London Bridge Hospital

About: London Bridge Hospital is a healthcare organization based out in London, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Antiphospholipid syndrome & Systemic lupus erythematosus. The organization has 107 authors who have published 122 publications receiving 4523 citations.

The Euro-Phospholipid project: epidemiology of the antiphospholipid syndrome in Europe.

Abstract: The Euro-Phospholipid project started in 1999 with a multicentre, consecutive and prospective design. A total cohort of 1000 patients with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), derived from 13 countries (Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and United Kingdom), has been followed since then. This project allowed the identification of the prevalence and characteristics of the main clinical and immunological manifestations at the onset and during the evolution of APS and demonstrated that it is possible to recognize more homogeneous subsets of clinical significance. Patients with APS associated with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) had more episodes of arthritis, livedo reticularis and more frequently exhibited thrombocytopenia and leucopenia. Female patients had more episodes of arthritis and livedo reticularis - both connected with the higher prevalence of migraine and SLE-related APS in women, while male patients had more myocardial infarction, epilepsy and lower limb arterial thrombosis. Childhood onset patients presented more episodes of chorea and jugular vein thrombosis, whereas older onset patients were more frequently male and had more strokes and angina pectoris, but less frequently livedo reticularis.

The Euro-lupus project: epidemiology of systemic lupus erythematosus in Europe.

Abstract: The Euro-lupus project provides updated information on the epidemiologic characteristics of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) at the change of the millennium and defines several clinical and immunological prognostic factors. The Euro-lupus cohort is composed of 1000 patients with SLE who have been followed prospectively since 1991. Among other findings, this project has shown that a) the age at onset of the disease, the gender and the autoantibody pattern, among other factors, modify the disease expression and define some specific SLE subsets; b) most of the SLE inflammatory manifestations are less common after long-term evolution of the disease, thus probably reflecting the effect of therapy as well as the progressive remission of the disease in many patients and c) a more prominent role of thrombotic events is becoming evident affecting both morbidity and mortality in SLE.

European consensus statement on the terminology used in the management of lupus glomerulonephritis

Abstract: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a complex, multisystem autoimmune disorder, which often involves referral to multiple medical specialists. Lupus nephritis (LN) occurs in ~35% of adults with SLE and predicts poor survival. There is currently no consensus on how to manage patients with SLE or LN across specialties and across different European countries. The Lupus Nephritis Terminology Advisory Group was formed to address this issue as it impacts upon LN treatment. It has developed consensus statements based on opinions from expert panel meetings with nephrologists, nephropathologists, rheumatologists, clinical immunologists and internal medicine specialists from many European countries, after reviewing current guidelines from the European League Against Rheumatism, the American College of Rheumatology and the participants' experience. In this article, we report consensus statements that were developed in six important areas: classification of patients with LN, how classification affects the selection of treatment options and definitions of induction, response, flare and maintenance. We have also proposed a consensus for the terminology involved in the management of LN that is consistent with clinical opinion gathered from multidisciplinary expert meetings and with existing guidelines. We believe this consensus approach provides agreed expert opinion to clinicians and will form the basis for optimising LN treatment.

Treatment for thoracic outlet syndrome

Abstract: Background Thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) is one of the most controversial clinical entities in medicine. Despite many reports of operative and non-operative interventions, rigorous scientific investigation of this syndrome leading to evidence based management is lacking. Objectives To evaluate the beneficial and adverse effects of the available operative and non-operative interventions for the treatment of thoracic outlet syndrome. Search strategy We searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Trials Specialized Register (July 2009), The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2009), MEDLINE (January 1966 to June 2009), EMBASE (January 1980 to June 2009), CINAHL (January 1981 to June 2009), AMED (January 1985 to June 2009) and reference lists of articles. Selection criteria We selected randomized or quasi-randomized studies in any language of participants with the diagnosis of any type of thoracic outlet syndrome (neurogenic, vascular, and disputed). The primary outcome measure was change in pain rating on a validated visual analog or similar scale at least six months after the intervention. The secondary outcomes were change in muscle strength and adverse effects of the interventions. Data collection and analysis Four authors independently selected the trials to be included and extracted data. The one included study was rated for risk of bias according to the methods recommended in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Main results This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted criteria for the diagnosis of TOS and had to rely exclusively on the diagnosis of TOS by the investigators in the reviewed studies. There were no studies comparing natural progression with any active intervention. In one trial with a high risk of bias involving 55 participants transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty of the brachial plexus. There were no adverse effects in either group. Authors conclusions This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of TOS. There was very low quality evidence that transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty but no randomized evidence that either is better than no treatment. There is no randomized evidence to support the use of other currently used treatments. There is a need for an agreed definition for the diagnosis of TOS, especially the disputed form, agreed outcome measures and high quality randomized trials that compare the outcome of interventions with no treatment and with each other.