive to conservative modalities. Knee pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]), Oxford Knee Score, overall treatment effect (Global Perceived Effect), analgesic drug use, and adverse events were compared between CRFA and IAS cohorts at 1, 3, and 6 months after intervention. RESULTSThere were no differences in demographics between study groups. At 6 months, the CRFA group had more favorable outcomes in NRSpain reduction 50% or greater74.1% versus 16.2%, P < 0.0001 (25.9% and 83.8% of these study cohorts, respectively, were nonresponders). Mean NRS score reduction was 4.9 ± 2.4 versus 1.3 ± 2.2, P < 0.0001; mean Oxford Knee Score was 35.7 ± 8.8 vs 22.4 ± 8.5, P < 0.0001; mean improved Global Perceived Effect was 91.4% vs 23.9%, P < 0.0001; and mean change in nonopioid medication use was CRFA > IAS (P = 0.02). There were no procedure-related serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONSThis study demonstrates that CRFA is an effective long-term therapeutic option for managing pain and improving physical function and quality of life for patients with painful knee OA when compared with IAS injection.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02343003).

A standard glucocorticoid regimen plus rituximab was not superior to standard intravenous cyclophosphamide as induction therapy in patients with newly diagnosed antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis and renal involvement. Rates of sustained remission were high in both groups. A standard glucocorticoid regimen plus rituximab was not superior to standard intravenous cyclophosphamide as induction therapy in patients with newly diagnosed antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)-associated vasculitis and renal involvement. Antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA)–associated vasculitis, including Wegener's granulomatosis and microscopic polyangiitis, is a multisystem autoimmune syndrome characterized by vasculitis predominantly affecting microscopic vessels and circulating autoantibodies to neutrophil cytoplasmic antigens. Renal involvement occurs in 70% of affected patients and is manifested as rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis with pauci-immune necrotizing, crescentic glomerulonephritis on biopsy. The current standard of care for ANCA-associated vasculitis is cyclophosphamide with high-dose glucocorticoids 1–4 ; such regimens are effective in 70 to 90% of patients. However, cyclophosphamide is associated with leukopenia, severe infections, cancer, and ovarian failure. 5 Mortality at 1 year exceeds 15%; infection and active vasculitis are . . .

In this randomized, controlled trial involving infants undergoing surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass, prophylactic use of methylprednisolone did not significantly reduce the likelihood of a worse outcome.

Patients with antineutrophil cytoplasm antibody–associated vasculitis (AAV) requiring dialysis at diagnosis are at risk for developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD) or dying. Short-term results of a trial comparing plasma exchange (PLEX) to intravenous methylprednisolone (IV MeP) suggested PLEX improved renal recovery. Here we conducted long-term follow-up to see if this trend persisted. A total of 137 patients with newly diagnosed AAV and a serum creatinine over 500μmol/l or requiring dialysis were randomized such that 69 received PLEX and 68 received IV MeP in addition to cyclophosphamide and oral glucocorticoids. The patients were followed for a median of 3.95 years. In each group there were 35 deaths, while 23 PLEX and 33 IV MeP patients developed ESRD. The hazard ratio for PLEX compared to IV MeP for the primary composite outcome of death or ESRD was 0.81 (95% confidence interval 0.53–1.23). The hazard ratio for all-cause death was 1.08 with a subhazard ratio for ESRD of 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.40–1.05). Thus, although short-term results with PLEX are encouraging, the long-term benefits remain unclear. Further research is required to determine the role of PLEX in AAV. Given the poor outcomes of patients with severe AAV, improved treatment is urgently needed.

For decades, physicians have administered corticosteroids in the perioperative period to infants undergoing heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) to reduce the postoperative systemic inflammatory response to CPB. Some question this practice because steroid efficacy has not been conclusively demonstrated and because some studies indicate that steroids could have harmful effects. STRESS is a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial designed to evaluate safety and efficacy of perioperative steroids in infants (age < 1 year) undergoing heart surgery with CPB. Participants (planned enrollment = 1,200) are randomized 1:1 to methylprednisolone (30 mg/kg) administered into the CPB pump prime versus placebo. The trial is nested within the existing infrastructure of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database. The primary outcome is a global rank score of mortality, major morbidities, and hospital length of stay with components ranked commensurate with their clinical severity. Secondary outcomes include several measures of major postoperative morbidity, postoperative hospital length of stay, and steroid-related safety outcomes including prevalence of hyperglycemia and postoperative infectious complications. STRESS will be one of the largest trials ever conducted in children with heart disease and will answer a decades-old question related to safety and efficacy of perioperative steroids in infants undergoing heart surgery with CPB. The pragmatic “trial within a registry” design may provide a mechanism for conducting low-cost, high-efficiency trials in a heretofore-understudied patient population.

Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) and corticosteroids are effective as initial treatment in patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy (CIDP), but little is known about the comparative risk–benefit profile of their long-term use in this disease. We compared the efficacy and tolerability of 6-month therapy with IVIg versus that with intravenous methylprednisolone. We did a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel-group study in patients with CIDP. We assessed efficacy and tolerability of IVIg (0·5 g/kg per day for 4 consecutive days) and intravenous methylprednisolone (0·5 g in 250 mL sodium chloride solution per day for 4 consecutive days) given every month for 6 months. Eligible patients had to be in an active or stationary phase of the disease. Allocation to treatment was centrally managed with a computer-generated, 1:1 randomisation scheme with a sequential block size of four. All patients and assessors were unaware of the treatment assignment. After therapy discontinuation, patients were followed up for 6 months to assess relapses. The primary outcome was the difference in the number of patients discontinuing either therapy owing to inefficacy or intolerance. Secondary endpoints included the difference in the proportion of patients experiencing adverse events or worsening after therapy discontinuation. This study is registered with EUDRACT, number 2005-001136-76. 45 patients (24 IVIg, 21 intravenous methylprednisolone) completed the study; one was excluded for inappropriate inclusion. More patients stopped methylprednisolone (11 [52%] of 21) than IVIg (three [13%] of 24; relative risk 0·54, 95% CI 0·34–0·87; p=0·0085). When adjusted for sex, age, disease duration, comorbidity, modified Rankin scale and ONLS scores at enrolment, and previous treatment with IVIg and steroids, the difference between the two groups remained significant (odds ratio 7·7, 95% CI 1·7–33·9; p=0·0070). Reasons for discontinuation were lack of efficacy (eight in the methylprednisolone group vs three in the IVIg group), adverse events (one in the methylprednisolone group), or voluntary withdrawal (two in the methylprednisolone group). Two patients on IVIg died during follow-up after the 6-month assessment. The proportion of patients with adverse events did not differ between the intravenous methylprednisolone group (14 [67%] of 21) and the IVIg group (11 [46%] of 24; p=0·1606). After therapy discontinuation, more patients on IVIg worsened and required further therapy (eight [38%] of 21) than did those on methylprednisolone (none of ten; p=0·0317). Treatment of CIDP with IVIg for 6 months was less frequently discontinued because of inefficacy, adverse events, or intolerance than was treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone. The longer-term effects of these treatments on the course of CIDP need to be addressed in future studies. Kedrion.

The use of systemic corticosteroids in the treatment of the acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is controversial. In this study, 180 patients were treated with methylprednisolone sodium succinate or placebo within 7 to 28 days after the onset of ARDS. There was no significant difference in mortality at 60 or 180 days; thus, treatment of ARDS with systemic corticosteroids is not recommended. Treatment with a systemic corticosteroid or placebo within 7 to 28 days after the onset of ARDS resulted in no significant difference in mortality at 60 or 180 days. Treatment of ARDS with systemic corticosteroids is not recommended. The acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is caused by an inflammatory injury to the lung that is characterized clinically by acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. 1 Pathologically complex changes in the lung are manifested by an early, exudative phase followed by proliferative and fibrotic phases. 2 , 3 Persistent ARDS is characterized by ongoing inflammation, 4 , 5 parenchymal-cell proliferation, 3 and disordered deposition of collagen, 3 , 6 – 8 all of which may be responsive to corticosteroid therapy. Four trials of high-dose, short-course corticosteroids for early-phase ARDS failed to show improvements in survival. 9 – 12 Several reports from small case series suggested a benefit of moderate-dose corticosteroids in patients . . .

Background Intra-articular injection is effective for osteoarthritis, but the best single injection strategy is not known, nor are there established predictors of response. The objectives of this study were to assess and predict response to a single ultrasound-guided injection in moderate to severe hip osteoarthritis. Methods 77 hip osteoarthritis patients entered a prospective, randomised controlled trial, randomised to one of four groups: standard care (no injection); normal saline; non-animal stabilised hyaluronic acid (durolane) or methylprednisolone acetate (depomedrone). Main Outcome Measures Numerical rating scale (NRS 0–10) ‘worst pain’, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) pain/function. Potential predictors of response (including radiographic severity, ultrasound synovitis and baseline symptom severity) were examined using univariate logistic regression analysis and Fisher's exact test. Results NRS pain, WOMAC pain and function improved significantly for the steroid arm alone. Effect sizes at week 1 were striking: NRS pain 1.5, WOMAC pain 1.9 and WOMAC function 1.3. Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials—Osteoarthritis Research Society responder criteria identified 22 responders (intention-to-treat): steroid 14 (74%; number needed to treat, two); saline, four (21%); durolane, two (11%); and no injection, two (10%; χ2 test between groups, p<0.001). Corticosteroid arm response was maintained over 8 weeks (summary measures analysis of variance, p<0.002 for NRS pain). Synovitis was a significant predictor of response at weeks 4 and 8 (p<0.05, Fisher's exact test; week 4 OR 16.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 204). Conclusions Ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections are highly efficacious; furthermore synovitis on ultrasound is a biomarker of response to injection.

Abstract Context Intravenous glucocorticoid (IVGC) is an accessible and affordable treatment for Graves orbitopathy (GO); the 4.5-g protocol is well studied, but many details of treatment protocols need to be clarified. Objective To compare the efficacy and safety of weekly and monthly protocol of IVGC in GO. Methods A prospective, randomized, observer-masked, single-center clinical trial, followed up to week 24, at the third affiliated hospital of Southern Medical University; 58 patients with active and moderate to severe GO, aged 18-60 years old, who had not received relevant treatment were included. The intervention was weekly protocol or monthly protocol of IVGC; both received a cumulative dose of methylprednisolone 4.5 g and had a duration of 12 weeks. The overall effective rate, improvement of quality of life (QOL) and signal intensity ratio (SIR) were measured. Results There was no significant difference in the effective rate between the 2 groups at week 12 and week 24 (86.21% vs 72.41%, P = .195; 86.21% vs 82.61%, P = .441), there was no significant difference in the improvement of clinical activity score, exophthalmos, soft tissue involvement, diplopia, and QOL. At week 24, the mean SIR and maximum SIR of the 2 groups were lower than those before treatment, and there were no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the 2 groups (31.03% vs 27.59%, P = .773). Conclusion The efficacy and safety of the 2 protocols are comparable; the monthly protocol could be used as an alternative to the weekly protocol.

High-dose methylprednisolone pulse therapy and oral high-dose prednisone are two common treatments for pediatric nephrotic syndrome (NS). While both treatments have shown effectiveness for patients with pediatric NS to some extent, a clear comparison of their efficacy and safety remains elusive, posing a challenge for clinicians when devising treatment plans. The study intended to compare the efficacy and safety of high-dose methylprednisolone pulse therapy and conventional oral high-dose prednisone for pediatric patients with NS, to provide more accurate treatment recommendations for clinicians to optimize their treatment plans, improve their QoL, and prevent complications. The research team conducted a randomized controlled trial. The study took place at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University in Quanzhou, China. Participants were 60 patients with pediatric NS who received treatment at the hospital between November 2020 and March 2022. The research team randomly divided participants into two groups, each comprising 30 patients: (1) the intervention group, which received high-dose methylprednisolone pulse therapy, and (2) the conventional group, which received oral high-dose prednisone. The research team measured: (1) clinical efficacy rates, the primary outcome measure; (2) time to symptom relief; (3) laboratory indicators, including blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine (SCr), serum globulin (GLB), and 24-hour urine protein quantification; and (4) incidence of adverse events. Compared to the conventional group, the intervention group's: (1) clinical efficacy rate was significantly higher (P < .05); (2) resolution times for edema (P < .001) and urine protein turning negative (P < .001) were significantly shorter; (3) levels of BUN (P < .001), SCr (P < .001), GLB (P < .001), and 24-hour urine protein quantification (P < .001) were significantly lower; and (4) incidence of adverse reactions was significantly higher (P < .001). High-dose methylprednisolone pulse therapy demonstrated better efficacy in treating pediatric NS patients, showing a shorter time to symptom relief, but it may also entail a higher risk of adverse reactions compared to conventional oral high-dose prednisone. Clinicians should consider the specific circumstances and needs of pediatric patients when selecting a treatment.