Efficacy of a fixed combination of palmitoylethanolamide and acetyl-l-carnitine (PEA+ALC FC) in the treatment of neuropathies secondary to rheumatic diseases.

BACKGROUND: The neurologic complications of rheumatic diseases (RDs) are highly variable, and their manifestations are linked to the pathogenesis and clinical phenotype of the specific RDs. In rheumatoid arthritis, for example, the peripheral nervous system is most commonly involved and mononeuritis multiplex, nerve entrapment and vasculitic sensorimotor neuropathies are not uncommon. Often the therapy for these disorders is not easy and is characterized by the use of different drugs. Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) has been tested in a wide variety of animal models and has been evaluated in several clinical studies for nerve compression syndromes, demonstrating that PEA acts as an effective and safe analgesic compound. Acetyl-L-Carnitine (ALC) has also been shown to be an effective and safe treatment in painful peripheral neuropathy. In the last years the synergistic effect between PEA and ALC has been demonstrated. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of supplementation of standard therapy (STh) with Kalanit® (Chiesi Italia Spa; Parma, Italy) in patients with peripheral neuropathy secondary to RDs. METHODS: Patients at the time of enrollment were affected by RDs with neuropathy from <12 months, documented by electromyography. The analyzed patients were treated with the STh chosen according to their rheumatic disease (RA or SpA) and for their neuropathy (e.g. analgesic, NSAIDs, pregabalin or gabapentin) as per clinical practice. The sample was divided into 2 groups: group 1, patients treated with STh, to which a fixed combination of PEA (600 mg) + ALC (500 mg) (Kalanit®) was added twice a day for 2 weeks and then once a day for 6 months; group 2, patients treated only with STh. Each patient underwent clinical evaluations and questionnaires were administered in order to evaluate their neuropathy and the efficacy of the therapy. RESULTS: In group 1, 18 patients suffering from sciatic pain, 16 patients from carpal tunnel syndrome and 8 patients with peripheral neuropathy of the lower limbs were included and PEA + ALC FC was added to STh. These patients were compared with patients from group 2, who had the same pathology and demographic characteristics: 20 patients with sciatic pain, 15 with carpal tunnel syndrome and 5 with peripheral neuropathy of the lower limbs, respectively; this group was treated with STh only. Patients treated with PEA + ALC FC had a significant improvement in pain VAS compared to patients treated with group 2 in all the diseases analyzed (P value: sciatic pain 0.032, carpal tunnel syndrome 0.025 and lower limbs neuropathy 0.041). Patients in group 1 showed a significant improvement compared to patients treated in group 2 also from a specific score. Specifically, LBP-IQ showed significant improvement in group one (P value: 0.031), as did CHFD (P=0.011) and NPQ (P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: The synergistic effect of PEA and ALC seems to have a further advantage in the treatment of this type of pathology, including the anti-inflammatory effect but also in terms of therapy optimization and therefore of better adherence to treatments. Our study shows that it is important to identify the type of pain to follow an accurate diagnostic algorithm, considering the clinical characteristics of the patient and carefully evaluate the indication, preferring a multimodal approach.

Rheumatologic manifestations of hepatitis C in the era of direct-acting antiviral agents.

Beyond the classic hepatic complications, hepatitis C (HCV) infection is considered as a systemic disease, since extrahepatic manifestations become clinically evident in 40% to 70% of the patients and it can frequently include rheumatic ones. Furthermore, HCV can promote the production of several autoantibodies, thus complicating the differential diagnosis between primitive and HCV-related rheumatic disorders. The recent development of direct-acting antivirals (DAA) against HCV has revolutionized the field, reducing the damage stemming from systemic inflammatory phenomena and persistent immune activation associated with continuous HCV replication. Our review focuses on the main rheumatologic manifestations associated with chronic HCV infection as well as the impact of DAA interferon-free treatments on such extrahepatic clinical involvement.

The clinical presentation in adulthood of juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) is a chronic systemic inflammatory disease, which affects children and adolescents, characterized by significant differences when compared to inflammatory rheumatisms in adulthood. Today, in a panorama enriched in the last decades with great improvements in the diagnostic and therapeutic field, a far from negligible portion and an increasing number of patients with JIA require the continuation of treatments in adulthood. This specific population of patients, given the high incidence of extra-articular manifestations, residual irreversible disabilities, comorbidities related to an inflammatory process and extended immunosuppressive treatments during the age of development, requires precise attentions in the follow-up and a multidisciplinary approach characterized by different clinical, psychological and social aspects.

Ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection: efficacy of hyaluronic acid compared to glucocorticoid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease which causes pain and functional impairment in adults over 50 years old with consequent important disability. Unfortunately, there is no definitive cure for OA, thus the approach is characterized by multiple treatments that can manage its symptoms. Even though data from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses indicate that intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) offers the best benefit/risk balance among the various pharmacologic treatments to improve OA-related knee pain, there is a lack of agreement among national and international guidelines about such uses of IAHA for the medical management of symptomatic knee OA. To minimize confounding factors and biases, the aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of the different weight and concentration of IAHA treatment in patients suffering from knee OA comparing to glucocorticoids (GC) joint injections. Furthermore, to make the procedure more accurate and assessment more objective, we use ultrasonography (US) with power Doppler (PWD) to help us differentiate between active and inactive inflammation within joints and periarticular soft tissues. METHODS: We performed a retrospective evaluation of a cohort of patients with knee OA, diagnosed according to the ACR criteria, treated by US-guided joint injection of HA and GC. The patients were catalogued according to the type of treatment they underwent: group A, patients treated with HA (1.5%) >1500 kDa (three US-guided knee injections one week apart); group B, patients treated with HA (2%) 800-1200 kDa (three US-guided knee injections one week apart); group C, patients treated with glucocorticoids (three US-guided knee injections of triamcinolone acetate 40 mg one week apart). All patients were monitored for 6 months, evaluating: subjective pain using a 10-cm Visual Analogue Scale; pain, stiffness, and functionality using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC); the concomitant intake of anti-inflammatory and/or analgesic drugs through a questionnaire; and US results by grey scale and PWD. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients affected by knee OA were evaluated (women 72.3%) with a mean age of 69.3±4.1 years. All the subjects analyzed showed a pain reduction at 6 months after treatment (group A: -39.5; group B: -36.9; group C: -30.8). The difference between the three groups was statistically significant (Kruskall-Wallis P=0.001) and in particular between group A and group C (P=0.000) and between group B and group C (P=0.005), but not between A and B (P=0.258). WOMAC was statistically significantly improved from baseline in all groups examined (group A: -11.9; group B: -14.9; group C: -11.2). The PWD score showed a statistically significant improvement in group B (-0.64) even after 6 months (P=0.004). All patients in the different groups showed a statistically significant reduction of concomitant therapy compared to baseline with respect to paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/COX2 therapy, while only group B showed a statistically significant reduction for opioids. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the efficacy of OA treatment with medium molecular weight HA in favor of the higher concentration of HA that may affect the reduction of pro-inflammatory mediators. Furthermore, US monitoring allowed to evaluate aspects related to synovial involvement, which cannot be appreciated with standard imaging.