4.3 Review

Differentiating between signs of intra-articular joint bleeding and chronic arthropathy in haemophilia: a narrative review of the literature

Journal

HAEMOPHILIA
Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 289-296

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/hae.12667

Keywords

arthropathy; diagnosis; haemarthrosis; haemophilia; symptoms

Categories

Funding

  1. Novo Nordisk

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: Elderly patients with haemophilia (PWH) suffer from both haemarthrosis and haemophilic arthropathy (HA). Diagnosis of haemarthrosis in PWH is currently based on clinical presentation. No diagnostic protocols or validated criteria are available to identify haemarthrosis or to differentiate haemarthrosis from HA. Aim: The aim of this study is to identify symptoms and signs that can be used to differentiate haemarthrosis from HA. Methods: A narrative literature review was performed on symptoms associated with haemarthrosis and symptoms associated with HA. Additionally, literature on the diagnosis of haemarthrosis in patients without haemophilia, imaging techniques and biomarkers was searched. Results: This review shows that there is no consensus about the symptoms associated with haemarthrosis and that there is limited literature about the symptoms associated with HA. Additionally, symptoms associated with haemarthrosis partly overlap with symptoms of HA, particularly those symptoms associated with flare-ups of HA. Due to the overlap in symptoms differentiating between these conditions is complex. Furthermore, differentiating based on imaging techniques or biomarkers causes practical difficulties. Conclusion: Despite the overlap in symptoms, differentiating between joint bleeds and flare-ups of HA based on clinical presentation still seems the most convenient and practical solution. Further research is necessary to identify specific symptoms that can be used to differentiate between the two conditions.

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