4.3 Article

An analysis of joint replacement in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

Journal

LUPUS
Volume 18, Issue 14, Pages 1298-1302

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0961203309345795

Keywords

avascular necrosis; rheumatoid arthritis; systemic lupus erythematosus; total joint replacement

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A small but important group of patients in our lupus cohort has needed total joint replacement (TJR). Arthritis was identified in 94% of our lupus patients. We have determined how many of our patients needed TJR, explored the risk factors for this procedure in patients with SLE and reviewed the outcome for these patients. Records of the cohort of patients with SLE who have attended our lupus clinic at University College of London Hospital/Middlesex from 1978 to 2008 were reviewed and patients who underwent TJR were identified. We recorded demographic data, other major systemic manifestations of SLE, autoantibody profile, previous use of steroids, other major systemic illnesses, smoking and alcohol habits. Nineteen patients with SLE from our cohort of 500 were found to have at least one TJR. Avascular necrosis (AVN) or concomitant rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was present in the majority of these patients. In contrast, age at disease onset, the presence of anti-cardiolipin antibodies, Raynaud's phenomenon and smoking habits were not found to be contributing factors for the need to replace joints. Four of our 19 patients (21.1%) had complications of the joint replacement: two of them had infections of the replaced joint, one had a large haematoma immediately after the surgery requiring surgical evacuation and the other had a deep vein thrombosis. None of the patients so far has required joint re-replacement. In conclusion, 4% of SLE patients in our cohort have one or more joints replaced, the majority because of AVN or RA. Lupus (2009) 18, 1298-1302.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available