MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389243690 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-173700

Heterotopic Ossification in Hemophilia: A Multi-Center Case Series

2023· article· en· W4389243690 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bruno Steiner, Mark A. Krimmel, Eric Y. Chang, Merel A. Timmer, Grace Hernandez, Jeffrey Kallberg, Osman Khan, Lorene Schmaderer, Fred Loeffler, Stacie Akins, Tiffany Kaltenmark, Stacey Cave, Jessica Ovans, Rebecca Kruse‐Jarres

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeterotopic Ossification and Related Conditions
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHemarthrosisMedicineHeterotopic ossificationMyositis ossificansHematomaComplicationSoft tissueSurgeryIncidence (geometry)Physical therapyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONCLUSION Heterotopic Ossification (HO), or Myositis Ossificans Traumatica, is the post-traumatic formation of unwanted abnormal benign lamellar ectopic bone within extra skeletal tissue locations. HO can form in varying sizes and sites in the body and can significantly impair muscle performance, range of motion (ROM), and function. Since the recent adoption of diagnostic musculoskeletal ultrasound (MSKUS) in hemophilia care, providers and physical therapists have deepened their understanding of hemarthropathic and hemarthrosis progression. MSKUS has also aided in detecting soft tissue injuries, muscle hematoma, and resultant HO formation. Despite advances in therapies for hemophilia, HO is emerging as an unforeseen complication of contusion and injury-related muscle bleeding in hemophilia. Its detection is important as delayed or inappropriate rehabilitation may prolong recovery and disability time. This multicenter retrospective case series sought to verify and confirm HO detection and investigate whether specific types and severities of hemophilia are at increased risk of HO. Deidentified data and MSKUS images from 29 cases were collected from 9 Hemophilia Treatment Centers from the USA, the Netherlands, and Canada from 2016 to June 2023. The case series was declared exempt from IRB approval. Diagnostic and evaluative data was compiled in Redcap. Images were reviewed and diagnostically confirmed by an RMSK-certified Doctor of Physical Therapy and a Radiologist. A single clinic subset was compared to the national hemophilia incidence taken from the ATHN dataset 2022. We detected HO formation in 29 patients across 9 HTCs. Trauma-induced HO was observed in all bleeding disorder types and severities. (See Table 1). The patients' ages at the time of the inciting injury ranged from 7-56 years, with a mean age of 22.3 and a median of 16.The study's highest incidence of HO cases occurred in patients with type A hemophilia totaling 22/29 subjects or 74.8% of all cases. Except for one severe A, one severe B and a moderate B, the patients were not on prophylactic hemostatic management at the time of injury. The majority of HO (n=24, 82.8%) occurred in the anterior and lateral compartments of the thigh and hip. There were 5 incidents in the upper extremity (4 in the upper anterior arm, 1 in the hand). 24 cases were due to blunt trauma except for 4 in the psoas at the level of the anterior hip and 1 in the elbow flexors of the upper arm. HO formation was mostly associated with deep muscle bleeds next to the bony cortex (n=24). HO was detected on average at 22.97 days after injury (median 21, range 11 to 60), with most detected with MSKUS (n=24) by the physical therapist (n=22) and physician (n=2) in clinic. At the Washington Center for Bleeding Disorders (WACBD), where strict MSKUS follow-up was possible in 7 patients, HO induction was confirmed at day 23, 26, 18, 11, 14, 20, and 22 for a mean of 19.14 days (SD = 5.24). Our study shows that HO occurs regularly in Hemophilia despite its omission in the recently revised 2020 World Federation of Hemophilia guidelines. Notably, the severity or type did not appear to be the sole determinant of HO formation, as the combined total of mild and moderate hemophilia genotypes was 21 (72.4%). Conversely, though limited by the study's small sample size, 74.8% of the HO incidence was reported in type A hemophilia, which appears to be an overrepresentation when compared to the ATHN dataset 2022 report, which indicates an overall 45.59% type A hemophilia incidence. The increased detection of HO in hemophilia may be explained by the growing use of MSKUS by HTC physicians and physical therapists. MSKUS has the advantages of safety and earlier HO detection than radiography. As shown in Fig. 1, HO bears the sonographic signature of hyperechoic contours and deeper acoustic shadowing. The WACBD conducted a review yielding an HO incidence of 23.68% (9 of 38 contusion events) compared to 9-17% in the non-hemophilia population. Though the single-center report is of limited significance, the suggestion of increased HO risk to hemophilia patients merits further study. This case series acknowledges HO as a complication of deep contusions in people with bleeding disorders, especially those not on hemostatic prophylaxis. Further study is needed to determine HO's incidence and risk in Hemophilia. Hemophilia treatment guidelines must be revised to include this complication.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHeterotopic Ossification and Related ConditionsFrench-language works237,207