Hypermobility of Joints, 4th Edition

Hypermobility of Joints Peter Beighton • Rodney Grahame Howard Bird Hypermobility of Joints Fourth Edition Peter B...

Author: Peter H. Beighton | Rodney Grahame | Howard Bird

259 downloads 1547 Views 3MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Hypermobility of Joints

Peter Beighton • Rodney Grahame Howard Bird

Hypermobility of Joints Fourth Edition

Peter Beighton, OMB, MD, PhD FRCP, FRSSA Department of Human Genetics University of Cape Town Cape Town South Africa

Rodney Grahame, CBE, MD, FRCP, FACP Department of Rheumatolgy University College Hospital London United Kingdom

Howard Bird, MA, MD, FRCP Department of Musculo-Skeletal Medicine University of Leeds Leeds United Kingdom

ISBN 978-1-84882-084-5 4th Edition e-ISBN 978-1-84882-085-2 ISBN 978-1-85233-142-9 3rd Edition ISBN 978-3-540-19564-1 2nd Edition ISBN 978-3-540-12113-8 1st Edition DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2 Springer London Dordrecht Heidelberg New York British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Control Number: 2011939069 © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012 First published 1983 Second edition 1989 Third edition 1999 Fourth edition 2012 Whilst we have made considerable efforts to contact all holders of copyright material contained in this book, we may have failed to locate some of them. Should holders wish to contact the Publisher, we will be happy to come to some arrangement with them. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of licenses issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms should be sent to the publishers. The use of registered names, trademarks, etc., in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. Product liability: The publisher can give no guarantee for information about drug dosage and application thereof contained in this book. In every individual case the respective user must check its accuracy by consulting other pharmaceutical literature. Printed on acid-free paper Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)

Foreword to the Fourth Edition

It is an honour and a pleasure to introduce the fourth edition of this remarkable book on joint hypermobility to the clinical and scientific community. The authors of this book, Peter Beighton, Rodney Graham and Howard Bird are distinguished physicians with a long and solid professional expertise in the clinical and genetic aspects of articular hypermobility. Thanks to this landmark book, the first edition of which dates from 1983, the ‘joint hypermobility syndrome’ became gradually recognized as an important and heterogeneous clinical entity that may bear significant impact on the physical and psychosocial well-being of affected individuals and their families. A major strength of this work is the comprehensive approach of the subject, whereby the authors address all medical aspects of the ‘joint hypermobility syndrome’, the clinical term that refers to the symptomatic status of articular hypermobility. Based on their vast clinical experience and wisdom, they systematically review the diagnostic challenges and management issues and illustrate the important contribution of joint hypermobility to the pathogenesis of rheumatological and orthopaedic manifestations. In addition, this fourth edition elaborates more extensively on the extra-articular manifestations such as autonomic dysfunction, proprioceptive impairment and chronic pain which may significantly increase the morbidity of hypermobility conditions. Not less importantly, the authors highlight the socio-economic and psychological burden that is associated with the chronic pain and physical disabilities that may arise as consequences of the joint hypermobility syndromes, and draw attention to the multidisciplinary approach of medical management that should include a combination of medical, technical, physiotherapeutic strategies and – where necessary – behavioural techniques such as cognitive behavioural therapy. In addition to addressing the diagnostic, nosological and management issues, the authors also respond to the rapidly evolving scientific knowledge on the genetic and molecular basis of joint hypermobility, by including appropriate updates of the chapters on molecular collagen biology and on the expanding list of known heritable disorders in which joint hypermobility is a major clinical manifestation, such as the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. v

vi

Foreword to the Fourth Edition

Last but not least, the final chapter opens a window to future avenues for research by formulating some speculative but challenging topics for further study that will certainly keep the next generation of clinicians and scientists busy not only in trying to resolve unanswered research questions but also in translating their findings to effective therapies for the patients. And, although the authors claim that this is the last edition from their own hand, it is obvious that the hypermobility syndromes will remain a fascinating clinical and scientific field for many decades to come. A. De Paepe, M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Human and Medical Genetics Centre for Medical Genetics, Ghent University Ghent, Belgium

Preface

It is now 28 years since the publication of the first edition of this book in 1983, and updated second and third editions appeared in 1989 and 1999 respectively. It seemed appropriate to once again re-visit this expanding and fascinating area, as urged by the late Professor Eric Bywaters in his foreword to the third edition. We are most grateful to Professor Anne de Paepe for gracing this fourth edition with a new foreword. The format is similar to that of previous monographs with the chapters on assessment, biomechanics and hypermobility in the performing arts and sports all updated. The introduction, the chapters on the molecular basis of hypermobility, illustrative case histories and the heritable hypermobility syndromes have been completely re-written. The clinical chapters have also been re-written, with specific division between articular and extra-articular features. With the expectation that this edition will be the last from our own pens, the innovative Chap. 10 speculates on future avenues for research that might provoke ideas and provide content for a future edition, probably with different editors, a decade hence. The last 10 years have seen significant advances in nosology of heritable hypermobility syndromes and, in particular, in our understanding of the molecular basis of these conditions. The latter informs on the possible pathogenesis of more heterogeneous hypermobility syndromes in the context of our increasing realisation that joints act as a surrogate for clinical features associated with joint hypermobility in other parts of the body. Translational research in the field of hypermobility may lead to real advances in this interesting group of conditions, perhaps paving the way for medical management through manipulation of cytokines connected with growth and eventually even with genetic engineering. Peter Beighton Rodney Grahame Howard Bird

vii

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the following for their contribution: Karl Ernest Kadler, B.Sc. (Hons), Ph.D. and Gillian Anne Wallis, B.Sc. (Hons), M.A., Ph.D. Faculty of Medicine and Human Sciences and Faculty of Life Sciences University of Manchester Michael Smith Building Manchester M13 9PT, United Kingdom

ix

Contents

1 Introduction to Hypermobility .................................................................. 1.1 Historical Background ........................................................................ 1.2 Rheumatological Manifestations ........................................................ 1.3 Extra-Articular Manifestations of Hypermobility .............................. 1.4 Late Effects of Hypermobility ............................................................ 1.5 Measurement of Joint Hypermobility ................................................. 1.6 Syndromic Associations of Joint Hypermobility ................................ 1.7 Nosology of the Hypermobility Syndromes ....................................... References.....................................................................................................

1 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 8

2 Assessment of Hypermobility .................................................................... 2.1 Simple Scoring Systems for Hypermobility ....................................... 2.2 The Brighton Criteria for Hypermobility Syndrome .......................... 2.3 General Principles of More Precise Measurement at Selected Joints................................................................................. 2.4 Back and Spinal Mobility ................................................................... 2.5 Rotation in the Limbs ......................................................................... 2.6 Movement at the Metacarpophalangeal Joint ..................................... 2.7 Joint Proprioception ............................................................................ 2.8 Correlations Between Scoring Systems Used in Assessing Joint Laxity ......................................................................................... 2.9 Variation of Joint Laxity Within Populations ..................................... 2.10 Clinical Applications of Scoring Systems .......................................... 2.11 Joint Hypolaxity.................................................................................. References ....................................................................................................

11 12 14

3 The Molecular Basis of Joint Hypermobility ........................................... 3.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 3.2 The Family of Fibril-Forming Collagens............................................ 3.3 Genes Encoding Type I and V Collagens ........................................... 3.4 Biosynthesis of Type I and V Collagens .............................................

15 17 18 18 19 21 21 22 23 23 27 27 28 30 31 xi

xii

Contents

3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12

Collagen Fibril Assembly ................................................................... EDS and Type I Collagen ................................................................... EDS and ADAMTS2 .......................................................................... EDS and Lysyl Hydroxylase ............................................................... EDS and Type V Collagen .................................................................. EDS and Tenascin-X........................................................................... EDS and Type VI Collagen ................................................................ Relationship Between Elastic Fibre Abnormalities, Marfan Syndrome and EDS ................................................................ 3.13 Conclusions......................................................................................... References ....................................................................................................

32 34 36 38 39 40 41

4 Biomechanics of Hypermobility: Selected Aspects.................................. 4.1 Mechanical Factors in Joint Mobility ................................................. 4.1.1 Relative Contributions of Different Factors............................ 4.1.2 Bony Surfaces ......................................................................... 4.1.3 Collagen .................................................................................. 4.1.4 Neuromuscular Control .......................................................... 4.1.5 Proprioception......................................................................... 4.2 Podiatric Aspects ................................................................................ 4.3 Lubrication and Stiffness .................................................................... 4.3.1 Lubrication of the Synovial Membrane .................................. 4.3.2 Measurement of Stiffness ....................................................... 4.3.3 Artificial Lubricants ................................................................ 4.4 Hypermobility and Osteoarthritis ....................................................... 4.5 Prospects for Surgical Intervention..................................................... References ....................................................................................................

49 50 50 50 51 53 54 55 55 55 56 57 57 60 61

5 Musculoskeletal Features of Hypermobility and Their Management.............................................................................. 5.1 Hypermobility and Hypermobility Syndrome .................................... 5.1.1 Impaired Healing .................................................................... 5.2 Epidemiology of JHS .......................................................................... 5.3 The Clinical Significance of Hypermobility ....................................... 5.4 Musculoskeletal Features.................................................................... 5.5 Hypermobility Syndrome in Children ................................................ 5.5.1 Epidemiology .......................................................................... 5.5.2 Clinical Presentation in Childhood ......................................... 5.6 Hypermobility in Adults ..................................................................... 5.6.1 Prevalence ............................................................................... 5.6.2 Role of Lax Ligaments ........................................................... 5.6.3 Clinical Manifestations ........................................................... 5.6.4 Articular Features ................................................................... 5.6.5 Soft Tissue Lesions .................................................................

65 65 66 66 66 67 67 68 68 73 73 74 74 75 76

42 42 43

Contents

xiii

5.6.6 5.6.7 5.6.8 5.6.9 5.6.10 5.6.11 5.6.12 5.6.13 5.6.14

Chondromalacia Patellae ........................................................ Acute Articular and Peri-articular Traumatic Lesions ............ Chronic Polyarthritis or Monoarticular Arthritis in Adults .... Dislocation of Joints ............................................................... Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction .................................. Premature Osteoarthritis (Other Than TMJ)........................... Spinal Complications .............................................................. Bone Fragility ......................................................................... The Natural History of JHS and the Development of Chronic Pain ...................................................................... 5.7 Management of Articular Complications in the Hypermobility Syndrome ................................................................... 5.7.1 General Management .............................................................. 5.7.2 Specific Management.............................................................. 5.7.3 Rest ......................................................................................... 5.7.4 Local Steroid Injections .......................................................... 5.7.5 Physiotherapy.......................................................................... 5.7.6 General Principles ................................................................... 5.7.7 Passive Mobilisation ............................................................... 5.7.8 Exercise Therapy .................................................................... 5.7.9 Podiatry ................................................................................... 5.7.10 Surgical Intervention............................................................... 5.7.11 Soft Tissue Lesions ................................................................. 5.7.12 Persistent Synovitis ................................................................. 5.7.13 Recurrent Dislocation or Joint Instability ............................... 5.7.14 Cervical or Lumbar Discectomy ............................................. 5.7.15 Surgery of the Foot ................................................................. 5.7.16 Advanced Osteoarthritis ......................................................... 5.7.17 Symptomatic Treatment .......................................................... 5.7.18 Analgesic and Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs ......... 5.7.19 Massage, Mobilisation, Hydrotherapy and Water Immersion .............................................................. 5.7.20 Behavioural Techniques .......................................................... 5.7.21 Acupuncture and Transcutaneous Neural Electrical Stimulation ............................................................. 5.7.22 Denervation Procedures .......................................................... 5.7.23 Support and Information ......................................................... References .................................................................................................... 6 Extra-articular Manifestations of Hypermobility ................................... 6.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 6.1.1 Weakness of Supporting Structures Including Pelvic Floor Insufficiency ....................................................... 6.1.2 Mitral Valve Prolapse..............................................................

76 76 77 77 77 78 78 79 80 81 82 82 82 83 83 84 85 85 87 87 88 88 89 90 91 91 91 92 92 93 93 94 94 95 101 101 102 104

xiv

Contents

6.1.3 Chronic Pain ........................................................................... 6.1.4 Proprioceptive Impairment ..................................................... 6.1.5 Lack of Efficacy of Local Anaesthetics .................................. 6.1.6 Autonomic Dysfunction.......................................................... 6.1.7 Certain Psychiatric Disorders ................................................. 6.1.8 Functional Disorders of the Gastrointestinal Tract ................. 6.2 Straws in the Wind .............................................................................. References ....................................................................................................

105 106 106 106 107 108 109 110

7 Illustrative Case Histories.......................................................................... Case 7.1: A 6-Year-Old Boy with EDS II/III with Grossly Unstable Hind Feet....................................................................... Case 7.2: Pelvic Floor Problems After Childbirth in a Patient with EDS Hypermobility Type..................................................... Case 7.3: A Labral Tear and Autonomic Dysfunction Complicating Hypermobility ....................................................... Case 7.4: Complexities in Diagnosis and Management ............................... Case 7.5: Bony Abnormality and Complications of Subluxation ................ Case 7.6: Arnold–Chiari Malformation and Specialised Physiotherapy ..................................................... Case 7.7: The Performing Artist................................................................... References ....................................................................................................

113

8 Hypermobility in the Performing Arts and Sport ................................... 8.1 Dancers ............................................................................................... 8.1.1 Are Ballet Dancers Born or Made .......................................... 8.1.2 Is Generalised Joint Laxity an Asset or a Liability in Ballet Dancing? .................................................................. 8.1.3 The Prevention of Injury ......................................................... 8.2 Contortionists ...................................................................................... 8.2.1 Historical Background ............................................................ 8.2.2 Nosology and Semantics......................................................... 8.2.3 Training ................................................................................... 8.2.4 Socio-medical Implications .................................................... 8.3 Musicians ............................................................................................ 8.4 Occupational Ills of Instrumentalists .................................................. 8.4.1 Illustrative Case Histories ....................................................... 8.4.2 Repetitive Strain Syndrome .................................................... 8.5 Sport .................................................................................................... 8.5.1 Joint Hypermobility in Selected Sports .................................. 8.5.2 Joint Hypermobility in Cricket ............................................... 8.5.3 Joint Hypermobility in Yoga ................................................... 8.6 Hypermobility and Injury ................................................................... 8.6.1 Training Methods to Improve Joint Flexibility ....................... 8.6.2 Hormonal Aspects .................................................................. References ....................................................................................................

113 115 116 118 119 120 121 123 125 125 125 126 130 131 131 131 132 133 133 135 137 140 140 141 143 143 144 145 146 147

Contents

xv

9 Heritable Hypermobility Syndromes........................................................ 9.1 Ehlers–Danlos Syndrome ................................................................... 9.1.1 General Features ..................................................................... 9.1.2 Nosology ................................................................................. 9.1.3 Diagnostic Considerations ...................................................... 9.1.4 Rare Forms of the EDS ........................................................... 9.1.5 Articular Manifestations ......................................................... 9.1.6 Orthopaedic Management of Articular Problems ................... 9.1.7 Non-articular Complications .................................................. 9.1.8 Resources: Patient Support Groups ........................................ 9.2 Familial Articular Hypermobility Syndromes .................................... 9.2.1 Nosology ................................................................................. 9.2.2 Articular Complications.......................................................... 9.2.3 Other Phenotypic Manifestations ........................................... 9.3 Miscellaneous Joint Laxity Syndromes .............................................. 9.3.1 Joint Laxity in Inherited Connective Tissue Disorders........... 9.3.2 Skeletal Dysplasias with Predominant Joint Laxity ............... 9.3.3 Dwarfing Dysplasias with Variable Joint Laxity .................... 9.3.4 Genetic Syndromes in Which Hypermobility Is Overshadowed by Other Manifestations ............................ References ....................................................................................................

151 151 152 152 155 157 158 163 164 167 167 168 170 171 171 171 175 178

10 Future Avenues for Research..................................................................... 10.1 Arterial Elasticity ................................................................................ 10.2 Cytokine Modulation .......................................................................... 10.3 Candidate Genes ................................................................................. 10.4 Disease Association: True or Artefactual? ......................................... 10.5 Neurological Aspects .......................................................................... 10.6 Podiatry ............................................................................................... 10.7 Hormonal Aspects .............................................................................. 10.8 Joint Hypermobility as a Model of Accelerated Osteoarthritis .......... References ....................................................................................................

191 191 193 194 194 195 196 196 197 197

181 183

Index ................................................................................................................ 199

Chapter 1

Introduction to Hypermobility

1.1

Historical Background

The first clinical description of articular hypermobility is attributed to Hippocrates, who, in the fourth century B.C., described the Scythians, a race of Iranian horseriding nomads inhabiting the region that now forms the Ukraine, as having humidity, flabbiness and atony such that they were unable to use their weapons. Their main problem in warfare was that hyperlaxity of the elbow and shoulder joints prevented them from drawing their bows effectively. Thereafter, the study of joint hypermobility was ignored until the late nineteenth century, when general physicians were energetically defining medical syndromes, some of which included joint hypermobility as an important feature. Notable amongst these were Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS) and Marfan syndrome. The last 50 years have seen the recognition of joint hypermobility, without obvious widespread connective tissue abnormality, as a cause of orthopaedic and rheumatological symptoms. In investigations on a small number of subjects, Finkelstein1 and Key2 noted a familial predisposition to lax joints. Subsequently, orthopaedic surgeons recognised the importance of generalised joint laxity in the pathogenesis of dislocation of a single joint. Congenital dislocation of the hip was investigated by Massie and Howarth3 and Carter and Wilkinson.4 Carter and Sweetnam studied dislocation of the patella5 and dislocation of the patella and shoulder.6 Thereafter, generalised joint laxity was recognised as being more common than had previously been realised. This led to the introduction of simple clinical scoring systems for measuring joint laxity in affected individuals and populations. The first report of an association between joint laxity and rheumatological symptoms emanated from Sutro,7 who described 13 young adults with effusions and pain in hypermobile knees and ankles. Similar clinical observations led Kirk et al.8 to define the ‘hypermobility syndrome’ in a group of patients with joint laxity and musculoskeletal complaints. In the absence of demonstrable systemic rheumatological disease, these authors attributed the symptoms to articular hypermobility. P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_1, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

1

2

1


Wood9 argued from the epidemiological viewpoint that joint hypermobility should be considered as a graded trait rather than as an ‘all or nothing’ syndrome. This is a simplistic concept, and there is general agreement amongst colleagues with clinical experience that the category ‘loose-jointed persons’ contains not only those at the upper end of the normal spectrum but also examples of familial articular hypermobility syndromes (see Chaps. 5 and 6). The decade prior to the publication of the third edition of this book in 1999 brought an increased recognition of the importance of inheritance of joint laxity in the pathogenesis of a variety of rheumatological problems. Biomolecular studies10 were then in their infancy and have advanced considerably since (see Chap. 3). The last decade has drawn increasing attention to the manifestations of the hypermobility syndrome at sites in the body other than the joints. Features such as compression neuropathy and involvement of the cardiovascular system have long been recognised. To this has recently been added involvement of the autonomic nervous system and the bowel. At the joints, understanding of the different factors that contribute to the observed range of joint movement has advanced with attention not just to the structure of collagen and shape of the bony articulating surfaces at each individual joint11 but also to the nuances of neuromuscular control and their links to impairment in joint proprioception, which often occurs. In the field of translational science, hypermobility syndrome, once relatively unfashionable, is providing a fertile area for fundamental studies in many different areas of medicine (see Chap. 10).

1.2

Rheumatological Manifestations

It is apparent that symptoms arising from lax joints may commence at any age. In their classic paper, Kirk et al.8 described 24 patients with generalised joint hypermobility. Their symptoms started between the ages of 3 and 55 years, and threequarters had problems before the age of 15. Females were more frequently affected than males. Symptoms were mainly in the lower limbs, the commonest being pain in the knees and ankles, although joint effusions and muscle cramps also occurred. Supraspinatus and bicipital tendonitis, tennis elbow and painful Achilles tendons were also noted. In a comprehensive review, Ansell12 mentioned that symptoms occur after, rather than during, unaccustomed exercise and diminish in later life, perhaps as the joints stiffen. Although the prognosis is good, other arthropathies must be excluded before making a diagnosis of the ‘hypermobility syndrome’. Thus, in 690 new referrals to a paediatric rheumatology unit, hypermobility was considered to be the final diagnosis in only 12 referrals. Most clinicians now, however, agree that the condition is under-diagnosed,13 and some series from general practice have suggested that hypermobility accounts for up to one-fifth of all musculoskeletal referrals in children but also in adults (J. Dickson 2009, personal communication).

1.4

Late Effects of Hypermobility

3

Some persons consider themselves to be ‘double jointed’ or ‘loose limbed’. There is often a family history of loose joints, and they may be talented at activities such as dance (see Chap. 8). By contrast, symptomatic patients are sometimes labelled as neurotic when medical practitioners who are unaware of the syndrome are unable to explain their symptoms. The hypermobile individual may be especially at risk from chronic back pain, disc prolapse and spondylolisthesis. In addition, the ‘loose back’ syndrome, in which women with hypermobility develop unexplained back pain in the absence of demonstrable disc lesions and spondylitis, is now accepted as being more common than originally supposed.14 The importance of both localised and generalised hypermobility in the pathogenesis of joint pains in children was emphasised by Lewkonia and Ansell.15 In this context, Gedalia et al.16 reported that 21 (66%) of 32 children with episodic arthritis had generalised joint laxity. These issues are discussed in Chap. 6.

1.3

Extra-Articular Manifestations of Hypermobility

The paucity of studies on extra-articular manifestations of familial hypermobility both in children17 and adults11 is being addressed, and this book covers recent developments in areas not previously considered to be relevant to joint hypermobility. To the strong impression that individuals with loose joints are susceptible to varicose veins, herniae and rupture of lung tissue leading to pneumothorax, have been added an increasing interest in mitral valve prolapse (floppy mitral valve syndrome), asthma, collagen structure in the bowel wall and at the sphincters and involvement of the autonomic nervous system affecting both the bowel and the vasculature (see Chap. 6). Dermal hyperelasticity is sometimes present in individuals with hypermobile joints, and various methods for measuring the physical properties of skin have been devised. These techniques have been used in EDS18 and in population studies.19,20

1.4

Late Effects of Hypermobility

Throughout the literature, it is widely held that premature osteoarthritis may be a direct consequence of hypermobility. However, final proof may only come from large and prospective long-term studies with adequate controls. In an investigation of EDS, which exhibits classical hypermobility, 16 out of a group of 22 individuals over the age of 40 had clinical osteoarthritis. The six persons without osteoarthritis had significantly less joint laxity.21 Premature osteoarthritis was a feature of the hypermobile patients in the original studies of Kirk et al.8; all affected patients were female with an age of onset of symptoms of 33–56 years. The trapeziometacarpal joints and the cervical spine were the commonest sites of involvement in this group.

4

1


In a radiological, histological and arthroscopic study, Bird et al.22 drew attention to the way in which joint hyperlaxity apparently predisposes to a traumatic synovitis in the third decade and premature osteoarthritis in the fourth or fifth. Pyrophosphate is subsequently deposited in the unstable joint. Despite the foregoing, it is still uncertain whether loose-jointed persons have a significant propensity to develop osteoarthritis in later life.23 We are also increasingly coming to understand the social consequences of hypermobility. Accounts from patients24 eloquently describe the chronic difficulties often associated with this condition, not least the frequent confusion in definitive diagnosis and the dismissive attitude of the medical profession.

1.5

Measurement of Joint Hypermobility

Clinicians and epidemiologists agree on the need to measure joint laxity. The first scoring system was devised by Carter and Wilkinson4 and subsequently modified by successive authors.25,26 The method, which has gained general acceptance, is that derived by Beighton et al.27 from the earlier scheme of Carter and Wilkinson. In this technique, a score of 0–9 is allocated to each individual, the highest scores denoting maximum joint laxity. Although more complex systems have been proposed, they are time-consuming and have not been widely used. Measurement of joint hypermobility in children is especially complex in view of the greater natural laxity in children compared to adults.28 There is a substantial body of literature concerning the measurement of movements at individual joints. Methods include radiological assessment,29 photographic techniques30 and a pendulum machine devised by Barnett31 for the calculation of the coefficient of resistance in the interphalangeal joints. Complicated or invasive techniques cannot be used in large population studies, and there has been some return to simple methods. Grahame and Jenkins25 constructed a device to measure the angle of extension at the little finger when a standard force is applied. To some extent, this has been superseded by the Leeds Finger Hyperextensometer, which records the range of movement at the metacarpophalangeal joint of the index finger in response to a pre-set fixed torque. Quantitative measurements of joint mobility in adolescents were undertaken by Fairbank et al.32 More recently, simple clinical techniques for the assessment of hypermobility have been used by Larsson et al.33 for comparison of normal males and females, and by Wordsworth et al.34 in a study of English Caucasians and Asian Indians. Recently, there has been some interest in measurement of neurological associations with joint hypermobility, particularly proprioception, with sophisticated devices now available for the accurate quantification of proprioception both at the knee and at the metacarpophalangeal joint. All methods of assessment are reviewed in detail in Chap. 2.

1.7

1.6

Nosology of the Hypermobility Syndromes

5

Syndromic Associations of Joint Hypermobility

Although no demonstrable hereditary disorder of connective tissue can be recognised in the majority of individuals with joint hypermobility, a proportion have specific genetic conditions such as EDS, familial articular hypermobility syndrome and Larsen syndrome (see Chap. 9). It is sometimes extremely difficult to diagnose minor forms of disorders of connective tissue. The characteristic picture of complete Marfan syndrome, with long thin limbs, ectopia lentis and dilatation of the ascending aorta, is easily recognised, but a definitive diagnosis is difficult in persons with mild manifestations. Similarly, although some varieties of EDS are easy to recognise, the hypermobility type, formerly EDS III, can closely mimic the familial articular hypermobility syndrome in both clinical presentation and mode of inheritance.21 A survey of British consultant rheumatologists35 demonstrated considerable confusion in the minds of these specialists as to the extent to which EDS type III could be teased apart from the less selective clinical features of ‘benign familial hypermobility syndrome’. A recent initiative from the USA36 has suggested that for clinical purposes (and certainly for political purposes), the two conditions could be considered as the same entity, not least because treatment for each is broadly the same. It is of practical importance that joint hypermobility can occur as a secondary manifestation of inflammatory disorders such as rheumatoid arthritis. In these circumstances, the clinical picture is sometimes complicated by the presence of a neuropathy, which may accentuate joint hyperlaxity. Muscular hypotonia and drugs such as prednisolone and D-penicillamine, which alter the structure or physical properties of collagen, also influence joint laxity. The determination of the relative contributions of multiple aetiological factors, which influence the range of movements at a given joint, is a fascinating challenge to the clinician.

1.7


Increasing interest in hypermobility has led to the subdivision of established disorders and the recognition of new entities. Problems have arisen, however, concerning syndromic boundaries, nomenclature and classification. There are considerable differences in the pathogenesis, natural history and prognosis in many of these conditions, and in these circumstances, diagnostic imprecision precludes optimal management. Similarly, the establishment of correlations between the clinical features (phenotype) and the underlying biomolecular defect is dependent upon the use of the same nosological system at both the clinical and laboratory levels. These problems first became apparent in EDS, where 11 types had been delineated and others proposed. The difficulty was accentuated when syndromes of familial articular hypermobility, without additional involvement of other tissues, were lumped together with EDS. In an attempt to bring order to this potentially chaotic situation, a Nosology Workshop was held at the Seventh International Congress of Human Genetics, Berlin,

6

1


Table 1.1 Nosology of the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome Classic (formerly EDS I and II, gravis and mitis type) Hypermobility (formerly EDS III, hypermobile type) Vascular (formerly EDS IV, arterial or ecchymotic type) Kyphoscoliosis (formerly EDS VI, ocular or scoliosis type) Arthrochalasia (formerly included in EDS VII) Dermatosparaxis (formerly included in EDS VII) Other rare forms of the EDS EDS V

EDS VIII

EDS X

Entries now removed from the EDS classification EDS IX

EDS XI

AD AD AD AR AD AR C-linked type, resembles the classic type, in mild to moderate severity. Delineated in a single large family in the UK Periodontal type, resembles the classic type with the addition of fragility of the gums. Very rare. Syndromic status uncertain. AD Resembles the classic type, in mild degree, with the additional feature of abnormal platelet aggregation. Syndromic status uncertain. AR? Now termed ‘occipital horn syndrome’. C-linked disorder of copper metabolism which is allelic to the Menkes syndrome Now termed ‘familial articular hypermobility syndrome’. Resembles the hypermobility form of the EDS

Source: Revised at the Villefranche Meeting, 1997, adapted

in September 1986. In this meeting, experts involved with genetic connective tissue conditions reached agreement upon syndromic definition and a unified nomenclature. The final proposals were published under the names of 22 authors as the ‘International Nosology of Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue, Berlin 1986’.37 The continuing accumulation of clinical experience and the elucidation of the molecular defects in some forms of the EDS generated a need for reappraisal of the nosology of the disorder. For this purpose, in June 1997, a representative group of interested colleagues, convened by Petros Tsipouras, met in Villefranche-sur-Mer, France. A new nosology was formulated and the proposals were presented at the American Society of Human Genetics Congress later in the year, and subsequently published.38 A summary is reproduced in Table 1.1, and the various forms of the EDS are further discussed in Chap. 9. Molecular heterogeneity has been recognised in the Classic type (formerly EDS I and II) and proposed in the Hypermobility type (formerly EDS III). It is likely that the nosology will be updated in the future in order to accommodate these advances.

1.7


7

Table 1.2 Familial articular hypermobility syndrome (147 900) Excludes EDS group of disorders, notably the hypermobile and arthrochalasia types Skeletal dysplasias with joint hypermobility, notably the Larsen syndrome Cardinal manifestations Generalised articular hypermobility, with or without subluxation or dislocations No skin involvement Familial articular hypermobility, uncomplicated type Familial articular hypermobility, dislocating type (formerly EDS XI, familial joint instability syndrome) (The basic defect in these disorders is unknown)

AD/AR AD

Table 1.3 Skeletal dysplasias with predominant joint laxity Larsen syndrome

Mild form: AD(150250) Severe form: AR(245600)

Cardinal manifestations Joint laxity, especially at the knees Flattened nasal bridge Short stature Broad terminal phalanges Radiographic characteristics Supernumerary ossification centres in the carpus and calcaneus Desbuquois syndrome

AR(251450)

Cardinal manifestations Joint laxity Short stature Prominent eyes Broad terminal phalanges Supernumerary phalanges Radiographic characteristics Supernumerary carpal ossification centres Prominent lesser trochanter of femur Spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity (SEMDJL)

AR(271640) AD(603546)

Clinical manifestations Gross joint laxity with progressive spinal malalignment and multiple dislocations Dwarfism Variable cardiac defects and palatal clefts Radiographic characteristics Skeletal dysplasia with changes in the vertebrae, epiphyses and metaphyses

The sections of the ‘Berlin Nosology’ which relate to the familial articular hypermobility syndrome and the skeletal dysplasias with joint laxity are reproduced in Tables 1.2 and 1.3, and the conditions in these categories are also reviewed in Chap. 9. The numbers allocated to entities in the current online version of McKusick’s ‘Mendelian Inheritance in Man’ [OMIM]39 have been cited in the titles of these disorders.

8

1


References 1. Finkelstein H. Joint hypotonia. N Y Med J. 1916;104:942-943. 2. Key JA. Hypermobility of joints as a sex linked hereditary characteristic. JAMA. 1927;88: 1710-1712. 3. Massie WK, Howarth MB. Congenital dislocation of the hip. Part II. Results of an open reduction as seen in early adult period. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1951;33:171-190. 4. Carter C, Wilkinson J. Persistent joint laxity and congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1964;46-B:40-45. 5. Carter C, Sweetnam R. Familial joint laxity and recurrent dislocation of the patella. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1958;40-B:664-667. 6. Carter C, Sweetnam R. Recurrent dislocation of the patella and of the shoulder: their association with familial joint laxity. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1960;42-B:721-727. 7. Sutro J. Hypermobility of the knee due to over lengthened capsular and ligamentous tissues. Surgery. 1947;21:67-76. 8. Kirk JA, Ansell BM, Bywaters EG. The hyper mobility syndrome. Musculoskeletal complaints associated with generalized joint hypermobility. Ann Rheum Dis. 1967;26:419-425. 9. Wood PH. Is hypermobility a discrete entity? Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64:690-692. 10. Child AH. Joint hypermobility syndrome: inherited disorder of collagen synthesis. J Rheumatol. 1986;13:239-243. 11. Bird HA. Heritable collagen disorders. In: Reports on the Rheumatic Diseases (Series 5): Topical Reviews. Chesterfield: Arthritis Research Campaign; 2005. 12. Ansell BM. Hypermobility of joints. Mod Trends Orthop. 1972;6:419-425. 13. Grahame R. Time to take hypermobility seriously (in adults and children). Rheumatology. 2001;40:485-487. 14. Howes RJ, Isdale IC. The loose back: an unrecognised syndrome. Rheumatol Phys Med. 1971;11:72-77. 15. Lewkonia RM, Ansell BM. Articular hypermobility simulating chronic rheumatic disease. Arch Dis Child. 1983;58:988-992. 16. Gedalia A, Person DA, Brewer EJ, Giannini EH. Hypermobility of the joints in juvenile episodic arthritis/arthralgia. J Pediatr. 1985;107:873-876. 17. Adib N, Davies K, Grahame R, Woo P, Murray KJ. Joint hypermobility syndrome in childhood. A not so benign multisystem disorder? Rheumatology. 2005;44:744-750. 18. Grahame R, Beighton P. Physical properties of the skin in the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 1969;28:246-252. 19. Grahame R. A method for measuring human skin elasticity in vivo with observations of the effects of age, sex and pregnancy. Clin Sci. 1970;39:223-229. 20. Silverman S, Constine L, Harvey W, Grahame R. Survey of joint mobility and in vivo skin elasticity in London schoolchildren. Ann Rheum Dis. 1975;34:177-180. 21. Beighton PH, Price A, Lord J, Dickson E. Variants of the ehlers-danlos syndrome. Clinical, biochemical, haematological, and chromosomal features of 100 patients. Ann Rheum Dis. 1969;28:228-245. 22. Bird HA, Tribe CR, Bacon PA. Joint hypermobility leading to osteoarthrosis and chondrocalcinosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1978;37:203-211. 23. Lewkonia RM. Hypermobility of joints. Arch Dis Child. 1987;62:1-2. 24. Gurley-Green S. Living with the hypermobility syndrome. Rheumatology. 2001;40:487-489. 25. Grahame R, Jenkins JM. Joint hypermobility – asset or liability? a study of joint mobility in ballet dancers. Ann Rheum Dis. 1972;31:109-111. 26. Horan FT, Beighton PH. Recessive inheritance of generalized joint hypermobility. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1973;12:47-49. 27. Beighton P, Solomon L, Soskolne CL. Articular mobility in an African population. Ann Rheum Dis. 1973;32:413-418. 28. Bird HA. Joint hypermobility in children. Rheumatology. 2005;44:703-704.

References

9

29. Harris H, Joseph J. Variation in extension of the metacarpo-phalangeal and interphalangeal joints of the thumb. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1949;31-B:547-559. 30. Troup JDG, Hood CA, Chapman AE. Measurement of the sagittal mobility of the lumbar spine and hips. Ann Phys Med. 1968;9:308-321. 31. Barnett CH. The mobility of synovial joints. Rheumatol Phys Med. 1971;11:20-27. 32. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB, Phillips H. Quantitative measurements of joint mobility in adolescents. Ann Rheum Dis. 1984;43:288-294. 33. Larsson LG, Baum J, Mudholkar GS. Hypermobility: features and differential incidence between the sexes. Arthritis Rheum. 1987;30:1426-1430. 34. Wordsworth P, Ogilvie D, Smith R, Sykes B. Joint mobility with particular reference to racial variation and inherited connective tissue disorders. Br J Rheumatol. 1987;26:9-12. 35. Grahame R, Bird H. British consultant rheumatologists’ perceptions about the hypermobility syndrome: a national survey. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2001;40:559-562. 36. Tinkle BT, Bird HA, Grahame R, Lavallee M, Levy HP, Sillence D. The lack of clinical distinction between the hypermobility type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and the joint hypermobility syndrome (a.k.a. hypermobility syndrome). Am J Med Genet A. 2009;149A(11):2368-2370. 37. Beighton P et al. International nosology of heritable disorders of connective tissue, Berlin, 1986. Am J Med Genet. 1988;29:581-594. 38. Beighton P, De Paepe A, Steinmann B, Tsipouras P, Wenstrup RJ. Ehlers-Danlos syndromes: revised nosology, Villefranche, 1997. Am J Med Genet. 1998;77:31-37. 39. McKusick VA (2009) Mendelian inheritance in man. Catalogs of autosomal dominant, autosomal recessive and C-linked phenotype. Online www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/omim/.

Chapter 2

Assessment of Hypermobility

Adequate methods for measuring the range of movement at joints are essential for the definition of criteria used in the study of clinical problems associated with joint hypermobility. Scoring systems for hypermobility that survey a large number of joints in simple fashion are ideal for epidemiological studies in large populations. Latterly, investigators have devised sophisticated mechanical devices for the precise quantification of movement at a single joint. The greater precision afforded may be ideal for serial assessments in the same patient but this greater precision is of limited use in epidemiological work if the joint fails to mirror the status of laxity at other joints in the body. Moreover, a joint may display acquired hyperlaxity in compensation for a reduced range of movement at adjacent joints, for example in the vertebral column. A recent trend has therefore been to return to scoring systems in which a reasonably large number of joints are assessed in simple fashion. Nevertheless, there still remains uncertainty about the value of new assessments proposed. The original scoring system, first devised by Carter and Wilkinson1 and modified by Beighton et al.,2 even now is re-emerging as the simple method of first choice, particularly for the screening of large populations. The definition of ‘generalised joint hypermobility’ still remains arbitrary, and rationally should reflect both the number of joints involved and the extent to which they move. Hypermobility may represent one extreme of a Gaussian distribution of joint laxity throughout the population. Scoring systems devised for measuring joint hypermobility have proved less satisfactory in the measurement of joint hypomobility. Attention has recently been directed at the factors that contribute to the range of joint movement, not only the shape of bony articulating surfaces, the inherited collagen structure and the tone and bulk of the restraining muscle, but also recently to their neurological control, particularly in respect of proprioception, which may be impaired. It is likely that future scoring systems will concentrate even more on aetiological aspects as we attempt to separate groups of patients who may be at particular risk of osteoarthritis.

P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_2, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

11

12

2.1

2 Assessment of Hypermobility

Simple Scoring Systems for Hypermobility

The first scoring system was devised by Carter and Wilkinson1 in conjunction with their work on congenital dislocation of the hip. They defined generalised joint laxity as being present when three of the following tests were positive, provided both upper and lower limbs were involved: 1. Passive apposition of the thumb to the flexor aspect of the forearm 2. Passive hyperextension of the fingers so that they lie parallel with the extensor aspect of the forearm 3. Ability to hyperextend the elbow more than 10° 4. Ability to hyperextend the knee more than 10° 5. An excess range of passive dorsiflexion of the ankle and eversion of the foot A more complex assessment was suggested by Kirk et al.,3 but in practice this proved to be too time-consuming for routine use. The system of Carter and Wilkinson1 was revised by Beighton and Horan4 for the measurement of joint laxity in persons with the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS). Passive dorsiflexion of the little finger beyond 90°, with the forearm flat on the table, was substituted for passive hyperextension of the fingers, as the latter test had proved too severe; the range of ankle movement was replaced by measurement of forward flexion of the trunk. Patients were given a score between 0 and 5. Grahame and Jenkins5 modified this system to include passive dorsiflexion of the ankle beyond 15°. This was partly an adaptation to the particular subjects under study, half of whom are ballet dancers. Subsequently, Beighton et al.2 amended the 1969 system for use in an epidemiological survey of bone and joint disorders in an indigenous rural South African community. They employed the same tests, but gave one point for each side of the body for the paired tests. The range of scoring was thus between 0 and 9, with high scores denoting greater joint laxity. The manoeuvres used in this scoring system are listed below and depicted in Fig. 2.1: 1. Passive dorsiflexion of the little fingers beyond 90° (one point for each hand) – two points 2. Passive apposition of the thumbs to the flexor aspects of the forearm (one point for each thumb) – two points 3. Hyperextension of the elbows beyond 10° (one point for each elbow) – two points 4. Hyperextension of the knee beyond 10° (one point for each knee) – two points 5. Forward flexion of the trunk with knees fully extended so that the palms of the hands rest flat on the floor – one point This method has found favour for the following reasons: 1. Scoring systems using hyperextension of the middle rather than the little finger exclude too many persons. 2. Scoring systems using ankle movements, although perhaps appropriate for dancers, are unlikely to show much variation between individuals in a normal population. 3. Scoring systems that include trunk and hip movement (composite joint movement) are more likely to reflect generalised articular laxity.

2.1

Simple Scoring Systems for Hypermobility

13

Fig. 2.1 Beighton et al.2 modification of the Carter and Wilkinson1 scoring system

In a study on 502 normal adult indigenous South Africans (168 males; 334 females), 94% of the males and 80% of the females achieved scores of 0, 1 or 2. This range of movement might be regarded as normal for adults in this population. The majority of clinicians require a minimum score in adults of between 4/9 and 6/9 before accepting the diagnosis. Laxity decreases with age and a lower level may be more appropriate to an elderly population. At any age, females are more mobile than males. In both sexes the degree of joint laxity diminishes rapidly throughout childhood and continues to fall more slowly in adult life. An alternative scoring system was then developed. Based upon work by JP Contompasis, an American podiatrist,6 and described in detail by Poul and Fait,7 this scoring system is more complex than the modification by Beighton et al.2 of the Carter and Wilkinson1 scale. A multiple-point scoring system based on six manoeuvres, five of which replicate Beighton, its scores span from the normal to the hypermobile range with a maximum total of 72. Initial studies had suggested that it was highly correlated

14

2 Assessment of Hypermobility

with Beighton’s score (r = 0.92; p = 0.0001) in original work by the editors, and it had been claimed that it was particularly useful in the assessment of ligamentous laxity in children. The scoring system is described in detail elsewhere,8 but greater experience produced problems in measurement, particularly in the use of foot flexibility tests, the major feature on which it differed from the Beighton score. Since the Contompasis score takes significantly longer and, in spite of the theoretical greater sensitivity, conveys little more information, the score is now only occasionally used.9 In a seminal paper Bulbena and colleagues10 compared Beighton’s modification with the original Carter and Wilkinson1 scoring system and the most popular scoring system used in France,11 to find the Beighton system as effective as any in measurement. Recent studies have emphasised the difficulty in establishing joint hypermobility as a causative factor of symptoms in children whose joints in any case display an unusually large range of movement compared to adults.12 A further study on the high prevalence of joint laxity in West Africans13 has shown that joint hyperlaxity is substantially greater in a West African population than in almost any other population group in which it has been studied, yet is not associated with joint pain.

2.2

The Brighton Criteria for Hypermobility Syndrome

Although the measurement systems so far described suit the musculoskeletal system alone (and may be of particular value in measuring serial change), it became increasingly apparent that wherever abnormal collagen was ubiquitous throughout the body other organ systems would become involved. Moreover, certain individuals, particularly in different ethnic groups, would demonstrate striking hypermobility according to a scoring system but still remain asymptomatic. It became clear that there was a need for a new scoring system that recognised all of these points. The Special Interest Group devoted to inheritable connective tissue disorders of the British Society for Rheumatology addressed this issue. As a result, criteria were proposed in Brighton in 1999, which were published the following year.14 These are shown in Table 2.1. Incorporating the Beighton score, still felt to be the best rapid assessment of musculoskeletal hypermobility, the presence of arthralgia for more than 3 months in four or more joints was allowed equal importance. A set of minor criteria was additionally proposed and, on the basis of pilot work, a number of major or minor criteria that needed to be fulfilled were decided. The Brighton criteria have subsequently enjoyed extensive use. A study from Chile15 using the Brighton criteria suggested that true diagnosis in the majority of patients with joint hypermobility syndrome is often overlooked, a finding replicated in the UK.16 In the study from Chile it was noted that use of the Beighton criteria alone would have excluded 61% of patients who were identified by use of the Brighton criteria. It has been suggested that the criteria may yet benefit from further analysis and validation17 and even the ‘gold standards’ based on ‘a consensus of experts’18 may be desirable, a point conceded by the original authors.19 Nevertheless, there seems to be a consensus that the Brighton criteria represent a significant step forward in the quantification of hypermobility.

2.3

General Principles of More Precise Measurement at Selected Joints

15

Table 2.1 The Brighton criteria for joint hypermobility syndrome Major criteria • A Beighton score of 4/9 or greater (either currently or historically) • Arthralgia for longer than 3 months in 4 or more joints Minor criteria • A Beighton score of 1, 2 or 3/9 (0, 1, 2 or 3 if aged 50+) • Arthralgia (>3 months) in one to three joints or back pain (>3 months), spondylosis, spondylolysis/spondylolisthesis • Dislocation/subluxation in more than one joint, or in one joint on more than one occasion • Soft tissue rheumatism >3 lesions (e.g. epicondylitis, tenosynovitis, bursitis) • Marfanoid habitus (tall, slim, span/height ratio >1.03, upper:lower segment ratio 3, and 15 (37%) a score of >5 using the Beighton (1973) criteria. Similarly, a study using magnetic resonance imaging of the TMJs of 62 symptomatic patients and 38 asymptomatic controls revealed a significant association between the occurrence of TMJ symptoms and generalised joint laxity (>4/9) (odds ratio = 4.0 [95% CI 1.38–10.95; p = 0.01]).57 Westling, using a multiple stepwise regression analysis, established that hypermobility was a more important factor

78

5 Musculoskeletal Features of Hypermobility and Their Management

in the pathogenesis of TMJ dysfunction than bruxism.58 Thirty-eight out of 70 (58%) patients with TMJ osteoarthritis (TMJOA) satisfied the criteria for hypermobility.59 A 30-year follow-up study of 13 hypermobile patients showed an increased radiological tendency to TMJOA compared with controls. Functionally, there was no difference between the groups.56 Several of the authors concluded that TMJ hypermobility is a subsidiary factor in the development of TMJOA.

5.6.11

Premature Osteoarthritis (Other Than TMJ)

There was for many years a strong clinical impression that hypermobility may predispose to the development of premature osteoarthritis, particularly in weight-bearing joints. Positive proof of this hypothesis awaits controlled prospective studies. Studies with dancers suggest that dancers with JHS develop premature hip OA as compared to their non-hypermobile peers (see Chap. 8). Scott et al.60 compared joint mobility in a group of 50 consecutive persons aged 50 years and over with symptomatic osteoarthritis with age- and sex-matched controls. These workers demonstrated a significantly higher frequency of hypermobility amongst the patients with osteoarthritis. They conceded that hypermobility is these individuals might have been the result of the osteoarthritis rather than vice versa, but they considered this unlikely. A statistically significant association between joint hypermobility and osteoarthritis has been established amongst adults attending a general rheumatology clinic. OA was found in 12/20 (60%) hypermobile patients compared with 33/110 (30%) patients without hypermobility (chi-sq = 6.73; p < 0.01).61 From Iceland come two studies linking hypermobility with the occurrence and severity of generalised osteoarthritis of the hand (GOA).62 Comparing 100 GOA patients with matched controls, it was found that thumb base OA was more common, more advanced and more disabling in hypermobile patients (³2/9). Disability also correlated with the hypermobility score. The authors proposed that ‘hypermobility-associated OA’ be designated as a subset of GOA of the hands. In a second study63 by the same group, 50 consecutive female patients with clinical OA hand and thumb base symptoms were examined for hypermobility according to the Beighton score. Thirty-one out of the 50 patients had a score of >2/9 and 17 patients ³4/9. Corresponding numbers for the 94 matched controls were 30 (p < 0.05) and 9, respectively (p < 0.001). Hypermobile patients were characterised as with more severe thumb base OA and less severe OA of the interphalangeal joints, whereas in non-hypermobile patients, the converse was true.

5.6.12

Spinal Complications

The spine, notably the lower cervical and lower lumbar region, is commonly affected by degenerative diseases in later life, as a result of the stresses to which it is submitted. This process is manifested by a combination of osteoarthritis of the facet joints and

5.6 Hypermobility in Adults

79

changes in the intervertebral discs. The onset may be acute, with herniation of the nucleus pulposus through the annulus fibrosus, leading to nerve root compression, or chronic, with osteophyte formation causing nerve root irritation. It is likely that the interspinous ligaments provide an important restraining force and prevent an excessive range of movement, which might otherwise lead to additional damage to the vertebrae, intervertebral discs or facet joints. It follows that a spine devoid of the protection provided by normal ‘tight’ ligaments will be particularly vulnerable to the insults to which the back is constantly subjected in daily life. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that traumatic lesions including intervertebral disc lesions, be they in the cervical, dorsal or lumbar region, might occur with greater frequency amongst hypermobile persons. Fatigue fractures of the partes interarticularis (spondylolysis) with or without isthmic spondylolisthesis are also frequent in loose-jointed individuals.64 Notwithstanding these recognisable structural abnormalities, low back pain does seem to occur in the absence of such identifiable lesions in otherwise healthy, hypermobile subjects. This has been termed the ‘loose-back syndrome’.65 As with arthralgia, the mechanism for the pain in this condition is unknown. The range of spinal motion in this series was not recorded. Morgan and her colleagues found that JHS and EDS patients had a highly significantly greater incidence of history of mechanical low back pain, more painful episodes lasting more than 3 months and more radicular pain than controls. Past ability to place hands flat on the floor with knees straight or current hyperextensibility of the lumbar spine were both strongly correlated with these three outcomes.64 Radiological anomalies of the spine, including scoliosis, transitional vertebrae at the lumbosacral junction and pars interarticularis defects, with or without spondylolisthesis, were more common amongst patients with widespread joint hypermobility. Eleven (73%) of a series of 15 patients with a hypermobility score ³5/9 showed such anomalies. The control groups (scores 3–4/9 and 0–2/9) revealed a lower incidence of anomalies of 3/9 (33%) and 3/13 (23%), respectively. The differences were statistically significant.66 An attempt to correlate the advent of spondylolisthesis with joint laxity amongst 364 female teachers of physical education failed to produce a significant result.63 However, this negative finding may have been due to the fact that the information was elicited by means of a postal questionnaire. Nevertheless, a higher prevalence of concomitants of joint laxity, such as flat feet, was recorded amongst the hypermobile subjects. It is of interest that the spondylolisthesis that occurred in this group was, with a single exception, of the degenerative (pseudo-spondylolisthesis) rather than the isthmic variety.

5.6.13

Bone Fragility

Some hypermobile people may have a bone defect, which predisposes to fracture. Thus, in a series of 33 patients with a hypermobility score of 5–9/9, 17 (52%) gave a past history of fracture. In two age- and sex-matched control groups with

80


hypermobility scores of 3–4 and 0–2, the incidences of fracture were 3 (14%) and 4 (15%), respectively.60 These findings suggest that there may be a collagen defect common to ligament and bone in JHS patients. By contrast, there was no excess of fractures in an early series of 100 patients with EDS.67 This discrepancy might reflect differences in the nature and distribution of the fundamental abnormalities of connective tissue in these disorders. More recent studies have strengthened the link between EDS and osteoporosis68 and between BJHS and osteopenia.69 In the latter study, bone mineral density was measured in 40 patients compared with age-matched control subjects. On balance, although BMD was marginally reduced, the difference did not achieve statistical significance. Further light is shone on this topic in new study in 25 women said to be diagnosed with BJHS who were compared with matched controls. Total femoral and trochanteric bone mineral density and t and z scores were significantly lower in hypermobile patients compared to the control group. Ward’s triangle and femoral neck z scores were also found to be significantly lower in hypermobile patients (p < 0.05). Significant inverse correlations were found between Beighton scores and trochanteric BMD, t and z scores (r = −0.29, r = −0.30, and r = −0.32 respectively) in hypermobility patients. Low bone mass was more frequently found among subjects with hypermobility (p = 0.03). Hypermobility was found to increase the risk for low bone mass by 1.8 times (95% confidence interval 1.01–3.38). The authors suggest that pre-menopausal women with joint hypermobility have lower bone mineral density when compared to the controls and furthermore, that hypermobility increases the risk for low bone density.70 Unfortunately, as with many such studies, the authors confuse hypermobility (as judged by the Beighton scale) with JHS (classified using the Brighton Criteria) and purport to have studied JHS when, clearly, they report ‘women with hypermobility’. A similar study using patients satisfying the Brighton Criteria would possibly have produced an even more significant result.

5.6.14

The Natural History of JHS and the Development of Chronic Pain

The onset of symptoms almost invariably occurs during the childhood years. In one series, out of 45 adult patients with EDS, symptoms had commenced in childhood in 40 (89%).71 Their early years are marked by episodic soft tissue injuries, dislocations or non-inflammatory joint or spinal pain. The same seminal study established that chronic pain in EDS affecting multiple sites is progressive and unrelenting and is associated with sleep disturbance, impaired physical activity and sexual function. Abdominal pain and headaches were found to be commonplace (1 in 2 and 1 in 3, respectively). The authors refer to a ‘severe and lifetime pain’, and they also pointed out that (at that time) it was unrecognised in the medical literature. They considered that EDS should always be considered in the differential diagnosis of chronic musculoskeletal pain.66 Chronic pain in EDS is now seen to be its greatest therapeutic challenge72 (see Treatment Section 5.7).

5.7

Management of Articular Complications in the Hypermobility Syndrome

81

UNACCUSTOMED PHYSICAL EXERCISE INEFFECITIVE ANALGESICS; PHYSICAL THERAPY INADEQUATE OR INAPPROPRIATE

NON-INFLAMMATORY JOINT/SPINAL PAIN; RECURRENT DISLOCATIONS; TRAUMATIC SOFT TISSUE LESIONS SLOW/INCOMLETE HEALING INJURY RTA WHIPLASH

‘KINESIOPHOBIA’ MUSCLE DECONDITIONING FUNCTIONAL IMPAIRMENT PHYSICAL DISABILITY DEPENDENCY CHAIR/BED-BOUND

REDUCED QUALITY OF LIFE LACK OF SELF-EFFICACY WORK INCAPACITY SOCIAL ISOLATION DESPAIR

CHRONIC PAIN SYNDROME

Fig. 5.7 Chronic pain is a frequent occurrence in the national history of JHS. Its pathogenesis is complex and incompletely understood. The early years of the syndrome are characterised by selflimited episodes of soft tissue injury, which recover, albeit slowly, but become increasingly frequent and incomplete healing may occur. Pain, in general, tends to become amplified over time, and this may be triggered by the use of ineffective physical therapy and/or analgesic medication. Other triggers to chronic pain include injury including road traffic accidents, work- or performancerelated upper limb disorder. Pain amplification invokes movement avoidance (kinesiophobia), leading to deconditioning and later weakness of muscle and progressive loss of function and diminution of quality of life

Its pathogenesis is multi-factorial, and this is shown diagrammatically in Fig. 5.7.

5.7


Hypermobile patients can be spared much unnecessary suffering by the establishment of the correct diagnosis. Many hapless individuals are misdiagnosed as suffering from rheumatoid arthritis (either adult or juvenile). Needlessly, they are forced to suffer the anguish of living with that diagnosis and are exposed to the dangers of the widening selection of anti-rheumatoid drugs and other potentially hazardous treatments used in its treatment. Others, in the absence of observed physical signs to

82


explain their symptoms (joint hypermobility is often overlooked), are labelled as neurotic. They either accept this and become resigned to a life of misery and disability, or reject it and go from one doctor to another in their quest for relief. Not surprisingly, many seek help from purveyors of complementary medicine. From the foregoing, it is self-evident that establishing a definitive diagnosis can have a profoundly beneficial effect on morale! It is, however, only just the start.

5.7.1

General Management

Although the precise cause of pain in hypermobility syndrome (JHS) may be unclear, most patients can discover some key exacerbating and relieving factors. The majority recognises the adverse effects of excessive physical activity, and an individual is often able to restrict exercise to within their reasonable level of tolerance. This may entail an avoidance of strenuous sporting pursuits, a change of occupation or a modification of the manner, speed or frequency of performance of a particular job or activity. The journey to and from their place of employment may provoke more symptoms than the actual work itself. Most children with JHS can relate their symptoms to performance of specific activities or sports. Such information can form the basis for helpful advice, which may well be of therapeutic benefit. It follows that in this respect, time spent on taking a detailed history will pay dividends. There is sound epidemiological evidence that body mass may influence the development of symptoms in the hypermobility syndrome.73 Anecdotal evidence suggests that sudden and substantial weight gain may precipitate the onset of symptoms, notably arthralgia, in previously asymptomatic hypermobile individuals. Despite the fact that no study has as yet demonstrated an improvement in symptoms following weight loss, it would seem advisable to recommend such a measure to obese adults or children with the syndrome.

5.7.2

Specific Management

The reader is recommended to consult the standard texts on rheumatology, orthopaedics, physiotherapy and podiatry for a full account of the management of the wide variety of complications that may be associated with joint hypermobility. A summary of the principal methods of management is given below.

5.7.3

Rest

After acute soft tissue injury, immobilisation, i.e. resting the affected part, is beneficial in the short term. Care is needed to avoid excessive rest as this may lead to loss of function. Local rest in the form of splinting combines pain relief and avoidance

5.7


83

of contracture formation, whilst dynamic splinting permits simultaneous restoration of function. In milder cases, rest and activity avoidance should be prescribed judiciously, and patients whether adult or child should only be denied pleasurable and healthy physical activities, be they for leisure or work, if it is strictly necessary. Much distress and needless inactivity can result from such inappropriate advice.

5.7.4

Local Steroid Injections

The treatment of choice in many of the soft tissue lesions associated with hypermobility is a carefully applied topical infiltration with hydrocortisone acetate or methylprednisolone with lidocaine. These entities include tennis and golfer’s elbow (lateral and medial epicondylitis, respectively), bicipital and supraspinatus tendonitis, adhesive capsulitis, tenosynovitis, bursitis and ligamentous and capsular tears. The longer-acting corticosteroid preparations should be used with caution in extraarticular conditions, as they may lead to severe connective tissue atrophy with consequent weakening of collagenous tissues.74 The injection of steroid directly into a tendon should be always avoided, as this can result in tendon damage, atrophy, weakness and even rupture. Local steroid injections are also effective in stenosing tenosynovitis – the cause of ‘trigger finger’. A small volume of a potent steroid preparation, such as hydrocortisone or methylprednisolone, gives excellent results in the treatment of persistent synovitis of joints and of the carpal tunnel syndrome. In the treatment of discogenic sciatica or cruralgia, epidural corticosteroid injections given to inpatients bring relief in over two-thirds of cases, whether or not hypermobility is a predisposing factor. As outpatients, 17 (90%) of 19 patients responded to the active injection in the short term compared with 3 (19%) of 16 control patients. Two-thirds of responders retained their benefit up to the time of the 6-month assessment.75

5.7.5

Physiotherapy

For the bulk of patients suffering from the JHS, physiotherapy is the mainstay of treatment, both in the management of identifiable local traumatic, overuse or degenerative sequelae, but also for the less well-understood symptoms of arthralgia and myalgia (see Symptomatic Treatment, below). A wide variety of techniques are practised, ranging from ultrasound, pulsed short-wave diathermy and laser to exercise therapy and passive (Maitland’s) mobilisations. As yet, although most of these treatments derive their popularity from empirical use, a number of relevant controlled trials have been published. At therapeutic levels, ultrasound has been shown experimentally to promote in vitro collagen synthesis by human fibroblasts.76 The clinical application of this technique in JHS lies in the treatment of traumatic lesions of ligament and muscle. It is also effective in disorders of attachment of tendon to

84


bone, such as tennis and golfer’s elbow, but is generally not as effective as a local corticosteroid injection in these conditions.

5.7.6

General Principles

Physiotherapists undertaking treatment on hypermobility patients will find that they will take longer to treat the hypermobility patient than the average patient, because they often pose quite complex problems – having pain at several sites. In one study, the average number of painful sites was 8.0.67 Patients’ attitudes may be coloured by resentment directed towards their former therapists and doctors, whom they perceive to have failed to understand the nature of their problems or to have treated them inappropriately. For many of these patients, severe pain may have been a common everyday occurrence.67 Their complaint is often as much stiffness as pain, and this is particularly true of the cervical and thoracic spines, which gradually become hypomobile from failure to take advantage of the hypermobile range. A full history should be taken, followed by a thorough examination. It is important to establish whether the presenting problem is an acute one, a series of chronic symptoms or an acute problem complicating a chronic one. Most acute lesions can then be treated with the usual physiotherapy modalities, taking care to progress the treatment slowly and to be content with small gains as recovery tends to take longer. The goal is to ensure that the joints can reach their natural range, no matter how excessive that may appear to be. Having attained the end of range of movement, the patient is advised to avoid sustained postures in this position. Passive mobilisations can be used to restore range both in peripheral and spinal joints.77 If the restriction is due to pain with the joint range limited by an increase in muscle tone, then manual techniques should be very smooth, large amplitude movements in mid-range. During the performance of the technique, the muscle will suddenly relax, allowing a greater range of movement. It is important to stop treatment at this point, or the patient may experience an increase in pain following treatment or a feeling of soreness as if they have been engaging in unaccustomed exercise. If the restriction of movement is due to tightness of the ligaments and capsule around the joint, this can also give rise to pain. The amplitude of the technique is smaller but used at end of range. The range will then not be restored so dramatically. It is important to ensure that patients have muscular control throughout their range of movement, and that their natural range is restored. The latter can often be assisted and maintained by the patients themselves. If postural muscles have become elongated so that they no longer support the underlying joint range, muscle balance exercises will train the functional length and recruitment patterns of the local and global stabilisers so that they can control the movement throughout its excessive range. It is thought that the exercises facilitate slow motor recruitment to retrain the tonic-holding capacity of these muscles.

5.7


85

These patients lack end-of-range proprioception, which could be one of the pathogenetic factors in the causation of their joint and muscle pain [see below]. It is important to teach postural awareness so that patients do not sustain or use their joints at end of range during static postures. For example, during sitting, all joints should be in a neutral position. Standing with the knees hyperextended should be avoided. Patients should, wherever possible, be taught to apply treatment themselves, e.g. rest, ice, heat, TENS machine and auto-mobilisations. They should be encouraged to work out their own problem-solving strategies such as pacing their activities and interspersing their activity periods with rest periods. Patients should also learn to understand the difference between pain and harm, so that excessive rest induced by fear does not lead to loss of joint range through inactivity, leading to atrophy, contracture and capsular fibrosis. Aids and appliances should be reserved for acute episodes of flares in a chronic one. The exception is where strapping is used as part of the retraining of good joint function.

5.7.7

Passive Mobilisation

Passive mobilisation is a specialised physiotherapeutic technique requiring rigorous training. It is widely used in the treatment of a variety of conditions where restricted joint movement occurs, such as adhesive capsulitis (‘frozen shoulder’) and ‘stuck neck’ when cervical spine facet joints become impacted. This may happen in hypermobile subjects from partial subluxation following overstretching or later on when cervical spondylosis develops. In the latter situation, it is important to ensure that neither cord compression nor basilar insufficiency (both contra-indications to manipulative therapy of any kind) is present. In the presence of radicular symptoms and/or signs, extra care is needed to avoid damaging neural structures. Passive mobilisation is also employed for low back pain, which is not due to bony pathology or disc prolapse with nerve compression. A word of caution is needed as regards the use of forceful manipulation in hypermobile patients, as joint subluxation may result from excessive enthusiasm! Gentle mobilisation procedures, however, are very useful, particularly in those individuals in whom degenerative changes in the facet joints cause troublesome locking.

5.7.8

Exercise Therapy

There is a growing evidence base verifying the value of physiotherapy in the JHS. A recent retrospective study involving 51 hypermobile children (mean age 8 years) confirmed the experience of many physiotherapists, namely that specific stabilising exercises can help to reduce symptoms in hypermobile children.77 Exercises specifically designed to improve the stability of hypermobile joints have been shown to

86


reduce significantly pain emanating from the treated joint.78 Some functions also improved, and in respect of the knee, it was possible to confirm a reduction in hyperlaxity of joints treated in this way. A clinical trial of an 8-week home-based exercise programme of closed-chain exercises aimed at improving proprioception was found to alleviate symptoms in 18 patients with JHS. Not only was proprioceptive acuity significantly improved (p < 0.001), but there was also improvement in balance board performance and in quadriceps and hamstring strength. Symptomatic improvement also occurred in terms of both pain (p = 0.003) and quality-of-life (p = 0.029 for physical functioning, p = 0.008 for mental health) scores.79 A recently published randomised clinical trial (RCT) in 57 children aged 7–16 years compares a targeted programme, aimed at providing symptomatic joints with stability by means of enhancing muscle retraining to achieve improved control, with a generalised one aimed at providing muscle strength and fitness.80 Statistically significant improvement was seen in terms of parental and patient pain scores between baseline and 3-month follow-up assessments, but differences in improvement between the two groups were not significant. This is perhaps the first RCT of physiotherapy in hypermobility in children. Logistic reasons precluded the authors from acceding to their target numbers which explains why the yield in terms of finding significant differences is perhaps disappointing. Nevertheless, this is an important study which points the way for others to follow. A problem that commonly confronts hypermobile subjects is peripheral articular instability, especially of the weight-bearing joints. This is usually the result of ligamentous tears that have occurred as a consequence of pre-existing laxity. The ankle joint is especially vulnerable, and the sprained ankle is a particularly common problem in hypermobile subjects. Fortunately, the majority of these are of mild or moderate severity (grades I or II), responding to treatment with an Aircast boot for 3 weeks, which reduces swelling but at the same time allows weight-bearing. Its easy removal permits the early institution of swimming and general rehabilitation. Severe ankle sprains (grade III) in which instability occurs may require 6 weeks of immobilisation in a cast, followed by intensive rehabilitation. The most common cause of pain and swelling after treatment is residual peroneal weakness due to inadequate rehabilitation. In other situations, for example the knee, it is possible to improve the stability of a lax joint by appropriate muscle-strengthening exercises. However, care must be taken to avoid hyperextension of a lax knee with strenuous and uncontrolled quadriceps exercises, as this merely aggravates the condition. Exercise therapy, perhaps combined with electrical stimulation, can be useful after knee surgery, e.g. after anterior cruciate ligament repair. An anti-rotational brace has been found to be helpful in treating patients with anterolateral rotational instability. Also, shoulder joint instability may be relieved with the aid of a programme of muscle-strengthening exercises. In the study referred to above, specific exercises over 6 weeks reduced knee hyperextensibility as well as relieving pain in hypermobile subjects. Patients with JHS often report that their experience tells them that physiotherapy is either counterproductive or ineffective, presumably because it is either too

5.7


87

aggressive or perhaps, in some cases, not aggressive enough. A new school of physiotherapy (still in its infancy) adapting physical therapy to the specific needs of patients with lax and fragile tissues is emerging based on sound scientific principles and with an evidence base.81,82 In summary, rehabilitation/physiotherapy aims to improve function and enable individuals to more effectively self-manage the condition. A comprehensive assessment identifies postural abnormalities, movement faults, muscle imbalances and weakness and balance deficits present. A specific, individualized exercise programme is developed with the patient based on the examination findings. The programme will usually be focused on functional restoration through improvement of movement control, joint stability, stretching, muscle strength and general fitness (see Hakim, Keer & Grahame 2010).114

5.7.9

Podiatry

Laxity of the ankle and foot region invariably leads to flattening of the longitudinal arch (pes planus/flat foot). This is usually accompanied by pronation of the forefoot and, in severe cases, calcaneal eversion of the hindfoot. Secondary ligamentous damage, tenosynovitis of the tibialis posterior or peroneal tendon sheaths, and eventually subluxation of the ankle subtalar and adjacent joint may supervene. A podiatric assessment is advisable in all such instances, particularly when symptoms develop. A lax-jointed foot naturally adopts a flat foot shape when weight-bearing, particularly in children. When the weight is taken off the limb, the normal shape is restored (see Fig. 5.2a, b). Such cases are mostly, but not invariably, painless and no treatment is required, and child or adult can be reassured appropriately. Where the foot is symptomatic, podiatric intervention is indicated. A podiatrist has a variety of orthotics available to help to correct the biomechanical abnormality, and thereby contain or reverse deformity, improve stability and relieve pain. Thus, the podiatrist can make an important contribution to the patient’s overall treatment and improve the quality of life of hypermobile subjects.19

5.7.10

Surgical Intervention

Certain complications of hypermobility may require surgical measures. These are usually undertaken only after conservative treatment has failed to relieve the problem. Reconstructive procedures should be performed only after careful consideration of the risks of possible failure from recurrent stretching or tearing of the intrinsically weak tissues. For this reason, certain conditions that in patients with normal tissues would appropriately be treated surgically may, in the presence of extreme tissue laxity (as in, for example, in the EDS), be best managed conservatively.

88


In EDS, the skin is thinner and less robust,83 and hence sutures are more likely to tear through. The fragility and friability of blood vessels can cause technical problems with wound closure and haemostasis, respectively, during operations. The greatest surgical hazard is in patients with EDS of vascular type (formerly EDS type IV), where the risk of serious vascular or visceral rupture is present, where the risk of wound dehiscence is greatest and where surgical mortality is high.84 In the JHS, the skin and other tissues are also lax, hyperextensible and relatively fragile. Extra caution is advisable in order to avoid unnecessary damage to soft tissues, which are less robust. Additional sutures and their longer retention may be advisable to reduce the risk of wound dehiscence. The following categories of surgical intervention are encountered.

5.7.11

Soft Tissue Lesions

Tennis and golfer’s elbow, tendonitis of the shoulder and the carpal tunnel syndrome, for example, may occasionally need operation. Tenosynovitis that has failed to respond to repeated treatment with local corticosteroid injections and other measures will very occasionally require surgical management. In severe chronic tendonitis, as occurs in the flexor hallucis longus tendon in dancers, debridement of calcific nodules may be required as well as excision of the tendon sheath. Severe (grade III) ankle sprains with rupture of the lateral ligament are probably best treated by open repair. Occasionally, a chronic bursitis unresponsive to non-surgical therapy requires surgical attention. One example is refractory trochanteric bursitis (which may be associated with a ‘snapping hip’), which responds to partial excision of the iliotibial band. Similarly, semimembranous tenosynovitis unresponsive to corticosteroid injections has been successfully treated surgically by excision of the fibrous sheath surrounding the tendon.

5.7.12

Persistent Synovitis

When this occurs in a joint which has failed to respond to local steroid injections, surgical synovectomy may be required. Alternatively, if the patient is over 45 years of age, a radiation synovectomy by means of intra-articular injection of yttrium-90 or other suitable isotope may be considered. Radiation synovectomy carries a risk of causing leakage of radioactive material from the joint, with consequent exposure of the regional lymph nodes to ionising radiation. The last decades have seen the gradual decline in the use of synovectomy, both by surgery and by radiation, following the introduction of more effective topical corticosteroid preparations for intra- and peri-articular use.

5.7


5.7.13

89

Recurrent Dislocation or Joint Instability

The patella, shoulder or other joint which is subject to recurrent dislocation may require surgical stabilisation to prevent further dislocation. The importance of recognising the multi-directional nature of shoulder joint instability in recurrent dislocation has been emphasised by Neer et al.85 The Trillat procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation, introduced in 1965, in which the coracoid process is subjected to osteotomy and tilted downward so that it serves as a bone block, has given excellent results in 38 (73%), good in 5 (10%), fair in 4 (7%) and poor in only 5 (10%) of 52 cases after a mean follow-up period of 69 months.86 Recent research has demonstrated that the application of laser energy can affect the mechanical properties of joint capsular tissues in an experimental model. Clinical results of laser-assisted thermal capsulorrhaphy in 60 patients (27 men, 32 women) with glenohumeral instability (anterior, 30; posterior, 7; anteroposterior, 4; and multi-directional (MDI), 19 were analyzed). Patients were evaluated on the basis of pain, recurrent instability, function and satisfaction. The authors conclude that laser-assisted thermal capsulorrhaphy is an effective adjunct in the treatment of anterior and posterior instability. Patients with MDI treated with this technique have high failure rates. The authors recommend caution when approaching MDI patients with this technique.87 For an up-to-date review of the management of the unstable shoulder in JHS, the reader is referred to Jaggi and Lambert.88 Recurrent painful dislocation of the distal interphalangeal joint of the finger can be successfully treated by arthrodesis. Chronic subluxation of a dislocating inferior radio-ulnar joint may be treated with a surgical reconstruction using the tendon of flexor carpi ulnaris. The Krogius tenoplasty – introduced in 1901, for the treatment of recurrent dislocation of the patella, in which a flap of medial retinaculum is moved over the patella and attached to the lateral retinaculum – is not recommended for use in patients with joint laxity in view of the high failure rate in such subjects.89 For the same reason, pes anserinus transfer is not recommended in knee instability from rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament of the knee. Recurrent subluxation of the patella that fails to respond to conservative treatment (strengthening the quadriceps and vastus medialis, stretching the tight lateral structures) is best treated by translocating the entire quadriceps and patellar mechanism medially using the Install procedure. A report from Canada found that semitendinosus transfer to the patella with tightening of the medial retinaculum and a lateral retinacular release results in a predictable, stable patello-femoral joint. There were 26 knees (8 hypermobile); 3 boys and 19 girls; mean age at surgery, 14 years and 4 months, range 8.9–17.9 years; mean follow-up, 3.2 years. On longterm follow-up, 23 of the 26 knees (88%) were asymptomatic, and the child had returned to regular activities. One child experienced recurrence of the patellar dislocation, and one child developed medial patellar subluxation.90 Surgical repair is the treatment of choice for severe (grade III) tears of the medial collateral ligament of the knee joint in preference to conservative management. A recent review of the knee in JHS is shortly to be published.91

90


Chrisman-Snook reconstruction is a surgical method for treating chronic lateral ankle instability and involves rerouting half the peroneus brevis tendon, based distally, through the lateral malleolus and anchoring it to the calcaneum. This study aims to examine the outcome and possible average follow-up period of 35.3 months, ranging from 26 to 51 months. The patients were young, and the average age was 24 years. Functional results were assessed using the Kaikkonen ankle stability score. Joint hypermobility was assessed by the Beighton score. The lateral ligaments were reconstructed. Excellent results were achieved in ten cases, good in four, and fair in one. None had poor results. Best outcomes tended to occur in patients with joint hypermobility.92 Contrary to earlier reports, there is now good evidence to establish an association between occipito-atlantal and atlanto-axial hypermobility, Chiari malformation type I (CM-I) and HDCT, predominantly EDS, resulting in lower brain-stem symptoms.93 CM-1 may also be associated with a further complication, namely the tethered cord syndrome with additional features which include elongation and downward displacement of the hindbrain, normal position of the CMD, tight filum terminale (FT) and reduced CSF flow in the lumbar theca. The authors present preliminary evidence that section of the FT can reverse moderate degrees of tonsillar ectopia and is appropriate treatment for cerebellar ptosis after Chiari surgery in this cohort.94

5.7.14

Cervical or Lumbar Discectomy

These may be indicated to remove a prolapsed or sequestered intervertebral disc. The recent trend has been away from extensive laminectomy towards the smaller minimally invasive procedures using microsurgical techniques.95,96 A similar approach has also been applied to decompression for spinal stenosis.97 A recently updated Cochrane Reviews addressed the question of the efficacy of surgery in the treatment of lumbar disc prolapse. All 40 randomised controlled trials published up to January 2007 were identified. Many of the early trials were of some form of chemonucleolysis, while later studies compared either different techniques of discectomy or the use of some form of membrane to reduce epidural scarring. Discectomy produces better clinical outcomes than chemonucleolysis, which were better than placebo. Microdiscectomy gives broadly comparable results to standard discectomy. Recent trials of an interposition gel covering the dura and of fat show that they can reduce scar formation, although there is limited evidence about the effect on clinical outcomes. The evidence for other minimally invasive techniques remains unclear except for chemonucleolysis using chymopapain, which is no longer widely available.98 Much interest now rest on the development of intervertebral disc replacement, which has the potential to retain flexibility and, at same time, obviate the additional strain posed by fusion on adjacent intervertebral discs. Basic scientific research has now developed apace,99 and early results are encouraging.100 However, it will some time before this intriguing new approach is suggested.

5.7


5.7.15

91

Surgery of the Foot

Instability of the talus has been successfully treated with a brace or by reconstructing the inter-osseous talocalcaneal ligament both in patients with a history of trauma and in those with generalised joint laxity.101 Hypermobility of the first ray results in insufficient weight-bearing behind the first metatarsal head. Recent research suggests that there is a direct association between hypermobility or the first metatarsophalangeal joint in extension and painful hallux valgus deformity.102 Treatment is directed towards re-establishing stable sagittal alignment in addition to reposition of the metatarsal head over the sesamoid complex. First MTP realignment arthrodesis by regulating the elasticity of the multi-articular first ray within the sagittal plane may be the treatment of choice. Podiatric personnel undertaking surgical procedures have also been urged to undertake a thorough preoperative medical (including genetic) evaluation followed by a detailed appraisal of such aspects as anaesthetic risk, tourniquet use, tissue handling, suture techniques, post operative bandaging, etc.103

5.7.16

Advanced Osteoarthritis

When there is advanced osteoarthritis of the hip or knee complicating JHS or EDS, total joint replacement may be required, as in patients without hypermobility. In a Mayo Clinic study, a series of 10 patients with the EDS underwent 12 primary knee arthroplasty procedures (mean age 43.3 years, mean follow-up 65 months). The primary indications for surgery were tibio-femoral or patellar instability (n = 8) and osteoarthritis (n = 4). Knee Society Functional scores averaged 29.6 before surgery and 51.3 at time of interview (p < 0.005). Knee Society Knee scores at time of follow-up evaluation averaged 70. Tibio-femoral and patello-femoral stability were significantly improved. The authors concluded that arthroplasty appears to be an effective option for knee arthritis and instability in EDS patients, although results and satisfaction were inferior to those reported for conventional arthroplasty indications.104

5.7.17

Symptomatic Treatment

Many of the locomotor complications of JHS can be attributed to clearly defined local lesions. Specific treatment, if appropriately applied, usually provides a satisfactory remedy. Many patients, however, suffer from arthralgia, myalgia, stiffness and/or back pain for which no overt identifiable cause is discernible. Trigger mechanisms may be recognised and, where possible, removed. For many patients, however, the only solution lies in symptomatic relief, as described below.

92

5.7.18


Analgesic and Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs

Pure analgesic drugs, such as paracetamol, dihydrocodeine or nefopam (or mixtures, such as co-dydramol), are helpful in relieving mild musculoskeletal pain. However, many patients prefer the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), which seem to have a propensity for relieving locomotor-system pain whether in joint, bone tendon, ligament or muscle. A wide variety of drugs are available. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Salicylates – aspirin in various forms Pyrazoles – azapropazone Indene derivative – indometacin, sulindac Propionic acid derivatives – naproxen, ketoprofen, fenoprofen, ibuprofen Aryl-acetic acid derivatives – diclofenac Oxicam derivatives – piroxicam, tenoxicam Miscellaneous NSAIDs – tiaprofenic acid, etodolac, nabumetone Low-dose tricyclic anti-depressants – amitryptiline Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors – fluoxetine, sertraline, paroxetine Muscle relaxants – carisoprodol Opioid analgesics – tramadol, buprenorphine, codeine, dihydrocodeine, oxycodone, pentazocine 12. Anti-epileptic drugs – gabapentin, pregabalin. Despite the large number of such drugs currently available, their usefulness in controlling pain in JHS is limited. All these drugs are capable of causing adverse reactions including skin rashes, gastrointestinal bleeding and, particularly in elderly subjects, renal impairment. The possible risk of side effects should be weighed against the need for analgesia. It is important to re-emphasise that drug therapy is not indicated for a lesion that requires primarily local treatment. Medicinal agents, however, can provide a limited level of analgesia for hypermobile patients with intractable arthralgia and/or neck or back pain. The development of chronic widespread pain poses further therapeutic challenges as analgesics (including the most potent drugs listed above), even in combination, not infrequently prove to be of little benefit. The most frequently used description of their efficacy is that at best, ‘they merely take the edge off the pain’.

5.7.19

Massage, Mobilisation, Hydrotherapy and Water Immersion

Arthralgia and stiffness for no apparent reason are helped by a wide range of accessory and physiological mobilisations77 either within the pain- and resistance-free range or just beyond it, depending on the severity of the symptoms. Myalgia – sore, stiff muscles, tender on palpation and aggravated by sustained postures, e.g. holding a hair dryer – often responds to sustained muscle stretch which the patient can learn and perform when required. A willing relative or friend can also be taught simple passive mobilising techniques. In this way, the need for a professional

5.7


93

physiotherapist may be reduced to an acute exacerbation only. It is important for the patients to regain their normal hypermobile range (without exceeding it) in order to become pain-free. Extreme care is necessary in cases of recurrent dislocation. Some patients also derive symptomatic pain relief from hydrotherapy, in which exercises are performed under the supervision of a physiotherapist in a pool warmed to a temperature of 35°C. Indeed, some appear to gain more benefit from immersion in the pool than from the exercises. This apparent benefit may have a rational basis and, moreover, may go some way towards explaining the popularity of spa therapy.105 If a hydrotherapy pool is not available, patients can be advised to soak at leisure in a warm bath.

5.7.20

Behavioural Techniques

Progressive relaxation techniques or biofeedback aimed at reducing muscular tension and anxiety have become increasingly widely used in recent years in combating chronic pain. A study in 1984 showed that applied relaxation can significantly reduce chronic back and/or joint pain.106 Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for chronic pain management aims to improve physical performance and coping skills and, at the same time, transfers the control of pain and its management of its related problems back to the patient.107 A meta-analysis of 65 studies of treatment of low back pain has shown that multidisciplinary treatments are more effective than no treatment, waiting list or singledisciplinary medical or physical treatments.108 Not only did pain and mood improve, but behavioural variables such as return to work and use of health service facilities did so too. A randomised controlled clinical trial compared the effects of an inpatient CBT programme administered by a multi-disciplinary team to mixed chronic pain patients in comparison with a similarly constructed outpatient regimen and with a waiting list control group. While the control group did not improve, both treatment groups improved in regard to physical performance, psychological function and reduced medication use.109 However, the inpatient group made greater gains, which they had better maintained at 1 year. They also utilised less health care. A recent review on the use of pain management programmes in the treatment of chronic pain in EDS gives an authoritative account of the state of current progress.110

5.7.21

Acupuncture and Transcutaneous Neural Electrical Stimulation

The use of electrical stimulation to relieve pain dates back to Ancient Greece, where the electric torpedo fish was prescribed for headaches and arthritis. Perhaps the modern equivalent is the transcutaneous nerve stimulator (TENS). A related technique, subcutaneous nerve stimulation, unfortunately has recently been shown to be no more effective in relieving pain in osteoarthritis of the hip than a placebo.111

94


Acupuncture was superior to placebo in the form of detuned TENS in a small series of 13 neck pain cases.112 Further studies are needed to assess the role of these techniques in the treatment of intractable pain.

5.7.22

Denervation Procedures

When persistent low back pain originates from the facet joints, it may be reduced or abolished by means of so-called facet joint denervation. After a successful preliminary injection of local anaesthetic into the facet joint under X-ray control, the joint is ‘denervated’ by radio-frequency ablation of the afferent nerves.113

5.7.23

Support and Information

Patient self-help and support groups now play an important role in providing information and support for their members. Their activities include the publication of leaflets, books and newsletters, holding study days and maintaining Web sites. In the UK, there are now three such groups: the Ehlers-Danlos Support Group, the Hypermobility Syndrome Association and the Marfan Association. All three are affiliated to the Coalition of the Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue, an umbrella organisation. All three maintain contact with their sister organisations in Europe and in other parts of the world. Addresses: Ehlers-Danlos Support UK P.O. Box 748, Borehamwood WD6 9HU Tel: +44 208 736 5604 http://www.ehlers-danlos.org Hypermobility Syndrome Association 49 Orchard Crescent Oreston Plymouth PL9 7NF http://www.hypermobility.org/alert.htm Marfan Association UK Rochester House 5 Aldershot Road Fleet, Hants GU13 9NG Tel: +44 1252 810472 Fax: +44 1252 810473

References

95

References 1. Grahame R, Bird HA, Child A. The revised (Brighton 1998) criteria for the diagnosis of benign joint hypermobility syndrome (BJHS). J Rheumatol. 2000;27(7):1777-1779. 2. Grahame R. Hypermobility: an important but often neglected area within rheumatology. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2008;4(10):522-524. 3. Bravo JF, Wolff C. Clinical study of hereditary disorders of connective tissues in a Chilean population: joint hypermobility syndrome and vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(2):515-523. 4. Grahame R, Hakim A. Joint hypermobility syndrome is highly prevalent in general rheumatology clinics, its occurrence and clinical presentation being gender, age and race-related [abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(suppl 2):263. 5. Jessee EF, Owen DS Jr, Sagar KB. The benign hypermobile joint syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 1980;23(9):1053-1056. 6. Grahame R. Joint hypermobility and genetic collagen disorders: are they related? [review] [29 refs]. Arch Dis Child. 1999;80(2):188-191. 7. Kirk JA, Ansell BM, Bywaters EG. The hypermobility syndrome. Musculoskeletal complaints associated with generalized joint hypermobility. Ann Rheum Dis. 1967;26(5):419-425. 8. Tinkle BT, Bird H, Grahame R, Lavallee M, Levy HP, Sillence D. The lack of clinical distinction between the hypermobility type of Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and the joint hypermobility syndrome (a.k.a. hypermobility syndrome). Am J Med Genet A. 2009;149A:2368-2370. 9. Wood PH. Is hypermobility a discrete entity? Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64(6):690-692. 10. Gedalia A, Press J. Joint hypermobility and musculoskeletal pain [comment]. J Rheumatol. 1998;25(5):1031-1032. 11. Maillard S, Payne J. Physiotherapy and occupational therapy in the hypermobile child. In: Hakim A, Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Pain. 1st ed. London: Elsevier; 2010. 12. Wynne-Davies R. Familial joint laxity. Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64:689-690. 13. Poul J, Garvie D, Grahame R, Saunders AJ. Ultrasound examination of neonate’s hip joints. J Pediatr Orthop B. 1998;7(1):59-61. 14. Adib N, Davies K, Grahame R, Woo P, Murray KJ. Joint hypermobility syndrome in childhood. A not so benign multisystem disorder? [see comment]. Rheumatology. 2005;44(6): 744-750. 15. Davidovitch M, Tirosh E, Tal Y. The relationship between joint hypermobility and neurodevelopmental attributes in elementary school children. J Child Neurol. 1994;9(4):417-419. 16. Tirosh E, Jaffe M, Marmur R, Taub Y, Rosenberg Z. Prognosis of motor development and joint hypermobility. Arch Dis Child. 1991;66(8):931-933. 17. Engelbert RH, Kooijmans FT, van Riet AM, Feitsma TM, Uiterwaal CS, Helders PJ. The relationship between generalized joint hypermobility and motor development. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2005;17(4):258-263. 18. Mintz-Itkin R, Lerman-Sagie T, Zuk L, Itkin-Webman T, Davidovitch M. Does physical therapy improve outcome in infants with joint hypermobility and benign hypotonia? J Child Neurol. 2009;24(6):714-719. 19. McCulloch RS, Redmond A. The hypermobile foot. In: Hakim A, Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Pain. London: Elsevier; 2010. 20. Kirby A, Davies R. Developmental coordination disorder and joint hypermobility syndrome– overlapping disorders? Implications for research and clinical practice. Child Care Health Dev. 2007;33(5):513-519. 21. Fatoye F, Palmer S, Macmillan F, Rowe P, van der Linden M. Proprioception and muscle torque deficits in children with hypermobility syndrome. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009;48(2): 152-157. 22. Maillard SM et al. Physiotherapy management of benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(suppl):S78.

96


23. Hanewinkel-van Kleef YB, Helders PJ, Takken T, Engelbert RH. Motor performance in children with generalized hypermobility: the influence of muscle strength and exercise capacity. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2009;21(2):194-200. 24. Gedalia A, Person DA, Brewer EJ Jr, Giannini EH. Hypermobility of the joints in juvenile episodic arthritis/arthralgia. J Pediatr. 1985;107(6):873-876. 25. Gedalia A, Press J. Articular symptoms in hypermobile schoolchildren: a prospective study. J Pediatr. 1991;119(6):944-946. 26. Mikkellson M, Salminen JJ, Kautiainen H. Joint hypermobility is not a contributing factor to musculoskeletal complaints in pre-adolescents. J Rheumatol. 1996;23(11):1963-1967. 27. Larrson LG, Baum J, Muldholkar GS. Hypermobility: features and differential incidence between the sexes. Arthritis Rheum. 1987;30:1426-1430. 28. Bird HA, Wright V. Joint hypermobility mimicking pauci-articular juvenile polyarthritis. Br Med J. 1978;2(6134):402-403. 29. Scharf Y, Nahir AM. Case report: hypermobility syndrome mimicking juvenile chronic arthritis. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1982;21(2):78-80. 30. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB, Phillips H. Quantitative measurements of joint mobility in adolescents. Ann Rheum Dis. 1984;43(2):288-294. 31. Binns M. Joint laxity in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988;70: 420-422. 32. Bunnell WP. Outcome of spinal screening. Spine. 1993;18:1572-1580. 33. Erkula G, Kiter AE, Kilic BA, Er E, Demirkan F, Sponseller PD. The relation of joint laxity and trunk rotation. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2005;14(1):38-41. 34. Peterson H. Growing pains. Pediatr Clin North Am. 1986;33(6):1365-1372. 35. Viswanathan V, Khubchandani RP. Joint hypermobility and growing pains in school children. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2008;26(5):962-966. 36. Engelbert RH, van Bergen M, Henneken T, Helders PJ, Takken T. Exercise tolerance in children and adolescents with musculoskeletal pain in joint hypermobility and joint hypermobility syndrome. Pediatrics. 2006;118(3):e690-e696. 37. Hagroo GA, Zaki HM, Choudhary MT, Hussain A. Pulled elbow–not the effect of hypermobility of joints. Injury. 1995;26(10):687-690. 38. Adair SM, Hecht C. Association of generalized joint hypermobility with history, signs, and symptoms of temporomandibular joint dysfunction in children. Pediatr Dent. 1993;15(5):323-326. 39. Westling L, Mattiasson A. General joint hypermobility and temporomandibular joint derangement in adolescents. Ann Rheum Dis. 1992;51(1):87-90. 40. Al-Rawi ZS, Al-Aszawi AJ, Al-Chalabi T. Joint mobility among university students in Iraq. Br J Rheumatol. 1985;24(4):326-331. 41. Birrell FN, Adebajo AO, Hazleman BL, Silman AJ. High prevalence of joint laxity in West Africans. Br J Rheumatol. 1994;33(1):56-59. 42. De Felice C, Toti P, Di Maggio G, Parrini S, Bagnoli F. Absence of the inferior labial and lingual frenula in Ehlers-Danlos syndrome [see comment]. Lancet. 2001;357(9267): 1500-1502. 43. Beighton P, Solomon L, Soskolne CL. Articular mobility in an African population. Ann Rheum Dis. 1973;32(5):413-418. 44. Child AH. Joint hypermobility syndrome: inherited disorder of collagen synthesis. J Rheumatol. 1986;13(2):239-243. 45. Floyd A, Phillips P, Khan MR, Webb JN, McInnes A, Hughes SP. Recurrent dislocation of the patella. Histochemical and electromyographic evidence of primary muscle pathology. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987;69(5):790-793. 46. Francis H, March L, Terenty T, Webb J. Benign joint hypermobility with neuropathy: documentation and mechanism of tarsal tunnel syndrome. J Rheumatol. 1987;14(3):577-581. 47. March LM, Francis H, Webb J. Benign joint hypermobility with neuropathies: documentation and mechanism of median, sciatic, and common peroneal nerve compression. Clin Rheumatol. 1988;7(1):35-40.

References

97

48. Hudson N, Starr MR, Esdaile JM, Fitzcharles MA. Diagnostic associations with hypermobility in rheumatology patients. Br J Rheumatol. 1995;34(12):1157-1161. 49. Diaz MA, Estevez BC, Sanchez-Guijo P. Joint hyperlaxity and musculoligamentous lesions: study of a population of homogenous age, sex and physical exertion. Br J Rheumatol. 1993;32(2):120-122. 50. March L, Silman A. Joint hyperlaxity: is there a case for screening? Br J Rheumatol. 1993;32(2):91-92. 51. al-Rawi Z, Nessan AH. Joint hypermobility in patients with chondromalacia patellae. Br J Rheumatol. 1997;36(12):1324-1327. 52. Walker HL, Schreck RC. Relationship of hyperextended gait pattern to chondromalacia patellae. Physiotherapy. 1978;1:8-9. 53. Grahame R. Joint hypermobility–clinical aspects. Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64(6):692-694. 54. Runow A. The dislocating patella. Etiology and prognosis in relation to joint laxity and anatomy of patella articulation. Acta Orthop Scand. 2010;202(suppl):1-53. 55. Carter C, Wilkinson L. Persistent joint laxity and congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1964;46:40-45. 56. Buckingham RB, Braun T, Harinstein DA, et al. Temporomandibular joint dysfunction syndrome: a close association with systemic joint laxity (the hypermobile joint syndrome). Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1991;72(5):514-519. 57. Perrini F, Tallents RH, Katzberg RW, Ribeiro RF, Kyrkanides S, Moss ME. Generalized joint laxity and temporomandibular disorders. J Orofac Pain. 1997;11(3):215-221. 58. Westling L. Temporomandibular joint dysfunction and systemic joint laxity. Swed Dent J Suppl. 1992;81:1-79. 59. Dijkstra PU, de Bont LG, de Leeuw R, Stegenga B, Boering G. Temporomandibular joint osteoarthrosis and temporomandibular joint hypermobility. Cranio. 1993;11(4):268-275. 60. Scott D, Bird HA, Wright V. Joint laxity leading to osteoarthrosis. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1979;18:167-169. 61. Bridges AJ, Smith E, Reid J. Joint hypermobility in adults referred to rheumatology clinics. Ann Rheum Dis. 1992;51(6):793-796. 62. Jonnson H, Valtysdottir ST. Hypermobility features in patients with hand osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1995;3(1):1-5. 63. Jonnson H, Valtysdottir ST, Kjartansson O, Breddan A. Hypermobility associated with osteoarthritis of the thumb base: a clinical and radiological subset of hand osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1996;55(8):540-543. 64. Morgan AW, Gibbon W, Bird H. A controlled study of spinal laxity in subjects with joint hyperlaxity and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome [abstract]. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;58(suppl 1), Abstract 36. 65. Howes RJ, Isdale IC. The loose back: an unrecognised syndrome. Rheumatol Phys Med. 1971;11:72-77. 66. Grahame R, Edwards JC, Pitcher D, Gabell A, Harvey W. A clinical and echocardiographic study of patients with the hypermobility syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 1981;40(6):541-546. 67. Beighton P, Horan F. Orthopaedic aspects of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1969;51(3):444-453. 68. Dolan AL, Arden NK, Grahame R, Spector TD. Assessment of bone in Ehlers Danlos syndrome by ultrasound and densitometry. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998;57(10):630-633. 69. Mishra MB, Ryan P, Atkinson P, et al. Extra-articular features of benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35(9):861-866. 70. Gulbahar S, Sahin E, Baydar M, et al. Hypermobility syndrome increases the risk for low bone mass. Clin Rheumatol. 2006;25(4):511-514. 71. Sacheti A, Szemere J, Bernstein B, Tafas T, Schechter N, Tsipouras P. Chronic pain is a manifestation of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1997;14(2):88-93. 72. Grahame R. Joint hypermobility syndrome pain. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2009;13:427-433. 73. Pountain G. Musculoskeletal pain in Omanis, and the relationship to joint mobility and body mass index. Br J Rheumatol. 1992;31(2):81-85.

98


74. Harvey W, Grahame R, Panayi GS. Effects of steroid hormones on human fibroblasts in vitro. I. Glucocorticoid action on cell growth and collagen synthesis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1974;33(5):437-441. 75. Ridley MG, Kingsley GH, Gibson T, Grahame R. Outpatient lumbar epidural corticosteroid injection in the management of sciatica. Br J Rheumatol. 1988;27(4):295-299. 76. Harvey W, Dyson M, Pond JB, Grahame R. The stimulation of protein synthesis in human fibroblasts by therapeutic ultrasound. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1975;14(4):237. 77. Maitland GD. Vertebral Manipulation. 5th ed. London: Butterworth; 1986. 78. Barton LM, Bird H. Improving pain by stabilisation of hyperlax joints. J Orth Rheumatol. 1996;9:46-51. 79. Ferrell WR, Tennant N, Sturrock RD, et al. Amelioration of symptoms by enhancement of proprioception in patients with joint hypermobility syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(10): 3323-3328. 80. Kemp S, Roberts I, Gamble C, et al. A randomized comparative trial of generalized vs. targeted physiotherapy in the management of childhood hypermobility. Rheumatology. 2010;49: 315-325. 81. Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility Syndrome – Recognition and Management for Physiotherapists. 1st ed. Edinburgh/London/New York/Oxford/Philadelphia/St. Louis/Sydney/ Toronto: Butterworth Heinemann; 2003. 82. Simmonds JV, Keer RJ. Hypermobility and the hypermobility syndrome [review]. Man Ther. 2007;12(4):298-309. 83. Grahame R, Beighton P. Physical properties of the skin in the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 1969;28(3):246-251. 84. Pepin M, Schwarze U, Superti-Furga A, Byers PH. Clinical and genetic features of EhlersDanlos syndrome type IV, the vascular type [see comment] [erratum appears in N Engl J Med 2001 Feb 1;344(5):392]. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(10):673-680. 85. Neer CS, Craig EV, Fukuda H. Cuff-tear arthropathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65(9):1232-1244. 86. Gerber C, Terrier F, Ganz R. The Trillat procedure for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1988;70:130-134. 87. Noonan TJ, Tokish JM, Briggs KK, Hawkins RJ. Laser-assisted thermal capsulorrhaphy. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(8):815-819. 88. Jaggi A, Lambert SM. The shoulder joint. In: Hakim A, Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Pain. London: Elsevier; 2010. 89. Bauer FC, Wredmark T, Isberg B. Krogius tenoplasty for recurrent dislocation of the patella. Failure associated with joint laxity. Acta Orthop Scand. 1984;55(3):267-269. 90. Letts RM, Davidson D, Beaule P. Semitendinosus tenodesis for repair of recurrent dislocation of the patella in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 1999;19(6):742-747. 91. Haddad F, Dhawan R. The knee joint. In: Hakim A, Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Pain. 1st ed. London: Elsevier; 2010: chap 12, sect iv. 92. Cheng M, Tho KS. Chrisman-Snook ankle ligament reconstruction outcomes–a local experience. Singapore Med J. 2002;43(12):605-609. 93. Milhorat TH, Bolognese PA, Nishikawa M, McDonnell NB, Francomano CA. Syndrome of occipitoatlantoaxial hypermobility, cranial settling, and chiari malformation type I in patients with hereditary disorders of connective tissue. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7(6): 601-609. 94. Milhorat TH, Bolognese PA, Nishikawa M, et al. Association of Chiari malformation type I and tethered cord syndrome: preliminary results of sectioning filum terminale. Surg Neurol. 2009;72(1):20-35. 95. Kotil K, Akcetin M, Bilge T. A minimally invasive transmuscular approach to far-lateral L5-S1 level disc herniations: a prospective study. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20(2):132-138. 96. Lee JY, Lohr M, Impekoven P, et al. Small keyhole transuncal foraminotomy for unilateral cervical radiculopathy. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2006;148(9):951-958. 97. Ikuta K, Arima J, Tanaka T, et al. Short-term results of microendoscopic posterior decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis. Technical note. J Neurosurg Spine. 2005;2(5):624-633.

References

99

98. Gibson JN, Waddell G. Surgical interventions for lumbar disc prolapse: updated Cochrane Review. Spine. 2007;32(16):1735-1747. 99. Cunningham BW. Basic scientific considerations in total disc arthroplasty. Spine. 2004; 4(6 suppl):219S-230S. 100. Zigler J. Lumbar spine arthroplasty using the ProDisc II. Spine J. 2004;4(6):S260-S267. 101. Kato T. The diagnosis and treatment of instability of the sub-talar joint. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995;77(3):400-406. 102. Klaue K, Hansen ST, Masquelet AC. Clinical, quantitative assessment of first tarsometatarsal mobility in the sagittal plane and its relation to hallux valgus deformity. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15(1):9-13. 103. Tompkins MH, Bellacosa RA. Podiatric surgical considerations in the Ehlers-Danlos patient. J Foot Ankle Surg. 1997;36(5):381-387. 104. Rose PS, Johnson CA, Hungerford DS, McFarland EG. Total knee arthroplasty in EhlersDanlos syndrome. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19(2):190-196. 105. Grahame R, Kitchen S, Hunt J. The diuretic, natriuretic and kaliuretic effects of water immersion. Q J Med. 1978;45:579-585. 106. Linton SJ, Gotestam KG. A controlled study of the effects of applied relaxation and applied relaxation plus operant procedures in the regulation of chronic pain. Br J Clin Psychol. 1984;23:291-299. 107. Williams de C AC, Richardson PH, Nicholas MK, Pither C, Harding V, Ridout KL. Inpatient vs. outpatient pain management: results of randomised controlled trial. Pain. 1996;66: 13-22. 108. Flor H, Fydrich T, Turk DC. Efficacy of multidisciplinary pain treatment centers: a metaanalytical review. Pain. 1992;49:221-230. 109. Williams de C AC, Nicholas MK, Richardson PH, Pither C, Justings D, Chamberlain J. Evaluation of a cognitive behavioural programme for rehabilitating patients with chronic pain. Br J Gen Pract. 1995;43:513-518. 110. Daniel HC. Pain management and cognitive behavioural therapy. In: Hakim A, Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Pain. Oxford: Elsevier Limited; 2010. 111. Cottingham B, Phillips PD, Davies GE, Getty CJM. Effect of subcutaneous nerve stimulation (SCNS) on pain associated with osteoarthritis of the hip. Pain. 1985;22:243-248. 112. Petrie JP, Langley GB. Acupuncture in the treatment of chronic cervical pain. A pilot study. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 1983;1:333-336. 113. Gallagher J, de Petriccione de Vadi PL, Wedley J, Hamann W, Ryan P, Chikanza I. Radiofrequency facet joint denervation in the treatment of low back pain: a prospective controlled double-blind study to assess its efficacy. Pain Clin. 1994;7(3):193-198. 114. Hakim A, Keer R, Grahame R. Hypermobility, Fibromyalgia and Chronic Pain. 1st ed. Edinburgh, London, New York, Philadelphia, St Louis, Sydney, Toronto: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier; 2010.

Chapter 6

Extra-articular Manifestations of Hypermobility

6.1

Introduction

Arguably, the most surprising development of the past decade has been the realisation that the effects of JHS do not lie exclusively within the confines of the musculoskeletal system. Nowadays, it is no exaggeration to state that JHS is seen as a multifacetted multi-system disorder which effectively touches virtually all medical specialties in one way or another. The original concept dates back to the original descriptions of the syndrome in the 1960s1 when JHS was considered to be purely a mechanical problem of lax joints presenting with pain after exercise, a tendency to instability, leading ultimately to premature osteoarthritis. The affected person was seen as essentially healthy, merely lax jointed and placed at the upper end of a physiological spectrum of joint mobility.2 Since few doctors (rheumatologists included), then as now, were trained to look routinely for hypermobility, the diagnosis was rarely sought and, thus, even more rarely found. Consequently, it was (and still is) considered to be a rare condition, which is not the case.3 The great conceptual leap occurred in three stages. Firstly, there was the recognition in the 1970s and 1980s that JHS was itself a forme fruste of a heritable disorder on connective tissue (HDCT) with overlap features that it shared with other HDCTs such as Marfan syndrome (MFS), Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS) and osteogenesis imperfecta (OI)4,5 (Fig. 6.1). Secondly, the notion that what rheumatologists call JHS is indistinguishable from, if not truly identical to, what clinical geneticists term the Hypermobility type of EDS (formerly classified as EDS type III6) has become more widely accepted.7 Then, finally and slowly, over the past three decades came the realisation that patients with JHS seeking help from doctors and therapists were complaining of many symptoms that bore no obvious direct relation to joint mobility, pointing, unequivocally, to a multi-system disorder. Sadly, more often than not, their pleas initially fell on deaf ears!8,9 Published reports pointed (roughly in the chronological order of their appearance in the literature) to: P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_6, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

101

102

6


MARFAN

EHLERS-DANLOS

AORTIC DILATATION ECTOPIA LENTIS MARFANOID HABITUS

CLASSICAL, VASCULAR, ETC TYPES STRETCHY SKIN: PAPYACEOUS SCARS: STRIAE ATROPHICAE

JOINT HYPERMOBILITY SYNDROME (=EDS III?)

OSTEOPENIA

OSTEOPOROSIS; FRACTURES OSTEOGENESIS IMPERFECTA

Fig. 6.1 Overlap between the principal heritable disorders of connective tissue – Marfan syndrome, Ehlers–Danlos Syndrome (EDS) and osteogenesis imperfecta and the probable relations hip between them and the joint hypermobility syndrome (indistinguishable from the hypermobile type of EDS (EDS III))

1. Weakness of supporting structures, in particular, the pelvic floor, diaphragm and anterior abdominal wall 2. Mitral valve prolapse 3. Chronic pain 4. Joint proprioceptive impairment 5. Lack of efficacy of local anaesthetics 6. Autonomic dysfunction 7. Certain psychiatric disorders and (most recently of all) 8. Functional disorders of the gastrointestinal tract.

6.1.1

Weakness of Supporting Structures Including Pelvic Floor Insufficiency

Abdominal, thoracic and pelvic viscera may be affected as a result of weakness of supporting structures such as the anterior abdominal wall (abdominal hernia), the pelvic floor (rectal and uterine prolapse), the diaphragm (hiatus hernia) or the parietal pleura (pneumothorax).

6.1

Introduction

6.1.1.1

103

Hernia

A sevenfold increase in the prevalence of hernia was seen in children with congenital dislocation of the hip and a fivefold increase in hernia in their fathers and brothers.10 A recent postal survey undertaken among member of the Dutch Ehlers–Danlos Society found that the popular concept that hernia is more common among EDS patients was upheld.11 A recent study from neighbouring Belgium failed to detect differences between the Beighton scores in 60 adult male inguinal hernia subjects compared to controls.12 Clearly, more research using modern methodologies and concepts is needed.

6.1.1.2

Rectal Prolapse

The first report of rectal prolapse occurring in EDS was published by Beighton in 1969 in four children, all of whom had experienced complete remission of the symptom by the age of 5.13 In a study of 21 male and 4 female patients of mean age 69.3 years with rectal prolapse, the angle of extension of the fifth metacarpophalangeal joint was significantly greater (81° ± 2.2 (S.E.M.)) than in age- and sex-matched controls (68° ± 1.7)14 suggesting that rectal prolapse should be considered part of JHS. Further studies are needed to substantiate or refute this assertion.

6.1.1.3

Uterine Prolapse

Amongst a group of 76 Iraqi women suffering from various degrees of uterine prolapse, 50 (66%) showed generalised joint laxity (Beighton score >3/9), compared with 14 (18%) (p < 0.005) in age- and parity-matched female controls.15 This initial observation has been confirmed in subsequent studies. Norton et al. (1995) found an incidence of hypermobility of 36% amongst 107 stress incontinence patients examined. Subjects with hypermobility showed a highly significantly increased incidence of rectocele, cystocele and uterine or vault prolapse than controls (p < 0.001, p < 0.002, p < 0.002, respectively).16 It is now widely accepted in the gynaecological literature that tissue laxity is an important factor in the pathogenesis of pelvic floor problems. In a study of 41 adult women with the EDS (mean age 41 years), genital prolapse was present in 29.3%, incontinence in 59%, endometriosis in 27%, dyspareunia in 57%, previous hysterectomy in 44% – a higher incidence than expected for women in this age bracket.17 In a recent Turkish study, 65 women who had been recommended for surgery for pelvic organ prolapse were compared with 52 age-matched healthy controls. Patients with prolapse had a significantly higher prevalence of JHM when compared with controls (53.8% vs. 9.6%). No significant correlation was demonstrated between Beighton scores and incontinence. Unfortunately, the presence or absence of JHS according to the Brighton criteria was not recorded.18

104

6


Although pelvic floor problems are occasionally encountered in nulliparous women, they are usually considered to affect mostly multipara. In one study, 100 pairs of nulliparous and parous postmenopausal sisters were assessed for pelvic organ prolapse. High concordance of pelvic organ prolapse between nulliparous and parous sister pairs suggests a familial (possibly, even a genetic) predisposition toward developing this condition. Vaginal delivery did not appear to confer increased risk for more severe pelvic organ prolapse in later years.19 Using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) and the Manchester Health Questionnaire, Jha et al. (2007) compared 30 JHS patients with 30 controls. They found that incontinence in the JHS group was present in 18/30 compared to 9/30 (60% vs. 30%; p = 0.037) in the control group. Twenty-three per cent (7/30) of the women with JHS had in additional anal incontinence compared to none of the controls (23% vs. 0%; p = 0.01). Thus, the prevalence of both urinary and anal incontinence appears to be significantly higher in women with JHS compared to women controls.20 The same group also conducted a survey among 148 members of the HMSA (Hypermobility Syndrome Association), the UK-based patients’ self-help group (40% response rate). The survey revealed a prevalence of urinary and faecal incontinence of 68.9% and 14.9%, respectively, compared to 30% and 2.2%, respectively, as reported in the general population.21 Self-reported data of this kind clearly need to be interpreted with caution, but admittedly, the figures are striking and further studies are necessary.

6.1.2

Mitral Valve Prolapse

Mitral valve prolapse (MVP) during systole has been reported in patients suffering from hereditary disorders of connective tissue, such as MFS,22 EDS23 and OI.24 Reports in the 1980s described an increased prevalence of mitral valve prolapse in persons with hypermobility.4,25 Using the echocardiographic technology and stricter criteria of the 1990s, Mishra et al.5 were unable to find an increased incidence of MVP among 58 JHS patients (10%) as compared with 30 age- and sex-matched controls (7%). The MVP was minimal, and only one patient had associated mitral regurgitation. Furthermore, not a single patient showed aortic root dilatation, thereby helping to differentiate patients with JHS from those with MFS and confirming the distinct and benign nature of JHS. A recent paper from Turkey sheds a little more light on this subject. Forty-six MVP patients (with or without hypermobility) were compared with 25 healthy controls. The incidence of H/M as judged by the Beighton scale was found to be significantly higher in patients than that in the controls. Those with MVP + H/M had significantly increased anterior mitral leaflet thickness (AMLT), maximal leaflet displacement (MLD) and degree of mitral regurgitation (DMR) compared to those without hypermobility. However, the index of aortic stiffness (IAOS) was found to be lower and the aortic distensibility higher. There was a significant correlation between AMLT, MLD and DMR, and hypermobility. Had the

6.1

Introduction

105

authors used the Brighton criteria for JHS (rather than solely relying on the Beighton score an index of JHM), these important new data could have clarified the situation with regard to MVP in JHS rather than in the more nebulous grouping of hypermobility.26

6.1.3

Chronic Pain

Chronic pain is a frequent symptom in patients attending outpatient clinics with JHS. Twenty-six per cent of 700 JHS patients attending the author’s specialist hypermobility clinic at University College Hospital, London, admitted that their pain was ‘lifedominating’ at the time of their first attendance (unpublished data). Surprisingly, it is only in the last decade or so that the link between JHS and chronic pain has become apparent.27 The onset of chronic pain is usually insidious, superimposing itself on the pattern of often long-standing widespread joint and spinal pain that preceded it. Chronic pain is very different from acute pain. Unlike its acute counterpart, chronic pain cannot usually be directly traced to a specific injury; its distribution is diffuse without conforming to anatomical patterns; it may cover the whole body, half the body (top or bottom or left or right) or just a quadrant; it may be accompanied by dysaesthesiae, hyperesthesia or allodynia (seen in the tender points of fibromyalgia); and it is generally resistant to the most potent combinations of oral analgesics up to and including morphine. Most patients describe their efficacy at best, ‘as taking the edge of it’. In JHS, chronic pain is often aggravated by any body movement. Intuitively, the affected individual resorts to a strategy of movement avoidance as a means of pain avoidance, a process termed kinesiophobia.28 This has the effect of aggravating and compounding muscle deconditioning, indeed, the very opposite effect of what is needed by a hypermobile person whose joints are inherently unstable through joint laxity. Not surprisingly, it often plunges them into a vicious downward spiral of declining function, loss of independence, self-esteem and self-efficacy. This downturn in the patient’s fortune rarely occurs out of the blue and can usually be traced to either a change in lifestyle, such as a new job or leisure activity involving greater physical demands on the person’s already compromised locomotor system, or a sudden traumatic event like an unaccustomed physical challenge, e.g. running in a race without appropriate prior training, undertaking over-ambitious home improvements schemes or an injury such as a whiplash injury following a road traffic accident (RTA). The intensity of all their pains is amplified. This includes not only the superimposed diffuse chronic pain, but also the pre-existing pains, be they joint, spinal or soft tissue in origin, which also increase progressively in parallel over time. The level of distress is heightened further by associated chronic fatigue (which may be just as debilitating as the pain itself and may incur an erroneous diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome) and depression. Sadly, for many people in this situation, their medical attendants, appear unaware of the link between JHS and this level of pain, and they are either not believed or told that ‘it is ‘all in the mind’.9 There is also a suggestion of an association between EDS and chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS).29

106

6


New interest has been added to the established association between hypermobility and fibromyalgia known to exist both in children and adults30,31 by the finding on dynamic MRI of the cervical spine of positional cervical cord compression in extension of the cervical spine in patients with widespread chronic pain of the fibromyalgia type and dysautonomia.32

6.1.4

Proprioceptive Impairment

It has been established that JHS as defined by the Brighton criteria is associated with impairment of joint proprioceptive acuity both in the finger and knee joints.33,34 Although it is not yet certain whether this is innate or acquired, it has been shown to be capable of being improved (even normalised) by appropriate exercise therapy35 where it now forms part of the evidence-based rehabilitation programme (see Chap. 5).

6.1.5

Lack of Efficacy of Local Anaesthetics

JHS patients can often recall experiences when local anaesthetics have proved to be ineffective. In one study, the following standardised question was put to groups of JHS patients and control subjects. They were asked ‘If you have ever had a local anesthetic injection (e.g. at the dentist, for minor surgery or epidural (spinal) anaesthesia), do you think that it was as effective as it should have been?’ Some 58% of the 172 JHS patients answered ‘No’ as compared with 18% of the 53 controls (OR 2.85).36,37 It is nearly 20 years since Arendt-Nielsen and co-workers confirmed in elegant experiments that there was a true and measurable difference in responses comparing EDS patients with controls. EDS patients were not totally resistant to local anaesthetics; they merely showed a shorter duration and a reduced effect.38 Their explanation at the time for this curious symptom, that the local anaesthetic solution diffuses away more rapidly from the micro-environment of the site of the injection because of the lax nature of the connective tissues, has not been bettered over the intervening period.

6.1.6

Autonomic Dysfunction

Patients with JHS frequently complain of symptoms compatible with autonomic dysfunction. These include palpitation, dizziness, pre-syncope and syncope, and there is often an orthostatic element, similar to that seen in patients suffering from chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) or fibromyalgia (FM).39 Such symptoms may have in times gone by have previously been misinterpreted as stemming from mitral valve prolapse.5 The first association between EDS and autonomic dysfunction was established in children with chronic fatigue.40

6.1

Introduction

107

Gazit et al. (2003) confirmed the occurrence of autonomic symptoms in JHS, studying 48 patients and 20 controls. Symptoms including syncope, palpitations, chest discomfort, fatigue and heat intolerance were significantly more frequent among the JHS patients as compared with the controls. Furthermore, 27 patients and 21 controls underwent autonomic evaluation: including orthostatic testing of cardiovascular vagal and sympathetic function. Orthostatic hypotension (OI), postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (PoTS) or uncategorized orthostatic intolerance (OI) was found in 78% (21/27) of JHS patients. The authors concluded that dysautonomia is a part of the extra-articular manifestation of JHS.41 In a study of 170 JHS patients from a specialist hypermobility clinic, Hakim and Grahame identified 41% of patients with light-headedness and other presyncopal symptoms, 26% with palpitations and shortness of breath and 37% with gastrointestinal symptoms, compared to 15%, 12% and 16% in controls, respectively.42 Bravo and Wolfe, in a study of 1,226 JHS patients, found the prevalence of OH and OI to be especially high in adolescent girls and in adult JHS patients younger than 30 years old. Autonomic dysfunction was present in 72% of females and 44% of males in this series.43 In a more recent study, the presence of cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction (CAD) was identified by detailed autonomic testing in symptomatic cases of JHS. Some 63% of patients had identifiable pathology (43% PoTS, 14% vasovagal syncope (VVS) and 6% both).44 None were identified as having other pathologies such as anaemia or epilepsy that might explain their symptoms. One in three of the symptomatic cases had no identifiable autonomic pathology; a similar finding to that seen in patients with fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome.45 A recent paper from Belgium draws attention to the overlapping relationship between chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), chronic musculoskeletal pain and JHS and emphasises the significance of pain catastrophising as an indicator of poor exercise performance in CFS.46 The well-established correlation between fibromyalgia (FMS) and hypermobility both in adults30 and in children31 has recently received further confirmation in a study of 118 FMS adult women and 118 healthy controls. Unfortunately, the investigators only measured the Beighton joint score for hypermobility (rather than the Brighton criteria for JHS), so that the true incidence of JHS in the two groups is not recorded. Using a cut-off point for hypermobility of ³4/9 on the Beighton scale, 46.6% of the FMS group and 28.8% of the control group were deemed to be H/M. The mean Beighton score of FM group was higher than in the controls (3.68 vs. 2.55, p < 0.001). More severe clinical findings were seen in hypermobile FMS patients compared with those who were not hypermobile, but this did not achieve statistical significance.47

6.1.7

Certain Psychiatric Disorders

A group of psychiatric colleagues working in Barcelona, Spain, have discovered a perplexing series of links between certain anxiety and phobic states on the one hand

108

6


and hypermobility on the other. Firstly, panic disorder, agoraphobia and simple phobias were four times more common in hypermobile patients than in controls.48 Then, from the opposite direction, it was apparent that joint laxity was sixteen times more common in patients with panic attacks or agoraphobia than in controls.49 Finally, a community-based study established beyond question the association between anxiety disorders and joint laxity.50 The finding by Gratacòs et al. (2001) of an interstitial duplication on human chromosome 15 (15q24-26) (Dup 25) significantly associated with panic, agoraphobia, social phobia, joint laxity in families and with panic disorder in non-familial cases led the authors to propose that Dup 25 is a susceptibility factor for a clinical phenotype that includes both panic and phobic disorders on the one hand and joint laxity on the other.51 In an attempt to confirm these interesting findings, a group led by Zhu et al. at NIH used two different methods to detect DUP25: high-throughput molecular gene dosage analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). They evaluated 56 lymphoblastoid cell lines derived from 26 unrelated patients with panic disorder obtained from several European and American populations and 30 normal controls, but could not find any cell line showing a result consistent with DUP25.52 A similar British study attempting to replicate the experimental conditions described by Gratacòs and colleagues in which fluorescence in situ hybridization was used to examine metaphase chromosomes of patients with panic disorder/social phobia and of control individuals from a southern region of the UK, the primary aim being to determine the prevalence of this chromosomal rearrangement in a geographically and ethnically distinct population. DUP25 was not observed in any of the 16 patients, nor in 40 control samples nor in 3 previously reported DUP25-positive control (Centre d’Etude du Polymorphisme Humain) cell lines, indicating a highly significant difference in the frequency of DUP25 between the study by Gratacòs51 and colleagues and the subsequent investigations in two other centres.53

6.1.8

Functional Disorders of the Gastrointestinal Tract

It has long been appreciated that in up to 50% of patients who present to gastroenterologists with GI symptoms, no structural or biochemical abnormality can be identified. Such patients whose symptoms are unexplained are said to be suffering from functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) (this includes so-called irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)). Because of their high prevalence, FGIDs have enormous economic consequences. There is increasing evidence to suggest that joint hypermobility is strongly implicated in the pathogenesis of the FGIDs. A recent Australian study has demonstrated an association between constipation and hypermobility defined as a Beighton score of ³4/9 (but not JHS) in 39 children (aged 7–17 years) with slow transit constipation (STC), a form of chronic constipation characterised with delayed colonic passage of stool, when compared with 41 controls without constipation. JHM was sought. The relationship was only statistically significant in boys.54 In a study of 129 patients with FGIDs, no less

6.2

Straws in the Wind

109

than 63 (49%) were found to have either JHM or JHS.55 Abdominal pain, bloating and constipation and/or diarrhoea, nausea and an unpleasant taste in the mouth were the commonest symptoms, and physiological studies showed features of a pan-intestinal dysmotility including gastroparesis, small bowel dysmotility and slowed colonic transit. The first evidence pointing to JHS as a factor in the pathogenesis of obstructive defecation (OD) came from a study from Australia which observed that OD, chronic constipation, JHS, chronic heavy lifting and a history of uterovaginal prolapse were significantly associated with patients with lower urinary tract (LUT) dysfunction and obstructive defecation compared to those with LUT dysfunction alone. Overall, symptoms of obstructed defecation were not more prevalent in any one urodynamic diagnostic group than in others. However, childhood constipation and current constipation were significantly more prevalent in women with voiding dysfunction than in those with other urodynamic diagnoses (16.7% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.0030 and 13.0% vs. 5.7%, p = 0.017). The authors concluded that women with LUT dysfunction are more likely to have symptoms of obstructive defecation than are community controls. Connective tissue disorders such as JHS were considered to be an important factor in this association.56 A further study of rectal physiology has revealed in hypermobile subjects rectal evacuatory disorder (RED) with features of functional rectocele, occluding intussusception, megarectum and features suggestive of enterocele on proctography. Of 200 patients satisfying the criteria for JHM using a self-reported validated 5-point questionnaire,35 56 (86%) were found to have significant morphological abnormalities, compared to only 64% of the non-JHM group (p = 0.001).57 Thus, one-third of constipated patients presenting to a tertiary centre with symptoms of RED had evidence of JHM compared to reported prevalences of JHM in the general population of only ~5–20%.57 The notion that the cause of the intestinal dysmotility revealed in these studies could be due to a common underlying connective defect manifesting as joint hypermobility is an intriguing one that gastroenterologists have yet to contemplate.

6.2

Straws in the Wind

If fragility of connective tissue underlies such a wide variety of pathological processes, it is very likely that links between hypermobility and other diseases will come to light in years to come. A foretaste of the kind of future ramifications of hypermobility that may emerge is to be seen in orthostatic (low-pressure) headache caused by spontaneous intracranial hypotension associated with leakage of cerebrospinal fluid from the sub-arachnoid space through a rent in the dura. Of 18 patients thus presenting in one series, no less than 7 (38%) showed evidence of a connective tissue disorder including types of EDS. The authors postulate at that leakage from the dural membranes may have resulted from their inherent fragility.58

110

6


References 1. Kirk JA, Ansell BM, Bywaters EG. The hypermobility syndrome. Musculoskeletal complaints associated with generalized joint hypermobility. Ann Rheum Dis. 1967;26(5):419-425. 2. Wood PH. Is hypermobility a discrete entity? Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64(6):690-692. 3. Grahame R, Hakim A. Joint hypermobility syndrome is highly prevalent in general rheumatology clinics, its occurrence and clinical presentation being gender, age and race-related [Abstract]. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(suppl 2):263. 4. Grahame R, Edwards JC, Pitcher D, Gabell A, Harvey W. A clinical and echocardiographic study of patients with the hypermobility syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 1981;40(6):541-546. 5. Mishra MB, Ryan P, Atkinson P, et al. Extra-articular features of benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35(9):861-866. 6. Beighton P, De Paepe A, Danks D, et al. International nosology of heritable disorders of connective tissue, Berlin, 1986. Am J Med Genet. 1988;29(3):581-594. 7. Tinkle BT, Bird H, Grahame R, Lavallee M, Levy HP, Sillence D. The lack of clinical distinction between the hypermobility type of Ehlers–Danlos syndrome and the joint hypermobility syndrome (a.k.a. hypermobility syndrome). Am J Med Genet A. 2009;149A:2368-2370. 8. Grahame R. Hypermobility: an important but often neglected area within rheumatology. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2008;4(10):522-524. 9. Gurley-Green S. Living with the hypermobility syndrome [see comment]. Rheumatology. 2001;40(5):487-489. 10. Wynne-Davies R. Familial joint laxity. Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64:689-690. 11. Liem MS, van der Graaf Y, Beemer FA, van Vroonhoven TJ. Increased risk for inguinal hernia in patients with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Surgery. 1997;122(1):114-115. 12. Pans A, Albert A. Joint mobility in adult patients with groin hernias. Hernia. 2003;7(1):21-24. 13. Beighton PH, Murdoch JL, Votteler T. Gastrointestinal complications of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Gut. 1969;10(12):1004-1008. 14. Marshman D, Percy J, Fielding I, Delbridge L. Rectal prolapse: relationship with joint mobility. Aust N Z J Surg. 1987;57(11):827-829. 15. Al-Rawi ZS, Al-Rawi ZT. Joint hypermobility in women with genital prolapse. Lancet. 1982;1(8287):1439-1441. 16. Norton PA, Baker JE, Sharp HC, Warenski JC. Genitourinary prolapse and joint hypermobility in women. Obstet Gynecol. 1995;85(2):225-228. 17. McIntosh LJ, Mallett VT, Frahm JD, Richardson DA, Evans MI. Gynecologic disorders in women with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 1995;2(3):559-564. 18. Aydeniz A, Dikensoy E, Cebesoy B, Altindag O, Gursoy S, Balat O. The relation between genitourinary prolapse and joint hypermobility in Turkish women. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010;281(2):301-304. Epub May 7, 2009. 19. Buchsbaum GM, Duecy EE, Kerr LA, Huang LS, Perevich M, Guzick DS. Pelvic organ prolapse in nulliparous women and their parous sisters. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108(6):1388-1393. 20. Jha S, Arunkalaivanan AS, Situnayake RD. Prevalence of incontinence in women with benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2007;18(1):61-64. 21. Arunkalaivanan AS, Morrison A, Jha S, Blann A. Prevalence of urinary and faecal incontinence among female members of the Hypermobility Syndrome Association (HMSA). J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;29(2):126-128. 22. Taub CC, Stoler JM, Perez-Sanz T, et al. Mitral valve prolapse in Marfan syndrome: an old topic revisited. Echocardiography. 2009;26(4):357-364. 23. Dolan AL, Mishra MB, Chambers JB, Grahame R, et al. Clinical and echocardiographic survey of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Br J Rheumatol. 1997;36(4):459-462. 24. Grau JB, Pirelli L, Yu PJ, Galloway AC, Ostrer H. The genetics of mitral valve prolapse. Clin Genet. 2007;72(4):288-295. 25. Pitcher D, Grahame R. Mitral valve prolapse and joint hypermobility: evidence for a systemic connective tissue abnormality? Ann Rheum Dis. 1982;41(4):352-354.

References

111

26. Yazici M, Ataoglu S, Makarc S, et al. The relationship between echocardiographic features of mitral valve and elastic properties of aortic wall and Beighton hypermobility score in patients with mitral valve prolapse. Jpn Heart J. 2004;45(3):447-460. 27. Sacheti A, Szemere J, Bernstein B, Tafas T, Schechter N, Tsipouras P. Chronic pain is a manifestation of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1997;14(2):88-93. 28. Vlaeyen JW, Linton SJ. Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art. Pain. 2000;85(3):317-332. 29. Stoler JM, Oaklander AL. Patients with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and CRPS: a possible association? Pain. 2006;123(1–2):204-209. 30. Acasuso-Diaz M, Collantes-Estevez E. Joint hypermobility in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome. Arthrit Care Res. 1998;11(1):39-42. 31. Gedalia A, Garcia CO, Molina JF, Bradford NJ, Espinoza LR. Fibromyalgia syndrome: experience in a pediatric rheumatology clinic. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2000;18(3):415-419. 32. Holman AJ. Positional cervical cord compression and fibromyalgia: a novel co-morbidity with important diagnostic and treatment implications. J Pain. 2008;9(7):613-622. 33. Mallik AK, Ferrell WR, McDonald AG, Sturrock RD. Impaired proprioceptive acuity at the proximal interphalangeal joint in patients with the hypermobility syndrome. Br J Rheumatol. 1994;33(7):631-637. 34. Hall MG, Ferrell WR, Sturrock RD, Hamblen DL, Baxendale RH. The effect of the hypermobility syndrome on knee joint proprioception. Br J Rheumatol. 1995;34(2):121-125. 35. Ferrell WR, Tennant N, Sturrock RD, et al. Amelioration of symptoms by enhancement of proprioception in patients with joint hypermobility syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(10):33233328. 36. Hakim AJ, Grahame R. A simple questionnaire to detect hypermobility: an adjunct to the assessment of patients with diffuse musculoskeletal pain. Int J Clin Pract. 2003;57(3): 163-166. 37. Hakim AJ, Grahame R, Norris P, Hopper C. Local anaesthetic failure in joint hypermobility syndrome. J Roy Soc Med. 2005;98(2):84-85. 38. Arendt-Nielsen L, Kaalund S, Bjerring P, Hogsaa B. Insufficient effect of local analgesics in Ehlers Danlos type III patients (connective tissue disorder). Acta Anaesth Scand. 1990;34(5): 358-361. 39. Hoad A, Spickett G, Ellio J, Newton J. Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome is an underrecognized condition in chronic fatigue syndrome. Q J Med. 2008;101(12):961-965. 40. Rowe PC, Barron DF, Calkins H, Maumenee IH, Tong PY, Geraghty MT. Orthostatic intolerance and chronic fatigue syndrome associated with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Pediatr. 1999;135(4):494-499. 41. Gazit Y, Nahir AM, Grahame R, Jacob G. Dysautonomia in the joint hypermobility syndrome. Am J Med. 2003;115(1):33-40. 42. Hakim AJ, Grahame R. Non-musculoskeletal symptoms in joint hypermobility syndrome. Indirect evidence for autonomic dysfunction? Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004;43(9): 1194-1195. 43. Bravo JF, Wolff C. Clinical study of hereditary disorders of connective tissues in a Chilean population: joint hypermobility syndrome and vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(2):515-523. 44. Hakim AJ, Mathian C, Grahame R. Outcome of cardiovascular autonomic testing in symptomatic patients with benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Rheumatology. 2009;48(4):216. 45. Raj RR, Brouillard D, Simpson C. Dysautonomia among patients with fibromyalgia: a non-invasive assessment [Abstract]. J Rheumatol. 2000;27:2660-2665. 46. Nijs J, Meeus M, De Meirleir K. Chronic musculoskeletal pain in chronic fatigue syndrome: recent developments and therapeutic implications [Review] [54 refs]. Man Ther. 2006;11(3):187-191. 47. Sendur OF, Gurer G, Bozbas GT. The frequency of hypermobility and its relationship with clinical findings of fibromyalgia patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2007;26(4):485-487. 48. Bulbena A, Duro JC, Mateo A, Porta M, Vallejo J. Joint hypermobility syndrome and anxiety disorders. Lancet. 1988;2(8612):694.

112

6


49. Bulbena A, Duro JC, Porta M, et al. Anxiety disorders in the joint hypermobility syndrome. Psychiat Res. 1993;46(1):59-68. 50. Martin-Santos R, Bulbena A, Porta M, Gago J, Molina L, Duro JC. Association between joint hypermobility syndrome and panic disorder. Am J Psychiat. 1998;155(11):1578-1583. 51. Gratacòs M, Nadal M, M-Santos R, et al. A polymorphic genomic duplication on human chromosome 15 is a susceptibility factor for panic and phobic disorders. Cell. 2001;106(3):367-379. 52. Zhu G, Bartsch O, Skrypnyk C, et al. Failure to detect DUP25 in lymphoblastoid cells derived from patients with panic disorder and control individuals representing European and American populations. Eur J Hum Genet. 2004;12(6):505-508. 53. Tabiner M, Youngs S, Dennis N, et al. Failure to find DUP25 in patients with anxiety disorders, in control individuals, or in previously reported positive control cell lines. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72(3):535-538. 54. Reilly DJ, Chase JW, Hutson JM, et al. Connective tissue disorder–a new subgroup of boys with slow transit constipation? J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43(6):1111-1114. 55. Zarate-Lopez N, Farmer AD, Grahame R, et al. Unexplained gastrointestinal symptoms and joint hypermobility: is connective tissue the missing link? Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2010;22(3):252-e78. Epub Oct 15, 2009. 56. Manning J, Korda A, Benness C, Solomon M. The association of obstructive defecation, lower urinary tract dysfunction and the benign joint hypermobility syndrome: a case-control study. Int Urogynecol J Pel. 2003;14(2):128-132. 57. Mohammed SD, Lunniss PJ, Zarate N, et al. Joint hypermobility and rectal evacuatory dysfunction: an aetiological link in abnormal connective tissue? Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2010;22(10):1085-e283. Epub Jul 5, 2010. 58. Schievink WI, Gordon OK, Tourje J. Connective tissue disorders with spontaneous spinal cerebrospinal fluid leaks and intracranial hypotension: a prospective study. Neurosurgery. 2004;54(1):65-70.

Chapter 7

Illustrative Case Histories

In all the three earlier editions of this book, published between 1983 and 1999, a chapter of ‘Illustrative Case Histories’ numbering between 22 and 32 cases was included. Almost without exception they documented the variegated modes of presentation of JHS as it affected the musculoskeletal system. They illustrated how until the very end of the twentieth century, despite the evidence that was emerging over the preceding decades to the contrary, JHS was perceived exclusively as a musculoskeletal problem. With the arrival of the new millennium came the realisation that JHS is truly a multi-systemic disorder as has been recounted in Chaps. 5 and 6. To mark the occasion of this radical change of emphasis was the publication in 2000 of the ‘Revised 1998 Brighton Criteria for the BJHS’, which for the first time provided a reliable and reproducible means of classifying joint hypermobility for research purposes and clinical purposes.1 It is as a consequence of these two developments that readers will find the current chapter on Illustrative Case Histories, whilst retaining the same name, is very different in content from its predecessors. It will attempt to demonstrate the complexity of JHS as it now manifests, as well as the often unrecognised major disabling effect that it can have on the musculoskeletal system.

Case 7.1:

A 6-Year-Old Boy with EDS II/III with Grossly Unstable Hind Feet

M.A. did not walk until after his third birthday, prior to which he bottom-shuffled rather than crawled as a prelude to walking and thereafter had a marked tendency to fall. His very stretchy skin and joint hypermobility (Fig. 7.1) was first noted at the age of 2 when he was admitted to hospital for another illness. He was seen to walk on the medial aspects of his feet with marked pes planus and calcaneal eversion. His joints, especially his hands and knees, were very lax and his skin soft, velvety and very stretchy. Another relevant point in the history was the fact that he bruised easily. P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_7, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

113

114

7


Fig. 7.1 The hands of a 6-year-old boy with EDS II/ III who had grossly unstable hind feet

Fig. 7.2 Same patient with feet showing marked flattening and pronation on weight bearing and, in particular, pronounced calcaneal eversion

He was the eldest of three siblings, all of whom showed evidence of hypermobility. There was little doubt that the condition had been inherited from their father who had been diagnosed as suffering from EDS type II by Professor Michael Pope in 1993 on the basis of scarring on the forehead, elbows and knees and the finding of cauliflower fibrils on electron microscopy of his skin collagen. M.A. was considered to manifest the EDS II/III overlap. He appeared a lively boy and extremely flexible. He walked with a hyperlordotic posture and borderline scoliosis (5° on the Bunnell scoliometer). His feet showed marked flattening and pronation on weight bearing and, in particular, pronounced calcaneal eversion (Fig. 7.2). Walking with the current orthotics only partially corrected the deformity. He scored 6/8 on the modified Beighton scale (only the elbows were not positive), and outside the scale, many of his other joints including shoulders, spine, small finger and toe joints, and hips were all markedly hypermobile. His

Case 7.2:

Pelvic Floor Problems After Childbirth

115

Fig. 7.3 Same patient. His skin was very extensible (3/3)

skin was very extensible (3/3) (Fig. 7.3). There were no scars or striae. His hands and feet appeared normal in length, but the palate was somewhat high arched and he had an obvious pectus excavatum. Initially he had been supplied with Piedro boots and later ankle/foot orthotics, which he was unable to tolerate. He walked with considerable difficulty because of the severe ankle deformities. He was referred to a podiatrist for tailor-made orthotics to good effect. Comment: This case illustrates the importance of orthotic correction of severe hind foot deformity in young children with EDS. In this instance, the child was suffering from the EDS type II/III overlap, so the deformity was unusually severe as was the walking impediment.

Case 7.2:

Pelvic Floor Problems After Childbirth in a Patient with EDS Hypermobility Type

G.E., a 35-year-old mother of a 6-month-old daughter, presented with severe locomotor problems and widespread joint pain in the presence of hypermobility. As a child, she had been bendy, clumsy and fidgety, performing contortionist tricks, ballet and gymnastics, going on to experience so-called growing pains in her legs in her early teens. She subsequently developed pains in her wrists, knees, hips and shoulders, neck, thoracic and, during pregnancy, the low back region. Her father, paternal uncle and two first cousins on her father’s side were also hypermobile. She had had a series of orthopaedic procedures mainly directed towards her knees with indifferent results. In the course of a forceps delivery of her daughter, she sustained a fourth

116

7


degree perineal tear. Post-delivery, she suffered from vaginal prolapse and lack of sensation as well as urinary urgency, frequency and leakage. She was treated with supervised intensive pelvic floor exercises supplemented with long courses of biofeedback and neuromuscular stimulation. After the birth of her daughter, she found it difficult to care for her, and this gave rise to considerable concern. Compatible with a hypermobility syndrome was the recurrent dislocation of her patellae and left shoulder, widespread joint clicking, stress incontinence since childbirth and orthostatic intolerance with syncope. Examination confirmed the presence of widespread joint laxity with a hypermobility score of 4 [historically 7/9] on the Beighton scale. By contrast, her cervical and thoracic spine movements were significantly reduced in all directions, the cervical spine particularly so and the restriction was painful. Her skin was characteristically soft and silky and showed increased stretchiness in the phase of taking up slack. A number of her operative scars were paper thin, and although she had no striae atrophicae, the absence of striae gravidarum was characteristic of the condition. The lingual frenulum was absent, another inconsistent sign of the EDS. There were no features of a marfanoid habitus. She conformed to the 1998 Brighton criteria for the joint hypermobility syndrome equivalent to the EDS hypermobility type, formerly EDS III. The nature of the condition was explained to her, in particular its genetic basis and the vulnerability it confers on soft tissue to the effects of injury and overuse. In her case, it had resulted in longstanding spinal pain and instability. Comment: Unfortunately, the emphasis in her management thus far had been along the orthopaedic route, and the results had been disappointing. She needed urgent attention to the rest of her locomotor system, in particular the axial skeleton, including a programme combining core and joint stabilising and proprioception enhancing exercises coupled with a general fitness programme to restore function and reverse the changes resulting from deconditioning, together with the use of mobilising techniques to restore areas of the spine or peripheral joints to their natural hypermobile state. She was referred to the physiotherapy department for assessment. She already attended other hospitals for her complaints and a Women’s Health physiotherapist for the pelvic floor problem. A community physiotherapist visited her at home, and she also attended pain clinics at two hospitals. She found analgesics generally unhelpful, and this is a feature of the pain amplification that accompanies JHS.

Case 7.3:

A Labral Tear and Autonomic Dysfunction Complicating Hypermobility

G.V. was a 29-year-old former mental health support worker who had not worked since her hip problem started in 2006. She was considered to have joint hypermobility syndrome. Like many hypermobile people, she walked late, experienced the so-called growing pains in her limbs, performed contortionist tricks and gymnastics in childhood,

Case 7.3: A Labral Tear and Autonomic Dysfunction Complicating Hypermobility

117

and went on to suffer from recurrent ankle sprains from the age of 10 years, which had persisted to the present time. She was clumsy with a tendency to trip and bump into furniture, which is also characteristic of the condition. From the age of 10 years, she complained of pain in her knees, hips and ankles, which has persisted. One day after sitting cross-legged for 3 h (as she is wont to do), she suddenly jumped up and developed an instantaneous severe left hip pain, which was excruciating and subsequently caused great difficulty in walking. From then on she managed to get about on crutches but needed a wheelchair for outdoor use. An MRI with contrast revealed a large tear of the acetabular labrum on the left. Compatible with a hypermobility syndrome were her disc prolapse at the age of 20 with left-sided sciatica and a dislocation of the left shoulder at the age of 23 when she fell downstairs, recurrent dislocations of the patellae and left 1st MCP joint. Widespread joint clicking, easy bruising, poor skin healing, history of capsulitis of the shoulder following a dislocation and right-sided costal chondritis, TMJ problems and resistance to lidocaine at the dentist and during minor surgery were other syndromic complaints. She also had osteopenia and was receiving calcium and vitamin D. She had experienced orthostatic intolerance from the age of 13 and had a history of panic attacks and claustrophobia, both of which have been linked to hypermobility. The examination revealed evidence of marked and widespread joint laxity with a Beighton score of 9/9 on the hypermobility scale. Outside the scale, her shoulders and cervical spine were also hypermobile. However, her dorsal spine showed restriction due to pain on rotation to the right. There is a 2° scoliosis on the Bunnell scoliometer but no other features of a marfanoid habitus. Her feet flattened on weight bearing. Her skin was soft and silky and showed increased stretchiness in the phase of taking up slack. There were a few small paper thin scars on her knees from childhood scrapes and striae atrophicae which had been present since the age of 14 years. The lingual frenulum was present, a normal finding. She scored relatively high (15/30) on the checklist of symptoms consistent with autonomic dysfunction commonly seen in JHS. It was not possible to confirm the presence of orthostatic hypertension or postural orthostatic tachycardia in clinic, although a rise in her pulse rate of 19 bpm on standing from lying was somewhat suggestive of the latter. She conformed to the 1998 Brighton Criteria for the Joint Hypermobility Syndrome1 (equivalent to the EDS hypermobility type, formerly EDS III). The nature of the condition was explained to her, in particular its genetic basis and the vulnerability it confers on soft tissues to the effects of injury and overuse. In her case, it had resulted in longstanding joint pain, probably early thoracic spinal spondylosis, a past lumbosacral disc prolapse and what was, almost certainly, a labral tear associated with a dysplastic hip, and the beginnings of a chronic pain syndrome. Comment: The first priority was the need for further investigation and treatment of her autonomic symptoms and to seek orthopaedic guidance for management of the hip problem. Once this was obtained, there was the need for a programme of appropriate rehabilitation to deal with the other aspects of her condition. Physiotherapy being the mainstay of treatment, we recommended a physiotherapy programme combining core- and joint-stabilising and proprioception-enhancing exercises together with a general fitness programme to offset or reverse the tendency

118

7


to deconditioning. Where appropriate, the use of mobilising techniques to restore mobility in stiffened joints/spinal segments to their previously natural hypermobile state was also initiated.2 She had previously found painkilling drugs ineffective and had entered a pain management programme in which a cognitive behavioural approach was used.

Case 7.4:

Complexities in Diagnosis and Management

C.C. was first referred at the age of 24 years by a consultant rheumatologist following a succession of referrals to the clinicians. She was then a graduate in psychology, aspiring to a second degree to allow a career as a solicitor. At 5 ft 10 in., she was the tallest member of the family, the mother being much shorter and not obviously hypermobile though there was an implication that the separated father might have been hypermobile, and he was able to bite his toenails. Her paternal grandfather had a horseshoe kidney. The Beighton score was 9/9 though this only gave a modest assessment of extreme hyperlaxity which was present at certain sites, especially the fingers. She had avoided sports because of ‘poor co-ordination’ and easily fulfilled the criteria for hypermobility syndrome.1 Her scars were well healed and were not typical of EDS, the ocular lenses were not subluxed and, although her fingers and toes were long and thin, these latter features were not classical for arachnodactyly. The changes in the spine were those of a simple thoracic scoliosis rather than any of typical marfanoid deformities. Echocardiogram had shown mild prolapse of the mitral valve and no concerns in the aortic area or the aortic ring. There were concerns with vision, and an ophthalmologist had previously diagnosed ‘swollen optic nerves’; optic neuritis had been excluded on appropriate investigation as had the Stickler syndrome. She did, however, display variation between extreme short-sightedness and extreme long-sightedness and, more recently, had developed astigmatism. There was also a family history of psoriasis (though her own skin lesions were thought to represent acne) and of possible psoriatic arthritis, though at no stage was she considered to have developed an anterior uveitis and HLA-B27 testing was negative. The gynaecological history was complex. Her periods started at 14 years, but prior to this, she was given Co-cyprindiol for skin lesions, and found that this preparation made the hyperlax joints more painful. At one point, polycystic ovary syndrome was suspected, and this has remained under review. Whilst symptoms had been present at all joints, the main practical problem was the management of the extreme hyperlaxity in the long fingers and the extreme laxity at the shoulders, both combining to cause considerable difficulties in the large amount of writing required in her second university course. Orthopaedic review in respect of the shoulders had so far avoided plication or laser capsular shrinkage and

Case 7.5: Bony Abnormality and Complications of Subluxation

119

it was possible the slight thoracic scoliosis was contributing to an asymmetry of symptoms at the shoulders. Management to date has been with intensive physiotherapy and guidance on thoraco-scapular tracking. Standard measures had been offered for the hands including chunky pens, three-fingered grip, elasticated gloves, spica splints by day (even when writing), and firm night rest splints ensuring the hands and wrists remained in a physiological position overnight prior to writing the next day. Both universities had been supportive with the provision of an ergonomic computer keyboard, voice recognition software and even the use of a scribe in examinations. Urinary tract symptoms including mild stress incontinence and a succession of infections were initially attributed to bladder and pelvic floor dysfunction often found in hypermobility syndrome. More recent investigation, however, has confirmed the presence of bilateral duplex kidneys. Comment: Although ‘benign joint hypermobility syndrome’ provides broad cover for the many symptoms experienced by hypermobile patients, careful exclusion of alternative diagnoses is still required. Inflammatory arthritis mimicking hypermobility is unlikely to be missed, but overlap with other inherited abnormalities such as a mild variant of Marfan syndrome or even osteogenesis imperfecta needs to be kept in mind. In this case, it seemed prudent to continue with intermittent monitoring of the diameter of the aortic ring. Many patients also demonstrate clustering with other heritable disorders, in this case a condition at the eye, not fully diagnosed but thought not to be Stickler syndrome, and bilateral duplex kidney. Against this background, completion of two university courses has been challenging, but the subject is a determined optimist who has vowed to use her legal skills in the support of claimants with inherited abnormalities, hoping ultimately to specialise in this area.

Case 7.5: Bony Abnormality and Complications of Subluxation J.T., first referred by her general practitioner at the age of 20 years, had also seen a succession of consultants from different specialities, including some rheumatologists, before reaching a specialised clinic devoted to inherited conditions of collagen. Most of the doctors in her local hospitals had declared themselves ‘perplexed’ by her condition. A Beighton score of 9/9 only touched the surface, and a characteristic of her condition was extreme laxity at certain joints. She also fulfilled the criteria for benign joint hypermobility syndrome, though her case was far from ‘benign’. As a child, she had seen geneticists when brachydactyly type B was suggested as a cause of the shortening of some fingers. She also considered herself extremely flexible, talented at sports as a child but was aware of limitations in the back with a propensity to acute episodes of back pain and spasm, probably reflecting intermittent prolapse of a disc. Radiographs of the spine revealed a mild scoliosis of the spine complicated by a corkscrew twist and a mild degree of spina bifida occulta

120

7


around L5. The joints, whilst capable of contortion, appeared uncontrolled with poor proprioception. In childhood, she had experienced Raynaud’s phenomenon, but this was normally mild, bilateral and precipitated by cold weather. During the 3 years she has been under review, a more complex picture has emerged characterised by extreme localised symptoms of vascular disturbance, analogous to reflex sympathetic dystrophy, specifically sparked by subluxation of one of her most flexible joints often, though not always, one of those displaying most bony abnormality. Nevertheless, a pattern has emerged that upon subluxation, particularly of the elbow but sometimes the shoulder, an episode of reflex sympathetic dystrophy is triggered, as often occurs after a surgical operation. A further specific feature has been the tendency for muscles around the joints that sublux to go into disproportionate spasm. In spite of intensive physiotherapy tuition in the weeks before her wedding, she still had the misfortune to sublux her right ankle on the wedding eve. Comment: The subject illustrates the greater complexity of the management of hypermobility that is disproportionately severe at certain joints. Whilst the widespread laxity at all joints of the body points to collagen structure as a cause, the disproportionately severe hyperlaxity only at certain joints is almost certainly a feature of mild bony dysplasia. Moreover, it is the dysplastic joints that seem to prompt the episodes of her presumed sympathetic dystrophy, though the tendency of these patients to exhibit a widespread autonomic neuropathy may also be a predisposing factor. Pharmacological management in her case has been complicated by the need to use muscle relaxants to counteract the spasm that is typical of her dislocations but only in doses that do not aggravate the laxity at other joints. When high doses of muscle relaxants are unavoidable, temporary extra physical protection needs to be provided for joints that will be aggravated.

Case 7.6:

Arnold–Chiari Malformation and Specialised Physiotherapy

E.B., an American citizen and university lecturer, was first seen at the age of 24 years. Her Beighton score was 5/9, and she conformed with criteria for hypermobility syndrome. Nevertheless, the skin was markedly hyperextensible at certain sites, particularly around the eyes, with a velvety texture raising the possibility of overlap with the Ehlers–Danlos spectrum. Her joints had always been susceptible to subluxation, though scars had healed well. Her periods had been controlled by the fitting of a Mirena coil (a progestogen depot preparation), which she considered had not made her joints worse. As a child in the USA, she had experienced headaches from the age of 14 years. These were initially attributed to migraine, but following the development of more widespread neurological symptoms in the upper cervical core and later around the base of the brain, a Chiari malformation was suspected and confirmed on investigation. At the age of 19 years, neurosurgeons widened the foramen magnum and performed a laminectomy at C1/C2, which improved the headaches and all the

Case 7.7:

The Performing Artist

121

symptoms that could be attributed to neurological compression at the foramen magnum. Investigations showed no syrinx in the lumbar area. At one point, bilateral carpal tunnel and bilateral cubital syndromes were suspected but these resolved spontaneously. After neurological decompression, as a good witness, she felt she became more susceptible to fainting attacks. These also were investigated; tilt table testing confirming a postural orthostatic tachycardia. An interesting feature of the joint laxity was that whilst ‘cold’, and therefore at conventional clinical examination, this was moderate with a Beighton score of 5/9. After only a brief warm up with a little stretching, this became much more pronounced with a Beighton score of 9/9. Further imaging showed that some 8 years after her surgical decompression, no recurrence of the malformation had occurred. She had, however, recently experienced bowel symptoms of increasing severity attributed by the surgeons to intermittent intussusception, sometimes complicated by rectal prolapse, and she had also experienced pelvic floor urinary tract symptoms for which she is currently being investigated. Any pelvic floor repair, which is under consideration at present, will need to attend both to bladder and bowels, possibly with surgeons working in combination. Comment: This case draws attention to the probable association between Arnold–Chiari malformation and variants and patients where hypermobility is indicative of certain types of EDS. This well-informed subject considered, as so often occurs, that conventional physiotherapy practices barely helped her symptoms. She has controlled the flexibility of her joints, and the symptoms from them, by an almost obsessive dedication to her hobby, which is the practice of Ashtanga Yoga. As one of the most active variants of yoga, this combines elements of cardiovascular training, strengthening and the acquisition of flexibility. Whilst she feels it is the flexibility that most relieves symptoms, the muscular control that is required as a series of stretched asanas are built together into a sequence provides reassurance. The added complexity here has been the design of a programme that confers no extra risk in the light of the previous neurosurgery. In turn, elements of conventional physiotherapy (stretching and strengthening) are combined in the form of a hobby that is enjoyed and practised to a higher standard than might be achieved in a conventional hospital physiotherapy department.

Case 7.7:

The Performing Artist

If the previous cases have dwelt on the disadvantages of hypermobility, this case illustrates the potential advantage of the syndrome but also the need for its precise specialised management. K.A. reached a clinic devoted to inherited complications of connective tissue through the auspices of the British Association for Performing Arts Medicine which had arranged onward referral in view of her musical prowess. First seen when she was 25 years old, she had then relinquished her ambitions to be either a professional musician or a professional dancer and, in a sea of despondency,

122

7


had taken a job as a nursing care assistant where the strain placed on her joints was making her more symptomatic. As a child and adolescent, she had sought a variety of medical opinions in the rural area where she lived, often to be given conflicting advice. Her pattern of joint laxity was predominantly that of hyperflexible hips and dislocating shoulders, though evidence of joint laxity was also present at other joints to the trained eye. Her brother, who has not been seen, was probably not hyperlax, but a younger sister, also not seen, has almost certainly had a degree of congenital dislocation of the hips. There is a tradition in the family both of sporting prowess and excellence in the performing arts. As a child and adolescent, she excelled not only at dance (ballet and contemporary) but also at music (cello and piano). She achieved at least regional standing with the award of prizes and the offer of scholarships both in music and dance with the resultant dilemma of which to select. Conflicting advice was given but in view of the flexibility of the ankles and instability of the hips a ‘sensible’ decision was made to concentrate on the cello, after which over the years her shoulders and the thoracic spine became more symptomatic with a tendency for the shoulders to dislocate. When the right (bowing) wrist became symptomatic, a well-intentioned orthopaedic operation was offered, shaving the bone at the ulnar styloid and rendering the wrist less mobile, which made playing much more difficult. When first seen, x-rays of the spine showed a mild S-shaped thoracic scoliosis within a superimposed corkscrew twist and a convincing Schmorl’s node on MRI scan. The Schmorl’s node resulted in considerable local pain and muscular spasm necessitating the use of potent analgesics as well as some muscle relaxants. To date, further surgery has been avoided, a more suitable job has been found and a home exercise programme with adaptations to computer and chair at the workplace have enabled the subject to embark on a career as a university administrator with dancing relinquished and music teaching (piano, cello and theory) adopted as a part-time evening hobby. Comment: This case illustrates the complexity in advising and managing the hypermobile performing artist, although equal prowess in dance and the playing of an instrument and the need to choose between them is unusual (though not exceptional). The predominant factor here of restricting her career as a professional cellist is probably the well-intentioned, though problematic, attempt at stabilisation of the wrist, though the different mechanical functions to which the two subluxing shoulders are put in the playing of this particular instrument are also problematic. The slight corkscrew twist in the spine can be an asset or liability according to whether it is or is not in the direction of the slight angulatory movement required of the spine as the artist rotates forward over the cello. Ironically, early career advice towards dance rather than music might have been a safer option in pursuit of fame and excellence though this would be less sustainable as a hobby into old age.

References

123

References 1. Grahame R, Bird HA, Child A, et al. The revised (Brighton 1998) criteria for the diagnosis of benign joint hypermobility syndrome (BJHS). J Rheumatol. 2000;27:1777-1779. 2. Keer R, Edwards-Fowler A, Mansi E. Management of the hypermobile adult. In: Keer R, Grahame R, eds. Hypermobility Syndrome: Recognition and Management for Physiotherapists. Edinburgh/London/New York: Butterworth Heinemann; 2003.

Chapter 8

Hypermobility in the Performing Arts and Sport

Individuals endowed with hypermobility may excel in certain artistic occupations. The professional activities of dancers, contortionists, musicians and sportsmen are all influenced by their range of joint movements. The wider implications of this situation are reviewed in this chapter.

8.1 8.1.1

Dancers Are Ballet Dancers Born or Made

In the performance of their art, ballet dancers display impressive ranges of joint movement, which are clearly beyond the ability of lesser mortals. How much of this joint laxity is the result of painstaking regular training, often initiated in childhood, and how much is it due to an inherent laxity that may have acted in favour of recruitment to dancing? The answer is almost certainly that both factors are operative. In order to test the hypothesis that generalised hypermobility may confer positive advantage in the selection of would-be ballet dancers for training, a comparative study of joint mobility was undertaken in 53 students attending the Royal Ballet School in London and 53 student nurses at Guy’s Hospital.1 The results showed that, compared with the nurses, the ballet students showed a significantly higher incidence of hypermobility of joints, not only of the spine, hips and ankles, which would be affected by training, but also of joints such as the knee, elbow and wrist, which become unaesthetic in the hypermobile range (Fig. 8.1). Interestingly, 13% of the dancers but none of the nurses knew of a first-degree relative who suffered from recurrent knee effusions (a known complication of hypermobility) supporting the concept that generalised hypermobility can be inherited. There is evidence that over the age of 11–15 years, female dancers retain the level of joint laxity that they enjoyed at an earlier age, while non-dancer controls show a significant reduction in Beighton et al.2 hypermobility score over the same period.3 P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_8, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

125

126

8


Fig. 8.1 Hyperflexion of the wrist and hyperextension of the elbows produces an unaesthetic appearance

8.1.2

Is Generalised Joint Laxity an Asset or a Liability in Ballet Dancing?

On the credit side is the increased facility for undertaking the spectacular range of movement, notably of the spine, hips and ankles that is required of a ballet dancer. In the tighter-jointed individual, this can be achieved only by dint of hard work, usually with graded stretching exercises. On the debit side, generalised laxity of ligaments can pose problems for the dancer. Indeed, an enhanced range of movement may result in an unacceptable appearance. This is seen, for example, in the so-called ‘swayback knee’ or genu recurvatum (Fig. 8.2). However, even when gross, this can be corrected satisfactorily by careful voluntary muscular control (Fig. 8.3). Hyperlaxity of the tarsal joints and the first tarsometatarsal joint of the great toe (Fig. 8.4) can create serious and even disastrous problems when one attempts to dance ‘en pointe’. To a certain extent, this lack of stability can be circumvented by improving muscular tone with exercise therapy. Hypermobile dancers are vulnerable to all the ailments to which loose-jointed persons are susceptible, but because of the greater physical demands imposed by ballet dancing they are at even greater risk.

8.1

Dancers

Fig. 8.2 The ‘swayback knee’

Fig. 8.3 The same knee corrected by voluntary muscular control

127

128

8


Fig. 8.4 Instability of the first metacarpophalangeal joint precludes the possibility of dancing ‘en pointe’

Not surprisingly, back, knee and foot complaints figure prominently amongst hypermobile dancers, many of whom are forced to abandon their career prematurely.4 Miller et al.5 compared the problems of the professional ballet dancer with those of a vigorous athlete, and cited osteochondral fractures, fatigue fractures, sprains, chronic ligamentous laxity of the knee, meniscal tears, degenerative arthritis of multiple joints and low back pain as problems which were frequently encountered. In a systematic radiological survey of 28 members of the Cincinnati Ballet Company, evidence of stress fractures was seen by the weight-bearing bones of the lower limbs.6 These were recognised in the femoral necks, anterior aspects of the mid-shafts of the tibiae and the lower half of the fibulae. In the feet, cortical thickening was present in the first, second or third metatarsal shafts in 23 out of 28 dancers but there were no fractures. A postal survey of injuries sustained in dancing, conducted throughout the USA and some other countries, revealed that ligamentous injuries were by far the commonest lesions.7 These occurred in the knee, ankle and foot, in descending order of frequency. Fractures constituted the second most frequent injury and the majority of these were in the metatarsals and phalanges.

8.1

Dancers

129

Fig. 8.5 Radiograph of the foot of a ballet dancer who complained of pain in the second right metatarsal shaft. There is hypertrophy of the cortex but no fracture

A hypermobility score of 4 or more by the Beighton et al. criteria was present in 36 (9.5%) of 377 ballet dancers studied by Klemp et al.8 Forward flexion correlated significantly with the duration of dance training, indicating an acquired training effect with regard to this movement, whilst the high prevalence of joint hypermobility in dancers’ families indicated a strong hereditary influence on generalised laxity. Injuries were significantly more numerous in the hypermobile dancers than in the non-hypermobile ones. Scintigraphy has been used to bring to light stress lesions in dancers presenting with pain and tenderness in the bones of the foot with normal appearance on radiography.9 Such a case is illustrated in Figs. 8.5 and 8.6, when little is shown on conventional radiography, although there is increased uptake in the scan in an area corresponding to the shaft of the second right metatarsal. This 16-year-old ballet student had experienced pain in the affected region for the previous 18 months and had been precluded from doing her pointe work. After a 3-month rest, her symptoms remitted and a repeat bone scan was normal. Similar findings have been reported in athletes.10 If generalised joint laxity represents one aspect of a multisystem heritable connective tissue disorder, it is conceivable that fractures, at least in some dancers, may be a further facet of the same problem. Another factor favouring the development of fractures is osteoporosis associated with oestrogen deficiency in adolescent female dancers with delayed menarche and/ or amenorrhoea.11,12 Such problems appear to be a combination of the degree of exercise and self-imposed dietary deficiency.13

130

8


Fig. 8.6 A scintiscan using technetium-99m diphosphonate. Increased uptake of the isotope on the region of the second right metatarsal is indicative of a ‘stress lesion’ (Reproduced with permission from Grahame et al.9)

8.1.3

The Prevention of Injury

Attention at dance schools has recently been directed to the screening of pupils and the prevention of injury. Applicants with joint hyperlaxity may sometimes be recommended to undertake a course of strengthening exercises before commencing the arduous routine inherent in professional dancing. Two recent articles have reviewed the prevalence and treatment of injury with comments on perception of causes.14-16 Although factors such as being overtired, overworked, unsuitable flooring, inadequate warm-up and difficult choreography all figure as causes of injury, many of the injuries described were those classically associated with hypermobile subjects. One quarter of all injuries occur at the foot or ankle, problems of the patella dominating knee complaints. Male dancers, with less laxity, have problems analogous to weight lifters, such as acute and chronic back and shoulder injuries. Female dancers were particularly susceptible to foot and ankle injuries, especially when these joints were relatively lax. Overuse injuries figure as prominently amongst dancers as amongst musicians. Imbalance or stress such as occurs between the plantar and dorsiflexors of the feet17 is increasingly recognised as a factor predisposing to injury. A Swedish study18 drew attention to the way in which poor training accounts for increased musculoskeletal complaints amongst 147 professional dancers.

8.2

Contortionists

131

A spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis, both common associations with joint hypermobility, are frequently found as causes of back pain in dancers. The incidence of spondylolysis in dancers has long been known to be four times that in the general population19; although this is sometimes attributed to the increased flexion extension inherent in dancers, an alternative explanation is that hyperlax subjects, favoured at audition, already have such an abnormality. Oblique radiographs or computer tomography may demonstrate stress fractures.20 Trunk strength as well as pilates exercises are helpful, and early diagnosis is important. Spondylolisthesis is also common amongst dancers. A grade 1 spondylolisthesis is not a contraindication to dance, and it is possible to dance with spondylolisthesis of even greater severity.

8.2 8.2.1

Contortionists Historical Background

Contortionists were certainly active 4,000 years ago, as evidenced by an engraving on the hilt of the sword, which now rests in a museum at Heraklion, on the island of Crete. This depicts a lithe youth in the Palace of Knossos, balancing himself on the tips of his toes and the crown of his head, which arched over the point of the blade. Extreme joint laxity seems to have excited interest in many cultures. During mediaeval times, contortionists performed in fairgrounds, attracting an audience by their peculiar abilities. When a crowd gathered, their assistants would sell patent remedies such as ‘slippery worm oil’, claiming that it was efficacious in the treatment of sore and stiff joints. The contortionist’s performance was obvious proof of the benefits to be obtained from regular applications of the oil! These acts were the forerunners of America’s nineteenth-century travelling medicine show wagons. Further information is available at ‘The Contortion Home Page’ at http:// contortionhomepage.com.

8.2.2

Nosology and Semantics

There has been much confusion in the past as to the differences, from a professional point of view, between the ‘India Rubber Man’ and the ‘Elastic Lady’. Although these terms were more or less interchangeable in the circus world, the India Rubber Man was usually a joint-bending contortionist, while the Elastic Lady was a skinstretching exhibitionist. The elastic people could take hold of the skin of their face or trunk and pull it out for several inches. On release, it would immediately spring back to its former position. These individuals had Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS), which is a familial disorder of connective tissue (see Chap. 9). Articular hypermobility is also a feature of EDS, and the elastic people were therefore equipped to

132

8


Fig. 8.7 A professional contortionist demonstrating her prowess (From Beighton71)

perform contortions. However, in view of their cutaneous fragility and unstable joints, it is doubtful whether they indulged in this activity. The contortionist’s act is centred around the ability to hyperextend or hyperflex the spine. In circus terminology, the performer is either a ‘front bender’ or ‘back bender’, and all the facets of the act are built on these movements. Many contortionists have considerable athletic prowess, and they may be able to indulge in such variations as placing their feet around their necks, whilst standing on one hand. The forward bending is usually the ‘funny man’, as he can take up ludicrous positions and perform amusing feats. In contrast, the backward bender or ‘posturer’ has a more serious act. The posturer is often an attractive young woman who can perform speciality acts, or incorporate her abilities into a graceful dance routine.

8.2.3

Training

Many contortionists develop their skills by rigorous training. This must begin in childhood, and the French author, Guy de Maupassant, described how mountebanks would steal children for this purpose. Legislation to preventing training of children in Great Britain was enacted at the beginning of the present century. Contortionists who have acquired their joint laxity by years of training must practise for several hours each day, and even a week of inactivity will result in a marked stiffening of the joints. In the same way, a long warming-up period is required before the performance. However, some contortionists have inherent articular laxity, and these individuals are in a much more fortunate situation, as they require very little in the way of training or warming-up. They are usually able to perform forward and backward bending with equal facility, and inactivity does not lead to loss of joint mobility (Figs. 8.7–8.9). On the other hand, their joints may be unstable, and they may be unable to perform feats of strength. Although able to roll up into a tiny ball, they cannot do this while balanced on their fingers! This type of joint laxity is often a genetic trait, and these individuals may have familial

8.3 Musicians

133

Fig. 8.8 and Fig. 8.9 A contortionist with inherent articular laxity is usually able to perform forward and backward bending with equal facility (From Beighton71)

hypermobility (see Chap. 9). The disorder is usually inherited as an autosomal dominant, and a number of affected persons are members of well-known circus families.

8.2.4

Socio-medical Implications

It is a surprising fact that osteoarthritis does not seem to affect elderly contortionists, and indeed, many of them retain hypermobility in old age. Ferry the Frog could still wrap his feet around his head at the age of 72 years, and he attributed his good health to his professional activity. Dad Witlock was performing in an American circus when he was 79 years old, and Norwood, the Flexible Fellow, retained much of his flexibility in his 80s (Fig. 8.10). Perhaps the secret of their continuing health is their good nature and their readiness to please other people. In the theatrical world, it is axiomatic that the ‘Elastic Ladies’ are always prepared to stretch a point, while the ‘India Rubber’ people are renowned for their willingness to bend over backwards to be of assistance!

8.3

Musicians

Manual dexterity is essential to the handling of many orchestral instruments, and hypermobility may be an asset. Dancers and contortionists tend to use both halves of the body equally. In musicians, the requirements of the instrument may dictate

134

8


Fig. 8.10 ‘Norwood the Flexible Fellow’ a professional contortionist in the days of the music halls

quite separate uses of the two sides; this is most pronounced in string players. Such musicians act as their own control, adding interest to the study of this group of players. Nicolo Paganini (1778–1840) is frequently quoted as having extreme hand hypermobility. Contemporary accounts describe his tall, thin frame and spider-like features associated with a chest deformity and striking laxity of the hands, endowing him with a technical prowess, which enabled him to play his difficult compositions. Some have suggested that he had Marfan’s syndrome.

8.4

Occupational Ills of Instrumentalists

135

Attention has recently been directed to the increasing digital skill, particularly with respect to the neglected fifth digit, that is inherent in the development of instrumental music over the centuries as both instruments and techniques have become more complex.21 Unilateral laxity of one hand is particularly helpful in classical guitarists.22 It has recently been argued that several composer pianists, including Liszt and Rachmaninov, were endowed with joint hypermobility in the hands, enabling them to compose and then play their extremely difficult works. Plaster of Paris casts of Liszt’s hands show them to be relatively large, and pupils of Rachmaninov who still survive attest to the considerable lateral laxity of the middle fingers in his hands that allow him to play stretched chords with great facility. Such chords figure prominently in his piano writing. It does not follow that a composer such as Mozart had hypomobile hands – the technical limitations of the instrument of his time, together with contemporary taste, also have influence on the final composition. The laxity of hands has been determined in 650 individuals at a music school. Hypermobility was found to be predominantly a female characteristic in this population. Age differences, as anticipated, were demonstrated. Attention was drawn to the way in which hypermobility could affect only a small number of joints (or even in a solitary joint), this pauci-articular hypermobility being more prevalent than the generalised variety in musicians. Whether this was acquired as a result of musical training or reflects selection of musicians by virtue of hyperlaxity in the hands remains unanswered.23-25 Playing instruments can certainly cause music-related upper limb pain,26 probably through overuse, though this study did not determine whether the frequency of pain was specifically associated with joint hyperlaxity.

8.4


The spectrum of rheumatic complaints seen in a music clinic has been outlined in considerable detail from several countries. Hochberg et al.27 describe their experience with 100 musicians presenting to an American clinic, and Fry28 describes patterns of overuse seen in 658 instrumental musicians, mainly from Australia. One review based on the Eastman School of Music, University of Rochester, New York, devotes particular attention to the influence of joint hypermobility on musical injuries.23 Additional reviews available include those by Hoppman and Patroni29, Lambert30 and Greer and Panush.31 Ironically, musicians are not matched anatomically and physiologically to instruments at the start of their training. This means that some individuals devote many years of practice to instruments for which they are anatomically unsuited. Inevitably, when they come to pursue a professional career, musculoskeletal difficulties occur, leading to much anxiety and sometimes loss of employment. In woodwind players, the main difficulty is holding a relatively heavy instrument (in the case of the oboe and clarinet) at a position of mechanical disadvantage for long periods of time. This leads to musculoskeletal problems in the shoulders, and difficulties can also occur with the mouth and lips. Pianists also develop bilateral

136

8


problems concentrated at the wrists and the fingers. The span required between fingers may be greater than the lesser spans required for the key systems of woodwind instruments, so hand hypermobility may be advantageous for pianists, particularly in interpretation of works of the late romantic era. Pianists with relatively stiff hands may be advised to concentrate on earlier composers. With players of stringed instruments, considerable differences in function are required between the two arms. Players of the double bass and cello may also have back and seating problems, particularly affecting the lower back muscles, whereas woodwind players need postural support of the upper body, particularly if the instrument is held sideways, as with the flute. Particular problems are seen with cellists who have a slight curvature of the spine, particularly if this is a corkscrew twist. The natural position for cello playing requires a slight rotation towards the instrument. If a cellist has a slight spinal rotation in the opposite direction, overuse problems often ensue. By contrast, a slight spinal twist in the direction appropriate for the instrument confers advantages. Additional problems have been seen in classical cellists who convert to the electric cello, which requires the use of a foot pedal. This can upset the alignment of the spine, especially if there is a slight scoliotic twist prior to the transition. For violin and viola players, one hand holds the bow and is subject to musculoskeletal strain, particularly at the shoulder and elbow. The other hand stops the strings, so lateral laxity of the fingers may be advantageous, enabling the hand to span a long distance on the sounding board. The greatest divergence of function occurs with the guitar. The hand that plucks the strings has a relatively easy task. The hand that spans the sounding board benefits from considerable hand hypermobility, the stretches required being greater than those in the violin or viola. It is tempting to hypothesise that in string players, especially those who have practised for many years, proprioception might be enhanced in the left hand, the fingers of which require precise positioning on the strings compared to the right hand where the function of the fingers is largely supportive of the bow with no great need for enhanced position sense. Studies of this sort, using the Leeds Proprioceptometer (see Chap. 2), are in progress. In the Rochester assessment of 660 individuals from a music school, musicians were examined for laxity of the thumbs, fingers, elbows, spine and knees. Of these, 178 (27%) had one lax joint, and only 20 (3%) possessed all five features. The proportion of women to men displaying two features was 2:1, the ratios for the occurrence of three, four and five features being 4:1, 8:1 and 3:1, respectively. Joint laxity declined with age though not to a statistically significant degree. In males, the decline started in the mid-20s, but in women, joint laxity persisted unaltered through the mid-40s. The authors did not attempt a correlation of patterns of joint laxity with the playing of individual instruments, so the question of whether the hyperlax individuals represented a normal occurrence within the population or whether they acquired their hypermobility by regular training from an early age remains unanswered. The Gaussian distribution of observed joint laxity was confirmed in this population. Additional surveys of instrumental musicians with overuse syndromes and with other musculoskeletal problems are available in the literature. Lederman and Calabrese32 have reviewed overuse syndrome in instrumentalists as seen in American musicians. Fry38 has described overuse syndrome in musicians as seen in Australia.

8.4


137

Fig. 8.11 The left wrist of the guitarist exhibiting traumatic synovitis (Reproduced with permission from Bird and Wright34)

His subsequent articles review patterns of overuse in 658 affected instrumental musicians28 and treatment of overuse syndrome in 175 patients.33

8.4.1


Musicians attending a rheumatology clinic in Leeds fall into three main categories: 1. Those with hypermobility of the hands 2. Those with normal laxity of the hands but with overuse syndromes 3. Those who have acquired systemic rheumatic diseases but who still wish to continue their playing The overuse syndromes now account for the most referrals. Typical case histories are presented from each of these three groups.

8.4.1.1

Hypermobility: Traumatic Synovitis in a Classical Guitarist

PD, a 31-year-old male, was a student of the classical guitar. He practised for up to 5 h each day for the last 10 years and was an advanced performer with a national reputation. In June 1978, he noticed pain at the back of the left wrist associated with swelling, exacerbated by practising the guitar. It was not present in the other hand, and no other joints were involved. In December 1978, he sought the advice of his general practitioner, and a cystic swelling on the dorsum of the left wrist was ascribed to traumatic synovitis (Fig. 8.11). He considered himself to be

138

8


‘double-jointed’ in comparison with other members of the class, and there was an unusual degree of joint laxity present in both hands. In May 1979, he was seen in the rheumatology clinic at Leeds. The swelling of the dorsal aspect of the left wrist had persisted, but his symptoms were controlled by indomethacin 25 mg three times daily. There was no early morning stiffness and no other symptoms apart from possible intermittent swelling of some proximal interphalangeal joints. His father had regarded himself as ‘double-jointed’, and a maternal aunt and grandmother were both said to have had rheumatoid arthritis. Although his score for generalised hypermobility was on 4/9, he had marked hypermobility in both hands. There was no clinical evidence of rheumatoid disease at the metacarpal or metatarsal heads or at the ulna styloid. All other joints were normal. Routine haematological and serological investigations yielded normal results, and radiographs of the hands and feet revealed no abnormality. He was treated with a single local injection of steroid and a short period of rest. This produced immediate and lasting improvement in spite of a subsequent return to regular guitar practice. He had only minimal symptoms for a period of 2.5 years; these did not require further steroid injections and were controlled by indomethacin capsules, which were taken as required, two or three before a concert. He was then lost from the clinic. The apparent association between the patient’s joint laxity, his occupation and the synovitis prompted study of other members of the guitar class.34 Details were collected of age, sex and duration of guitar playing. Hyperextension of the metacarpophalangeal joint of the left index finger was measured by the Leeds Finger Hyperextensometer (35; see Chap. 2) and assessment of the lateral laxity of the fingers made by eye and graded +, ++, +++. The finger hyperextensometer was also used to assess laxity of the same joint in 100 normal people, drawn at random from a Caucasian population. The degree of joint laxity found in the other members of the guitar class (11 male, 3 female) was in no instance as marked as in this particular individual. Overall, the females exhibited slightly more laxity than did the males. Hand laxity did not correlate with the duration of guitar playing, and the observations suggested that hereditary factors were more important than regular training in producing the observed laxity. Even when an allowance was made for the age differences, the only member of the class who exhibited synovitis (PD) had by far the most striking laxity in the hands. This was not only in an antero-posterior plane, but also in a lateral plane. Indeed, PD was the only member of the class who could reasonably be described as ‘double-jointed’. It is of interest that guitar players overall have a lower degree of hyperextension than normal members of the population. This possibly reflects their greater muscular control since studies on athletes confirm that the range of movement at other joints in the body is reduced by regular athletic training (see below). In the case of PD, there was a strong history of joint hypermobility on his father’s side of the family and it seems that his hypermobility was inherited. Only the stretched hand developed a synovitis and it is in this hand that he has had the majority of musculoskeletal symptoms associated with benign hypermobility. Lateral instability

8.4


139

in the loaded joint may be the most important factor on the aetiology of traumatic synovitis.

8.4.1.2

Overuse Syndromes: Synovial Trauma in a Violinist

PN, a 27-year-old violinist had performed to a high standard for almost 10 years, often playing for up to 8 h a day. His symptoms had always been confined to the left hand and wrist, and he attributed this to the greater stress placed upon this hand by his playing. He did not consider himself to be ‘double-jointed’, and there was no evidence of generalised joint hypermobility. The history was of 4 weeks of pain in the left wrist, most pronounced when he flexed the joint and accentuated by rapid finger work. Like many patients with overuse syndrome, he had identified a critical threshold above which symptoms occurred. He had noticed that if he was able to rearrange his work schedule (which was difficult with his appointment) so that the critical threshold was never exceeded, the symptoms abated over a period of a few days. Examination showed no general or localised hypermobility, though there was a localised point on the extensor tendon expansion over the left wrist at which pain could be reproduced. A diagnosis of overuse syndrome was made, and the patient was advised to immobilise the joint for 4 days. The symptoms disappeared, and this schedule was then changed for a compromise between immobilisation and playing that did not exceed the trigger threshold. The localisation of symptoms to one hand strongly supports the mechanical aetiology of overuse syndrome. In many patients, chronicity develops and anxiety can exacerbate symptoms as well.

8.4.1.3

Acquired Systemic Disease: Generalised Osteoarthritis in a Violinist

Mrs. EM, aged 68 years, had been Leader (Concert Master) of a respected local orchestra for 20 years. She played the violin regularly for 50 years and had also taught this instrument. There was a family history of progressive generalised osteoarthritis, and examination confirmed this diagnosis with the presence of Heberden’s nodes and typical osteoarthritic deformity. There is no evidence of rheumatoid disease in the form of muscle wasting, vasculitis, nodule formation or synovial proliferation. Nevertheless, a remarkable degree of osteoarthritic deformity existed in her joints, possibly attributable to the additional mechanical insult of playing her instrument over many years. She had never considered her hands to be hypermobile, though examination confirmed the presence of an unusual degree of joint hypermobility for a 68-yearold woman. In part, this may be attributed to her earlier treatment with a small dose of oral prednisolone. Management has been with analgesics, anti-inflammatory agents and as required and the occasional increase in the dose of prednisolone to enable her to perform well at an important concert. Musicians are often of high intelligence, and it is remarkable how

140

8


they learn to adapt their playing technique in the face of arthritic deformity. Even patients with rheumatoid arthritis are often able to continue pursuing their musical hobby.

8.4.2

Repetitive Strain Syndrome

This accounts for most maladies experienced by musicians.36 It is characterised by pain and loss of function in muscles and joint ligaments of the upper limb but can affect other muscles, for example the mouth and soft palate in wind players.37 Physical signs of tenderness can often be elicited in affected structures, and the condition is typically brought on by an increase in the duration and intensity of practice or playing.38,39 Opinions vary on treatment, which ranges from absolute immobility at one extreme to a more cautious approach integrating periods of rest with a gentle return to playing.40 The syndrome has been a major cause of litigation in Australia.41 If the condition is mechanical in aetiology and if joint hypermobility behaves as a graded trait with a Gaussian distribution throughout the population, research is likely to be directed to seeking possible correlations between these two common conditions. The anecdotal impression that repetitive playing of an instrument is more likely to invoke discomfort in hands that are hypermobile, rather than nonhypermobile, is a strong one. There is also an impression that in violin players, symptoms of repetitive strain are more likely to be present in the left hand, whether this is dominant or non-dominant, compared to the right, reflecting the quite different hand function in the two arms. It has been claimed that the repetitive strain syndrome is characterised by an increase in type 1 muscle fibres and a decrease in type 2 fibres, with mitochondrial changes and other ultrastructural abnormalities in a controlled study of muscle biopsy in this condition.42 Overall, the frequency of this condition appears to be reducing particularly in certain countries such as Australia where an apparent epidemic of 5 years ago was felt partly to be attributable to the wide number of conditions, with vague definition, for which industrial compensation was available. Musicians, unlikely to benefit from litigation in view of the parlous financial state of orchestras and music schools, do not illustrate such trends, and in general, the percentage of musicians experiencing overuse syndromes such as repetitive strain disorder has remained relatively constant.

8.5

Sport

All sportspeople attest to the need for ‘flexibility’, a useful attribute, which is said by coaches to improve performance in a wide variety of sports. There is a Gaussian distribution of ‘flexibility’ throughout the population and in sports; this natural variation may be altered by regular training. A stiff person may become more supple but may never reach the level achieved by individuals who have greater natural endowment.

8.5

Sport

141

The range of movement at any given joint depends upon a variety of actions, including muscular tone, laxity of the ligaments and joint capsules and the shape of bony contours. In the hip, for example, either acetabular dysplasia or ligamentous laxity may produce an abnormally wide range of movement. Individuals must be considered on their own merits according to their sport, and different joints within the same person are likely to respond to different training programmes. For example, all the best hurdlers may have a small degree of acetabular dysplasia, which enables them to achieve the wide range of lateral movement at the hip joint that is required in this sport. Regular training of the individual without this particular bone structure may never achieve the range of movement required, no matter how much attention is given to the factors which may be altered, such as muscle tone and ligamentous stretching. In Eastern European countries, the selection of individuals who are suitable for particular sports reached a high level of sophistication. Schoolchildren were screened for their body attributes and directed into the sport in which they were most likely to succeed. This selection was followed by a lengthy and detailed training programme at specialist state-subsidised schools. The range of movement that can be achieved at joints varies not only between persons but also between different joints in the same individual. ‘Flexibility’ may not always be of value to the sportsperson. Joint hypermobility at the elbow, a feature deliberately sought on the Carter and Wilkinson43 scoring system, may be a severe disadvantage to a gymnast who has to stand on his or her hands. The elbows may give way under the weight of the body, and regular training is required to increase the muscle tone around the elbow joint in order to achieve stabilisation. Similarly, hyperextension of the knee joint, a feature also sought in the Carter and Wilkinson scoring system, places runners at a disadvantage, particularly when running downhill. Conversely, the ability to hyperextend the knee confers a mechanical advantage in uphill running. The virtue of evaluating joint laxity in sport is to enable individuals to be directed towards the sport for which their joints are most suited. Thereafter, where necessary, training programmes should be directed at improving the performance of the joints in terms of the requirements of that particular sport. This may involve either inducing hypermobility in a stiff person or stabilising laxity in an individual who is initially too supple. Certain sports where hypermobility is especially relevant, or to which the author’s attention has been directed, are reviewed below.

8.5.1

Joint Hypermobility in Selected Sports

Gymnasts have much in common with ballet and hypermobility would at first sight be deemed an advantage. A wide range of movement at the lumbar spine, hips and shoulders is required. Although parts of women’s gymnastics place emphasis on suppleness at many joints, marks are also rewarded for tumbling which requires considerable momentum of a stable body. Instability of the elbows would be a disadvantage in performing a handstand, and strength is needed in the sub-sport of

142

8


acrobatics where human pyramids are built. Gymnastics coaches prefer a relatively stiff newcomer to a novice who is too supple. Appreciation of each individual’s attributes is required. Thus, the ‘crab’ or backbend position can be achieved in several ways. Provided that a total sum of 180° of hyperextension is achieved, the precise joints that hyperextend can be varied according to the individual’s ability. Some will hyperextend the back; others will compensate for a stiff back with hyperextension of the shoulders and hips.44 It has been suggested that idiopathic scoliosis may be more frequently encountered in gymnasts than in other sportspersons and that, in turn, a degree of hypermobility that might be beneficial in gymnastics has actually predisposed to the presence of a scoliosis.45 Swimmers are aware of the beneficial effects of practising in warm water, which enhances the range of movement at joints. Many swimmers cite a particular stroke as their preferred one and this is often based upon anatomical attributes. Thus, the butterfly stroke requires the greatest flexibility of all at the shoulders, though considerable strength as well and is tiring, requiring power in the legs. The back stroke requires slightly less (though still substantial) flexibility in the shoulders and is less tiring on the body. The crawl (freestyle) occupies an intermediate position requiring only modest flexibility of the shoulders and reasonable strength in the legs. For these reasons, it is the most popular stroke and most frequently encountered. The breaststroke is compatible with relative stiffness in the shoulders but requires substantial flexibility in the hips and knees to adopt the ‘frog’ position that is required for it. Diving combines the attributes of swimming and gymnastics46 especially from the highest board. In athletics, a small physique is suited to long-distance running whereas the taller individual will excel at the long jump. For high jumping and hurdling, flexibility of the spine and hip, respectively, may be advantageous. Javelin throwers need flexibility at the shoulder. Racquet sports require flexibility of the shoulder, though neuromuscular co-ordination with good reflexes and good eyesight may be more important attributes in the selection of students. In team sports such as soccer, rugby and hockey, joint hypermobility will not contribute extensively to the individual’s sporting performance, though it may influence the pattern of sports injuries the player is likely to sustain. The same applies to cricket, though laxity of the fingers may help spin bowlers to impart a greater rotation on the ball as it leaves the hand. Work from Leeds47 quantified the range of joint movement using hydrogoniometry at a wide selection of joints in an athletic population selected for joint hyperlaxity. This included gymnasts competing at national club level, divers and dancers as well as non-specialised physical education students who acted as controls. The greater laxity of females in youth was confirmed and the influence of training recorded. A graded increase in laxity from controls through novice gymnasts, divers, dancers, to competitive gymnasts was observed in that order. A group of patients recruited because of their symptoms had an even higher degree of laxity recorded on a Carter and Wilkinson scale as measured by a postal questionnaire.

8.5

Sport

8.5.2

143

Joint Hypermobility in Cricket

If a single sport were to be selected as being most closely entwined with hypermobility, it would probably be cricket with the arm actions required of the bowlers. It also provides an interesting example of inter-ethnic aptitude. In general, the elbows, wrists and fingers of Caucasians are relatively inflexible. Genetic mutation would probably be required to give them the prowess enjoyed by competing ethnic groups. As might be expected, West Indians of Afro-Caribbean descent tend to have a little more hyperlaxity than their Caucasian competitors (see Chap. 2). Asymptomatic hypermobility, especially of the fingers, seems to be a trait of individuals from the Indian subcontinent, particularly the southern part, which probably accounts for the prowess of spin bowlers from India. Lateral laxity of the fingers is required both to hold the ball and to impart the spin. If strength is acquired in the index and ring fingers, the ball can be held between the two, the middle finger depressed such that not only is the ball spun but also it is virtually impossible for the batsman to read the direction of the spin procured (The Doosra). By contrast, anatomical variation in the elbow, arguably particularly pronounced in the northern part of the Indian subcontinent (characterised politically as Pakistan), has led to attempts to rewrite the rules of cricket. If natural hyperextension of the elbow occurs in fast bowlers, the force of the action will cause the hyperextension to be pronounced, leading to the criticism of ‘throwing’. This is clearly a quirk of natural selection in individuals so endowed and would therefore not necessarily carry any implication of cheating. The philosophy of whether extreme natural selection is compatible with ‘fair play’ also intrigues. Much ink has been spilt on the importance of chromosome testing in athletes with the implication that the resultant differential concentration of male and female sex hormones might confer unfair advantage. By contrast, AfroCaribbeans, with their explosive power in sprint events or hyperlaxity of the spine conferring an advantage in tall, thin, high jumpers, would not attract such criticism. The distinction between selecting individuals for sports deliberately by virtue of their anatomical endowment and then implying that this confers unfair advantage, analogous to cheating, would seem to be a fine one.

8.5.3

Joint Hypermobility in Yoga

Although not strictly a sport, yoga also raises intriguing issues both ethnic and therapeutic. That yoga may have originated on the Indian subcontinent where individuals are often endowed with asymptomatic hyperlaxity may not have arisen by chance. Legend sometimes has it that those who devoted unlimited time to religious practices had ample time to refine the art form. Philosophical implications apart, there exists a wide variety in the anatomical and physiological requirements for each of the many yoga styles. At one extreme

144

8


are the philosophical variants where time is spent observing a candle burn, which may in itself provide relaxation analogous to cognitive behavioural therapy that has sometimes been claimed to be helpful in the management of hypermobility syndromes. At the opposite extreme are the severely physical, even acrobatic, types of yoga with Ashtangar yoga as the most obvious example. A little less severe than Ashtangar and concentrating deliberately on an exact balance of agonist and antagonist movements around a given joint is Miyengar yoga. All have their advocates, not least in the treatment of hypermobility syndromes. This raises the extent to which yoga is beneficial in hypermobility and, indirectly, whether physiotherapy routines should concentrate on strengthening or stretching or aim to combine both. This last is probably the most appropriate, and discussion with yoga teachers attending or assisting in our own clinics devoted to hypermobile patients suggests that a combination of two-thirds strengthening and one-third stretching may well be optimum for patients, though there is considerable variation between individuals and ideally a programme should be tailor-made to the attributes of each individual set of joints.

8.6

Hypermobility and Injury

Injuries rarely occur in yoga but are more frequently seen in competitive contact sports such as American football. In one large study,48 American footballers were divided into ‘stiff-jointed’ and ‘loose-jointed’ individuals. The former were particularly susceptible to tearing injuries, and the latter were susceptible to stretching injuries. Physiotherapy programmes and training schedules were modified accordingly so that hypermobile joints were stabilised by enhanced muscle power. The injury rate declined. These general findings have been confirmed whenever other sports are studied. Although injury patterns in gymnasts follow this general rule,44 most injuries result from falls or even from faulty apparatus rather than from joint hypermobility.49 In a study to determine whether injury-prone gymnasts could be identified using simple test procedures, 22 with relatively high body weight were found to be most susceptible to injury. As a result, an injury score that could be applied to trainee gymnasts in the field was devised. Of the injuries, 70% could be predicted from consideration of weight, height, mesomorphy, lumbar posture and age.50 That ligamentous laxity makes a relatively minor contribution to injury is confirmed in a study in which 166 American footballers and 116 basketball players were compared to 400 normal age-matched subjects not involved in interscholastic sports. No correlation could be found between ligamentous laxity and the occurrence or type of injury.51 With renewed social interest in keep-fit programmes, it should be recalled that individuals who are unaccustomed to regular training develop rheumatic symptoms, particularly in hypermobile joints, after performing ‘aerobics’.52 Knee injuries have been the subject of research. A physiological study to examine the hypothesis that excessive training of the knees by exercises led to acquired increased ligamentous laxity

8.6 Hypermobility and Injury

145

that might predispose to injury showed a significant increase in joint laxity (p = 0.02) after an appropriate exercise programme.53 Females may be particularly susceptible in view of the increased knee joint laxity inherent in a normal female population. It has been argued that female athletes may be better protected by vigorous training regimes, and the degree of potential knee laxity should be considered when females are selected for serious training in different sports.54 In a study of basketball-related injuries in 76 females, the knee was the most common site of injury and anterior cruciate ligament rupture accounted for 25% of all injuries seen. This injury was more common in female than in male basketball players, and joint laxity, along with a weak quadriceps mechanism, player position and hormonal background were postulated as reasons for the difference between sexes.55 Joint laxity has also contributed to injuries at a variety of joints in soccer players.56 The role of knee meniscus injury also merits attention. Medial meniscectomy often predisposes to osteoarthritis.57,58 Whether this is because the operation leads to altered joint mechanics, or whether individuals who require operation already display a genetic susceptibility to osteoarthritis mediated by the presence of faulty collagen that causes the initial damage, is not clear. In a radiological survey of physical education teachers, premature osteoarthritis was not seen significantly more frequently than in an age-matched control population but, on the odd occasion when it occurred, usually after meniscectomy, it was severe in the physical educationalists.59 When stress radiography for antero-posterior mobility of the knees was performed on 17 patients who had undergone medial meniscectomy and 10 patients who had undergone later meniscectomy, an increase in varus mobility following medial meniscectomy was primarily attributed to compression of the medial compartment space. Anterior and total antero-posterior mobility were bilaterally greater in patients with medial meniscectomy compared with lateral meniscectomy and were also greater than values obtained with 28 normal knees. On this evidence, the biomechanical joint laxity induced by the operation may be the greatest risk factor, and individuals who already have hyperlax joints might benefit from counselling prior to operation and more intensive physiotherapy after it.60 A graded exercise programme, individualised for each subject, providing strengthening exercises around joints that were particularly lax and providing stretching exercises around joints that were particularly stiff has been shown to be effective in improving performance. This stabilisation of hypermobile joints, in particular, was pronounced and maintained using the standard method favoured by sports physiologists advising sporting coaches.47

8.6.1

Training Methods to Improve Joint Flexibility

It may be advantageous for the athlete and coach to increase the range of joint movement. A variety of methods have been validated for this. Massage and warming-up are beneficial61, and static stretching exercises and stationary

146

8


cycling both proved equally effective in increasing the range of movement of the hip joint, retaining the increase for a 15-min period in a controlled environment.62 Stretching by jogging is less helpful in increasing mobility than simple stretching exercises.63 One of the most effective methods of enhancing the range of joint movement is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). This hypothetically induces relaxation of the muscle to be stretched through spinal reflexes.64,65 Studies show that a static contraction preceding muscle stretch facilitates stretching activity through lingering after discharge in the afferent limb of the stretch reflex. A muscle is initially more resistant to change in length after a static contraction. In an electromyographic investigation of muscle stretching techniques in which static, contraction/relaxation cycles and PNF were compared in 21 female gymnasts, hamstring stretch produced the greatest increase in range of joint movement and was associated with significantly greater hamstring length.66 Although the efficacy of PNF is not doubted, the long-term risk of its use on muscles and ligaments, if any, still has to be determined. Experience from North America, where the method has been used for many years and where the results of its use are well documented, does not at present cause undue anxiety. A small pilot study in which plain stretching, ballistic stretching and PNF were compared in a group of medical students who were amateur dancers suggests that both ballistic stretching and PNF are superior to ordinary passive stretching in procuring extra flexibility. However, since the benefits from PNF, although most pronounced, were also normally short-lived, ballistic stretching under appropriate careful supervision was judged to be the most effective. This would also conform with the view of many sports coaches. More comprehensive details of the many methods available for improving the range of joint movement for athlete pursuits are to be found elsewhere.67,68

8.6.2

Hormonal Aspects

That dancers and, perhaps, other sportspersons for whom a small frame is considered advantageous might also have implications in relation to hypermobility is something that has not so far attracted much attention. In the management of hypermobility syndromes, evidence is accumulating that progestogens tend to make previous asymptomatic hypermobile joints symptomatic, while oestrogens tend to stabilise and reduce symptoms. With menarche sometimes delayed in the case of dancers and young female gymnasts, there may be implications for joint laxity as well as for bone strength. In the case of male football players, maturity, defined as the difference between chronological age and skeletal age, plus training and playing hours, together in a formula, predict injury in schoolboy footballers 69. Joint mobility was not measured in this study but may also have contributed. Epidemiologically, the ratio of finger length between the second and fourth fingers has been championed as a predictor of sporting prowess in females.70 The

References

147

reason is unclear and probably depends upon the diverse gender and hormonal related traits, including cognitive ability, disease susceptibility and sexuality. A relationship with testosterone has also been postulated, perhaps influencing joint laxity, as well as muscular strength. Clearly, a variety of factors may have relevance of which joint laxity is only one.

References 1. Grahame R, Jenkins JM. Joint hypermobility – asset or liability? a study of joint mobility in ballet dancers. Ann Rheum Dis. 1972;31:109-111. 2. Beighton P, Solomon L, Soskolne CL. Articular mobility in an African population. Ann Rheum Dis. 1973;32:413-418. 3. Poul J, Fait M, Bajerova J. Zjistovani generalizovani ligamentosni laxicity u studujicich baletu. Rheumatologia (CSSR). 1988;4:246-252. 4. Huwyler J. Bedeutung der flexibilität bei klassichen tänzerinnen und tänzern. Orthopade. 1984;13:52-62. 5. Miller EH, Schneider HJ, Bronson JL, McLain D. A new consideration in athletic injuries. The classical ballet dancer. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975;111:181-191. 6. Schneider HJ, King AY, Bronson JL, Miller EH. Stress injuries and developmental change of lower extremities of ballet dancers. Radiology. 1974;113:627-632. 7. Washington EL. Musculoskeletal injuries in theatrical dancers: site, frequency, and severity. Am J Sports Med. 1978;6:75-98. 8. Klemp P, Stevens JE, Isaacs S. A hypermobility study in ballet dancers. J Rheumatol. 1984;11:692-696. 9. Grahame R, Saunders AS, Maisey M. The use of scintigraphy in the diagnosis and management of traumatic foot lesions in ballet dancers. Rheumatology. 1979;18:235-238. 10. Saunders AJS, El Sayed TF, Hilson AJW, Maisey MN, Grahame R. Stress lesions of the lower leg and foot. Clin Radiol. 1979;30:649-651. 11. Warren MP. The effects of exercise on pubertal progression and reproductive function in girls. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1980;51:1150-1157. 12. Warren MP, Brooks-Gunn J, Hamilton LH, Warren LF, Hamilton WG. Scoliosis and fractures in young ballet dancers. Relation to delayed menarche and secondary amenorrhea. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:1348-1353. 13. Anonymous (leading article). Bionic ballerinas. Lancet. 1985;326:481-482. 14. Bowling A. Injuries to dancers: prevalence, treatment, and perceptions of causes. Br Med J. 1989;298:731-734. 15. Hald RD. Dance injuries. Primary Care. 1992;19:393-411. 16. Schon LC, Weinfeld SB. Lower extremity musculoskeletal problems in dancers. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 1996;8:130-142. 17. Micheli LJ, Gillespie WJ, Walaszek A. Physiologic profiles of female professional ballerinas. Clin Sports Med. 1984;3:199-209. 18. Ramel E, Moritz U. Self-reported musculoskeletal pain and discomfort in professional ballet dancers in Sweden. Scand J Rehabil Med. 1994;26:11-16. 19. Roche MB, Rowe GG. The incidence of separate neural arch and coincident bone variations. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1952;34:491-493. 20. Micheli LJ. Back injuries in dancers. Clin Sports Med. 1983;2:473-484. 21. O’Donovan DK. The role of the fifth digit in music: discussion paper. J R Soc Med. 1992;85: 740-743. 22. Bird HA. Occupational illnesses in classical guitarists. Eur Guitar Teachers Assoc. 1991;2: 27-29.

148

8


23. Larsson LG, Baum J, Mudholkar GS. Hypermobility: features and differential incidence between the sexes. Arthritis Rheum. 1987;30:1426-1430. 24. Larsson L-G, Baum J, Mudholkar GS, Kollia GD. Benefits and disadvantages of joint hypermobility among musicians. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:1079-1082. 25. Grahame R. Joint hypermobility and the performing musician. N Engl J Med. 1993;329: 1120-1121. 26. Fry HJ, Rowley GL. Music related upper limb pain in schoolchildren. Ann Rheum Dis. 1989;48:998-1002. 27. Hochberg FH, Leffert RD, Heller MD, Merriman L. Hand difficulties among musicians. JAMA. 1983;249:1869-1872. 28. Fry HJ. Patterns of over-use seen in 658 affected instrumental musicians. Int J Music Educ. 1988;11:3-16. 29. Hoppmann RA, Patrone NA. A review of musculoskeletal problems in instrumental musicians. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 1989;19:117-126. 30. Lambert CM. Hand and upper limb problems of instrumental musicians. Rheumatology. 1992;31:265-271. 31. Greer JM, Panush RS. Musculoskeletal problems of performing artists. Baillieres Clin Rheumatol. 1994;8:103-135. 32. Lederman RJ, Calabrese LH. Overuse syndromes in instrumentalists. Med Probl Perform Art. 1986;1:7-11. 33. Fry HJ. The treatment of overuse syndrome in musicians. Results in 175 patients. J R Soc Med. 1988;81:572-575. 34. Bird HA, Wright V. Traumatic synovitis in a classical guitarist: a study of joint laxity. Ann Rheum Dis. 1981;40:161-163. 35. Jobbins B, Bird HA, Wright V. A joint hyperextensometer for the quantification of joint laxity. Eng Med. 1979;8:103-104. 36. Bird HA. Overuse injuries in musicians. Br Med J. 1989;298:1129-1130. 37. Bird HA. When the body takes the strain. New Sci. 1990;1724:49-52. 38. Fry HJ. Overuse syndrome in musicians: prevention and management. Lancet. 1986;328: 728-731. 39. Fry HJ. Prevalence of overuse (injury) syndrome in Australian music schools. Br J Ind Med. 1987;44:35-40. 40. Bird HA, Rathbone J, Nixon PGF. Over-use syndromes in musicians. Lancet. 1986;328: 916-917. 41. Littlejohn GO. Repetitive strain syndrome: an Australia experience. J Rheumatol. 1986;13: 1004-1006. 42. Dennett X, Fry HJ. Overuse syndrome: a muscle biopsy study. Lancet. 1988;332:905-908. 43. Carter C, Wilkinson J. Persistent joint laxity and congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1964;46-B:40-45. 44. Bird HA, Walker A, Newton J. A controlled study of joint laxity and injury in gymnasts. J Orthop Rheum. 1988;1:139-145. 45. Meyer C, Cammarata E, Haumont T, et al. Why do idiopathic scoliosis patients participate more in gymnastics? Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2006;16:231-236. 46. Brodie DA, Bird HA, Wright V. Joint laxity in selected athletic populations. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1982;14:190-193. 47. Barton L, Bird HA, Lindsay M, Newton J, Wright V. The quantification of joint hyperlaxity in athletes. J Orthop Rheumatol. 1995;8:79-86. 48. Nicholas JA. Injuries to knee ligaments: relationship to looseness and tightness in football players. JAMA. 1970;212:2236-2239. 49. Silver JR, Silver DD, Godfrey JJ. Injuries of the spine sustained during gymnastic activities. Br Med J. 1986;293:861-863. 50. Steele VA. Injury Amongst Female Olympic Style Competitive Gymnasts [M.Sc., thesis]. Salford: Physical Education Section, University of Salford; 1984.

References

149

51. Grana WA, Moretz JA. Ligamentous laxity in secondary school athletes. JAMA. 1978;240: 1975-1976. 52. Hull RG. Articular hypermobility presenting after aerobic exercise. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 1985;3:359-360. 53. Skinner H, Wyatt MP, Stone ML, Hodgdon JA, Barrack RL. Exercise-related knee joint laxity. Am J Sports Med. 1986;14:30-34. 54. Beck JL, Wildermuth BP. The female athlete’s knee. Clin Sports Med. 1985;4:345-366. 55. Gray J, Taunton JE, McKenzie DC, Clement DB, McConkey JP, Davidson RG. A survey of injuries to the anterior cruciate ligament of the knee in female basketball players. Int J Sports Med. 1985;6:314-316. 56. Keller CS, Noyes FR, Buncher CR. The medical aspects of soccer injury epidemiology. Am J Sports Med. 1987;15:230-237. 57. Serafini-Fracassini A, Smith JW. The Structure and Biochemistry of Cartilage. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1974. 58. Tapper EM, Hoover NW. Late results after meniscectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51: 517-526. 59. Bird HA, Hudson A, Eastmond CJ, Wright V. Joint laxity and osteoarthrosis: a radiological survey of female physical education specialists. Br J Sports Med. 1980;14:179-188. 60. Sturup J, Iversen BF, Lauersen N. Abnormal knee mobility and meniscal injury. Acta Orthop Scand. 1987;58:655-657. 61. Wiktorsson-Möller M, Oberg B, Ekstrand J, Gillquist J. Effects of warming up, massage, and stretching of range of motion and muscle strength in the lower extremity. Am J Sports Med. 1983;11:249-252. 62. Hubley CL, Kozey JW, Stanish WD. The effects of static stretching exercises and stationary cycling on range of motion at the hip joint. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1984;6:104-109. 63. Williford HN, East JB, Smith FH, Burry LA. Evaluation of warm up for improvement in flexibility. Am J Sports Med. 1986;14:316-319. 64. Holt LE, Travis TM, Okita T. Comparative study of three stretching techniques. Percept Mot Skills. 1970;31:611-616. 65. Knott M, Voss DE. Proprioceptive Neuromuscular Facilitation: Patterns and Techniques. 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Rowe; 1968. 66. Moore MA, Hutton RS. Electromyographic investigation of muscle stretching techniques. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1980;12:322-329. 67. Anderson R. Stretching: Exercises for Everyday Fitness and for Twenty-Five Individual Sports. London: Pelham Books; 1980. 68. De Vries HA. Physiology of Exercise. Dubuque: Brown & Co; 1986. 69. Johnson A, Doherty PJ, Freemont A. Investigation of growth, development, and factors associated with injury in elite schoolboy footballers: prospective study. Br Med J. 2009;338:b490. 70. Paul SN, Kato BS, Hunkin JL, Vivekanandan S, Spector TD. The big finger – the second to fourth digit ratio (2d:4d) is a predictor of sporting ability in females. Rheumatology. 2006;45(supp 1):Abs 283, 116. 71. Beighton P. The Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome. London: William Heinemann Medical Books Ltd; 1970.

Chapter 9

Heritable Hypermobility Syndromes

The heritable hypermobility syndromes are a group of disorders in which joint laxity is a prominent feature. In some of these conditions, the loose joints predispose to a wide variety of articular complications and, despite their rarity, they are of considerable rheumatological importance. The best-known disorders of this type are Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS) and Familial Articular Hypermobility syndrome (FAHS). Joint laxity is also a feature of several inherited connective tissue disorders, such as Marfan syndrome and osteogenesis imperfecta, together with certain dwarfing skeletal dysplasias and other genetic entities. These conditions are reviewed here from the rheumatological standpoint, and a selective bibliography is provided.

9.1

Ehlers–Danlos Syndrome

The Ehlers–Danlos syndrome is an inherited disorder of connective tissue which is characterised by the clinical triad of articular hypermobility, dermal extensibility and cutaneous scarring.1,2 The manifestations are very variable, although usually fairly consistent within any kindred, and it has become increasingly evident that the EDS is very heterogeneous. The joint laxity in EDS leads to a wide variety of rheumatological complications which are outlined in this chapter. Detailed accounts of the condition can be found in the following books: The Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Beighton (1970)3 McKusick’s Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue, Beighton (1993)4 Connective Tissue and Its Heritable Disorders, Royce and Steinmann (1993)5 Articles in the online GeneReviews series, which are regularly updated, provide expert overviews of the various forms of the EDS. P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_9, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

151

152

9


EDS Classic Type (Wenstrup and De Paepe 2008)6 EDS Hypermobility Type (Levy 2007)7 EDS Vascular Type (Pepin and Byers 2006)8 EDS Kyphoscoliotic Type (Yeowell and Steinmann 2008)9 EDS is of topical interest because of the protean nature of its clinical complications, the unfolding heterogeneity and the ongoing elucidation of the biomolecular determinants. The level of attention that is being given to the EDS can be obtained from the fact that in 1991, the world literature concerning the condition comprised about 500 articles. By 2009, this figure had risen to over 1500. In 1966, the combined population frequency of all forms of the EDS in southern England was estimated at about 1 in 150,000, while the current estimates for the USA are as high as 1 in 5,000. The latter figure is indicative of increasing awareness of the condition, together with diagnostic accuracy and medical interest. The development of lay associations for affected families, the availability of information on the internet and the establishment of dedicated Hypermobility clinics are other relevant factors.

9.1.1

General Features

There is considerable variation in the extent to which individuals may be affected by EDS, and the clinical manifestations and complications are by no means consistent. Nevertheless, the components of the diagnostic triad of extensible skin, loose joints and fragile tissues are always present in some degree (Figs. 9.1–9.3). The skin splits on minor trauma, forming gaping lacerations. These heal slowly and wide papyraceous scars develop which are often darkly pigmented and are typically found over the knees and elbows. Raisin-like swellings known as molluscoid pseudotumours are present in scarred areas and hard calcified subcutaneous spheroids may be palpated in the forearms and shins. The joint laxity predisposes to instability, sprains, subluxations and dislocations. Pes planus and hallux valgus are frequent, while spinal malalignment is a less common complication. Limb and joint pains of uncertain pathogenesis are an inconsistent but important problem. Complications are encountered in virtually every system of the body; these have a common basis in connective tissue extensibility and fragility. In the minority of affected persons with the Vascular form (previously EDS IV), sudden death can occur from rupture of large arteries, dissection of the aorta or gastrointestinal perforation and bleeding.

9.1.2

Nosology

Heterogeneity was initially suspected on clinical and genetic grounds.10,11 Further delineation was achieved by the recognition of the basic biochemical

9.1 Ehlers–Danlos Syndrome

153

Fig. 9.1 Dermal extensibility is a prominent feature of EDS. On release, the skin springs back to take up its former position (From Beighton3)

Fig. 9.2 Thin pigmented scars over the bony prominences result from trivial trauma (From Beighton3)

154

9


Fig. 9.3 Articular hypermobility is variable in degree, but often very marked (From Beighton3)

abnormality in some affected individuals and nine major forms of EDS were eventually proposed. A nomenclature and subclassification of EDS, together with information concerning the mode of inheritance, was subsequently promulgated as the ‘Berlin Nosology’.11a The continuing elucidation of biochemical and molecular defects and the widening of clinical experience soon necessitated expansion.12 In 1997, a new version of the Nosology was compiled at Villefranche-sur-Mer, France, under the auspices of the Ehlers-Danlos Support Group (UK) and the Ehlers-Danlos National Foundation, USA.12 This simplified version, which listed six major types of the EDS, is presented in Chap. 1. It has emerged that about 50% of families with the comparatively common EDS types I and II have defects of the proa1 or proa2 chains of type V collagen determined by the COL5A1 and COL5A2 genes; these conditions are now lumped together as the ‘Classic’ type of the EDS. The former EDS III is retained as the ‘Hypermobility’ type, in which the basic defect is still unknown, although the glycoprotein tenascin-X has been implicated in a few instances.13 EDS IV, in which type III collagen is defective, is now codified as the ‘Vascular’ type. The uncommon EDS VI, previously known as the ‘Ocular’ or ‘Scoliosis’ form, is characterised by major spinal problems, while the eyes are often normal. For this reason, it is now termed the ‘Kyphoscoliosis’ type; the basic defect is deficiency of the collagen-modifying enzyme, lysyl oxidase. The former EDS VII was an incompletely delineated category, which has now been subdivided on a biomolecular basis. The new ‘Arthrochalasia’ type is an autosomal dominant condition with predominant joint laxity and extensible skin which results from a defect in type I procollagen, due to a skipping mutation of exon 6 in the COL1A1 gene. The other former component of EDS VII, an autosomal recessive disorder with skin laxity and fragility which is now termed the ‘Dermatosporaxis’ type, is the consequence of deficiency of


155

procollagen 1 N -terminal peptidase in collagen type I. The clinical manifestations of these two rare entities are very disparate. The former EDS V, VIII and X are now regarded as private syndromes or of doubtful syndromic status, while EDS IX and XI have been reclassified. Further discussion is outside the scope of this review but details of the biomolecular defects in the EDS can be found in Chap. 3 and in articles referenced at the end of this chapter. In clinical practice, the majority of affected persons have the Classical type of EDS (formerly EDS I gravis and II mitis). Another large group of individuals have the Hypermobility type (formerly EDS III) and as discussed elsewhere, this category is frequently overdiagnosed. In the uncommon potentially lethal Vascular type (formerly EDS IV), the propensity for arterial and bowel rupture overshadows the other conventional syndromic manifestations. The remaining forms of the EDS are rare.

9.1.3

Diagnostic Considerations

The initial diagnosis of the various forms of the EDS is usually made on a basis of the clinical manifestations and pedigree data. It must be emphasized, however, that there is considerable phenotypic overlap and precise categorisation is often very difficult. In these circumstances, it may be possible to obtain an objective diagnosis by biochemical studies involving cultured fibroblasts or by molecular investigations. Histological and electron microscopical investigations of skin biopsy specimens yield conflicting results and they are not of great diagnostic value. A firm diagnosis facilitates accurate prognostication and meaningful genetic counselling. Related issues such as prenatal diagnosis, pre-implantation diagnosis and carrier detection may arise, and in these situations, the identification of a specific mutation by molecular techniques is necessary. The banking of DNA for future studies is another issue which warrants consideration. In view of the increasing sophistication of laboratory technology and the rapid accumulation of knowledge, it is anticipated that routine molecular genetic testing in the EDS will be increasingly available. The practical implications of the common forms of the EDS and the current status of biomolecular testing in these conditions are summarised below: 1. Classical form (OMIM 130000:130015) The Classical form of the EDS is the archetype of the disorder and affected persons have the characteristic skin and articular features in greater or lesser degree. Autosomal dominant inheritance is well established and large affected families have been documented. The geographical distribution is wide and a population prevalence of 1 in 20,000 has been estimated for the USA. In the premolecular era, the electron microscopical ‘cauliflower’ configuration of collagen fibrils in skin biopsy specimens was used as a diagnostic indicator. These changes have proved to be inconsistent, and this test has fallen into disuse. Biochemical investigations are unhelpful but molecular studies have proved to be of value.

156

9


Mutations in the COL5A1 gene identified by sequence analysis are present in about 45% of affected families and in the COL5A2 gene in 5% of families.14-16 In the remainder, the determinant genes have not been identified.17 In clinical practice, molecular investigations for the COL5A1 and COL5A2 genes are widely available in Europe and the USA. 2. Hypermobility form (OMIM 130020) Articular laxity in the absence of other syndromic manifestations is a common problem in the rheumatological setting. In this situation, diagnostic distinction between the Hypermobility form of the EDS, the Familial Articular Hypermobility syndrome and persons at the end of the normal spectrum of joint mobility can be a difficult matter.17a The molecular basis of the Hypermobility form is the focus of considerable current interest. The usual mode of inheritance is autosomal dominant, but in a rare autosomal recessive variety, deficiency of the glycoprotein tenascin-X encoded by the TNXB gene at the chromosomal locus 6p21.3 has been implicated.18,19 Some heterozygotes in an affected family had joint laxity.20 In a separate group of 80 sporadic persons with joint laxity, 6 had deficiency of tenascin-X and the corresponding gene mutation was identified in 2 of them.21 These observations have considerable potential implications for diagnostic categorization, but it must be emphasized that at the present time, tenascin deficiency has been detected in only a very small minority of persons with articular laxity. These tests are not currently available on a routine basis. 3. Vascular form (OMIM 1300500) The potentially lethal Vascular form of the EDS is uncommon, and a population prevalence of about 1 in 250,000 has been estimated for the USA. Despite this low frequency, reports of dramatic arterial and visceral complications and their management predominate in the literature. The surgical management of spontaneous bowel perforation was discussed by Fuchs and Fisherman.22 and Hawk et al.23 The occurrence of spontaneous carotid cavernous fistulae was reviewed by Chuman et al. and the surgical management of this complication was outlined by Hollands et al.24 Naidu et al.25 reported percutaneous embolisation of a lumbar pseudoaneurysm. The hazards of surgical intervention have been emphasised by Freeman et al.26 and Oderich et al.27 and a review of 400 affected persons provided objective information concerning the natural history of the condition.28 In view of the unfavourable prognosis, diagnostic confirmation in the Vascular form is routinely obtained by biomolecular investigations on blood or skin biopsy specimens. The conventional approach is biochemical demonstration of abnormal type III collagen in proteins synthesised in cultured skin fibroblasts, followed by molecular analysis of the COL3A1 gene.29,30 These tests are readily available in Europe and North America. 4. Kyphoscoliotic form (OMIM 225400) The autosomal recessive Kyphoscoliotic form of the EDS is most often encountered in Greece, Turkey and the Middle East, and it is uncommon in Western Europe and the USA. The condition resembles the Classic form of the EDS with the additional features of a propensity to early onset progressive


157

kyphoscoliosis, arterial rupture and occasional spontaneous perforation of the ocular sclera. The diagnosis is made by biochemical assessment of the activity of the enzyme lysyl hydroxylase I indirectly in urine specimens31 or directly in cultured fibroblasts.32 Determinant mutations in the PLOD-1 gene at the locus 1p36.3–p36.2 can be identified by molecular sequencing or deletion-duplication analysis.33 Diagnostic confirmation and gene carrier detection is available in specialised laboratories.

9.1.4

Rare Forms of the EDS

For the sake of completion, rare forms of the EDS are summarised below. These conditions are unlikely to be encountered in routine rheumatological practice.

9.1.4.1

EDS Arthrochalasis Type (Formerly EDS VIIA and B)

Congenital dislocation of the hip is a presenting feature of this rare autosomal dominant form of the EDS. Skin extensibility, a mild scarring propensity and marked articular laxity are other manifestations.34 Mutations in the COL1A1 or COL1A2 genes underlie mRNA deletions of exon 6. Investigation of collagen fibril ultrastructure may be of diagnostic value.35

9.1.4.2

EDS Dermatosparaxis Type (Formerly EDS VIIC)

Skin fragility and laxity are the major manifestations of this autosomal recessive condition. Joint laxity is minimal but short stature, stubby digits and blue sclerae are syndromic concomitants. Activity of the enzyme procollagen-N-proteinase is deficient.36

9.1.4.3

EDS Progeroid Type

In addition to joint laxity and dermal extensibility, affected persons have an aged appearance, with thin wrinkled skin and fine hair. The basic defect in this rare autosomal recessive disorder is defective activity of galactose transferase 7 due to homozygosity for mutations in the B4GALTZ gene.

9.1.4.4

EDS Cardiac Valvular Type

In this autosomal recessive disorder, the manifestations of the Classic form of the EDS are accompanied by significant abnormalities of the valves of the heart. Mutations in COL1A2 gene have been implicated.37

158

9.1.4.5

9


Classic EDS with Arterial Rupture

A few individuals with the Classic EDS phenotype plus a propensity to arterial rupture have been documented.38 This autosomal dominant disorder results from a mutation in the COL1A1 gene. 9.1.4.6

Spondylocheiro Dysplastic form of the EDS

This unusual autosomal recessive entity is the consequence of homozygosity for mutations in the zinc transporter gene SLC39A13.39 9.1.4.7

EDS: Osteogenesis Imperfecta phenotype

There have been a few reports of persons with a combined EDS-Osteogenesis Imperfecta phenotype. The basic defect has been documented as partial duplication of the COL1A2 gene,40 and as a specific cysteine substitution in type I collagen.41 9.1.4.8

Occipital Horn Syndrome (Formerly EDS IX)

This X-linked disorder is no longer classified as a form of the EDS, but it is included in this section for the sake of completion. It is characterised by articular hypermobility, and skin which is lax but not fragile. Palpable occipital protuberances or ‘horns’ are a pathognomonic feature. Diagnosis is confirmed by biochemical detection of disordered copper transportation.

9.1.5

Articular Manifestations

Hypermobility of the joints is a cardinal manifestation of EDS and articular problems are frequently encountered. The complications which were present in a series of 100 patients of all ages have been reviewed.42 The majority of these individuals had the former EDS I and II, which are now grouped together as the Classical type. The general implications of articular laxity are similar in the various forms of the EDS. The Classical and Hypermobility types are by far the most common in rheumatological practice, and the details set out below pertain to either. In general, these facts also hold true for the other rarer forms of the EDS in which the joints are lax, and for the Familial Articular Hypermobility Syndrome. 9.1.5.1

Disclocations

The degree of articular hypermobility and the incidence of dislocations are closely related, although in some persons a surprising range of joint movement can occur without causing


159

Fig. 9.4 In some persons with EDS, articular laxity may be extreme and it is not surprising that a large variety of musculoskeletal complications may occur

clinical problems. The joints most frequently affected are those of the digits, elbows, shoulders and patella, while dislocation of the sternoclavicular joints has also been recorded. Congenital dislocation of the hips is well documented but infrequent.43 Recurrent temporomandibular joint subluxations are more common than previously supposed.44,45 Dislocations are often recurrent and may be spontaneous, but reduction is usually easy and often spontaneous, particularly in the digital and shoulder joints. The degree of hypermobility and the incidence of dislocations often lessen with ageing although musculoskeletal disability does not usually decrease.

9.1.5.2

Joint Instability

The more hypermobile persons are frequently troubled by instability of the joints, particularly the ankles and knees (Figs. 9.4 and 9.5). For this reason, such activities as running or the wearing of high heels may be impossible. Instability of the finger joints may also be a problem and simple actions such as typing or unscrewing bottle tops can be very difficult.

160

9


Fig. 9.5 An affected girl with instability of the knee and ankle. Her shins bear the characteristic scars

It must be stressed that not all affected individuals have articular problems. Amongst persons known to have EDS were a racing cyclist, a weight-lifter and an amateur boxing champion. The implications for athletic activity in individuals with the EDS have been reviewed by Schroeder and Lavallee.46 9.1.5.3

Joint Effusions

Persistent or recurrent effusions are commonly encountered. The usual site is the knee joint, but the ankles, elbows and digits may also be affected. These effusions are related to activity and often appear at the end of the day. Haemarthroses may occur in a minority of patients in whom the bleeding tendency is severe.47 9.1.5.4

Hypotonicity

Many affected individuals have muscular hypotonicity, which is probably directly associated with their lax joints. In infancy, the recognition of EDS may be very


161

difficult, particularly as all babies are somewhat hypermobile. The EDS should certainly be considered in the differential diagnosis of any ‘floppy infant’. It is relevant that misdiagnoses of a variety of neuromyopathies have been made in neonates with the EDS. The Kyphoscoliotic form which presents with severe neonatal hypotonia is vulnerable in this respect.48 9.1.5.5

Spinal Abnormalities

Spinal malalignment of greater or lesser degree is present in a proportion of affected persons and it is the hallmark of the Kyphoscoliotic form of the EDS. Thoracolumbar scoliosis is the commonest abnormality of this type, and vertebral wedging may occur at the apex of the kyphotic element of the curve when a severe scoliosis is present. Spondylolisthesis is an uncommon complication.49 The fact that spinal changes are uncommon in affected children suggests that scoliosis in adults is caused by the strains imposed by the upright stance on vertebral joints which have lax ligaments. 9.1.5.6

Thoracic Asymmetry

Asymmetry of the thorax and sternal depression may occur, particularly in conjunction with spinal malalignment. When severe, the thoracic deformity may cause displacement of the heart, which in turn can lead to a cardiac murmur and an abnormal electrocardiogram. It is relevant, however, that a floppy mitral valve is more common in the EDS than previously suspected.50 9.1.5.7

Foot Involvement

Talipes equinovarus is present at birth in a proportion of persons with EDS. As intrauterine malposition is a causative factor in the pathogenesis of the club foot, it is reasonable to postulate that individuals with abnormally mobile joints would be at an unusually high risk for this complication. Pes planus is a frequent abnormality in the EDS. During childhood, the longitudinal arch frequently appears to be normal when no weight is being borne, but by the age of 30 years, the majority of persons with flat feet show both static and dynamic pes planus deformity. The most severe flat feet usually give no pain, and difficulty in fitting shoes is the main problem. Hallux valgus, claw toes and plantar keratomata are other common problems in the feet. The extensible skin may contribute to an appearance of ‘moccasin feet’ where the affected individual seems to be wearing an oversize pair of ankle socks. Pain on weight bearing can result from the presence of piezogenic papules on the margins of the soles of the feet. These pea-shaped lumps result from herniation of globules of fibro-fatty tissue through the dermis.

162

9


The implications of foot pain and disability in the EDS upon daily life activities have been reviewed by Berglund et al.51

9.1.5.8

Osteoarthritis

It seems likely that the development of osteoarthritis is related directly to the magnitude of hypermobility and the frequency and degree of trauma to which a particular joint is exposed. Nevertheless, there is a lack of consensus in this matter and the issue has not been settled. Osteoarthritis in the EDS and FAHS has been observed in the hands, knees, ankles and shoulders, but involvement of the hip joint is uncommon.

9.1.5.9

Bursae

Bursae may develop in association with the Achilles tendon, hallux valgus and in the olecranon and prepatellar regions. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish these bursae from haematomata or from molluscoid pseudotumours, which also occur at these sites. The results of excision of these bursae are usually good.

9.1.5.10

Limb Pain

A considerable proportion of persons with the EDS experience cramps in the leg muscles. These usually occur at night and are most severe during childhood, often resolving in adult life. In addition, ill-defined muscular pain is relatively common and may cause considerable handicap.52 The pathogenesis is unknown, but it is possible that the pains are caused by the overstretching of the muscles which is permitted by the abnormal range of movements of the lax joints. In addition to cramps and muscle pains, non-specific discomfort may also involve the joints. This symptom is occasionally severe and may warrant consideration in the differential diagnosis of any child with polyarthralgia. Limb pain is a major reason for referral to special Hypermobility Clinics and a great deal of effort has gone into the elucidation of this problem. Protocols for management include sophisticated physiotherapy and psychological support. The pathogenesis and management of limb and joint pain in the EDS and the Hypermobility syndrome is discussed in detail in Chap. 6. 9.1.5.11

Peripheral Circulatory Phenomena

Acrocyanosis occurs in many affected persons, while a minority experience the Raynaud phenomenon.


9.1.5.12

163

Bony Abnormalities

A variety of bony features have been encountered in isolated instances, including radioulnar synostosis, lack of development of the proximal phalanx of the little finger, syndactyly, spina bifida occulta and abnormalities of cranial ossification. It is unlikely, however, that these changes are directly related to EDS, as a majority of affected persons do not have any significant primary bony abnormality. The incidence of fractures is no higher than in normal individuals, and bone healing is uneventful. There is no increased liability to musculoskeletal neoplasia.

9.1.5.13

Handshake

Affected individuals have a characteristic handshake. The musculoskeletal structure of the hand seems to collapse on pressure and the hands feel like a bag of bones.

9.1.5.14

Gait

Persons with EDS can often be recognised by their gait. The feet are placed firmly and flatly upon the ground. The hips are hyperextended during weight-bearing to counteract the genu recurvatum, thus enabling the pelvis to remain balanced with respect to the feet. This gait is accentuated by the concomitant pes planus, and resembles that of tabes dorsalis.

9.1.6

Orthopaedic Management of Articular Problems

The orthopaedic management of the EDS is determined by the strict application of basic principles. It is an important practical point that surgical procedures may be complicated by the fragility of the tissues. Sutures often cut out, and closure of operation sites may be difficult. Surgeons have aptly described attempts at skin suture as being ‘like trying to sew porridge’.53 Similarly, angiographic procedures have caused major lacerations of the femoral artery. Nevertheless, the majority of affected persons do not have operative problems of this magnitude. A bleeding tendency may be present in some individuals. Although the majority of patients have trouble-free operations, massive haemorrhage has occurred in a few instances. The bleeding diathesis has been variously ascribed to changes in the coagulation mechanism, vessel walls or perivascular connective tissues, but no consistent abnormality has been demonstrated.54 Postoperative haematoma formation may delay wound healing. The alteration of normal tissue elasticity, which would usually prevent the expansion of such haematomata is probably significant.

164

9


Due to the tissue fragility, a small skin incision may extend spontaneously to become a gaping wound. Fine suture material, the avoidance of tension and a meticulous technique increase the chances of satisfactory operative results. Healing is often slow and wounds may reopen when sutures are removed. Surgical scars are usually thin and they may widen and distract with the passage of time, even when initial healing has been satisfactory. In some affected persons, especially those with the Kyphoscoliosis type of EDS, spinal malalignment may require correction.55 In view of the potential surgical problems, it would be prudent for a major procedure of this type to be undertaken only after due consideration. Despite the potential problems in orthopaedic intervention in the EDS, total knee arthroplasty has been successfully accomplished.56 Likewise, sternoclavicular joint stabilization57 and orthoscopic tendon arthroplasty have been undertaken.58 Anaesthetic techniques need to be chosen with cognisance of the syndromic manifestations and potential complications. The Vascular form of the EDS is especially important in this respect.59,60 Local anaesthesia may be ineffective in the EDS and the hypermobility syndrome. The basis of this problem has not yet been elucidated. Lax joints are generally best left lax as stabilisation procedures, apart from fusion, are rarely successful. The quote ‘I was doing well before they operated on me’ is often apt.

9.1.6.1

A Patient’s Viewpoint of His Articular Problems

A young man with EDS wrote the following excellent description of certain aspects of his condition. My skin is rather loose and my knee joints will extend about 2 inch further back than a normal person’s knees. If I stand with my knees straight I have to use my leg muscles to hold them there. If I let my knees extend backwards to their locked position it doesn’t take long until they ache from the awkward position which they are in. The weight of my body rests on my knees at a slight angle from the vertical, which results in a strain being put upon them. Not only is my skin loose but the supporting tissue under the skin is soft. Although I am a construction electrician and work with my hands, I do not form callous on them. Sometimes when I lift something heavy I feel the tissue give way between the bones of my fingers and the object that I am lifting.

9.1.7

Non-articular Complications

Apart from the articular complications, a wide variety of problems in other systems may arise from the underlying connective tissue abnormality. These are briefly reviewed below.


9.1.7.1

165

Cardiovascular

Structural cardiac defects were initially thought not to be a primary feature of EDS, but with the introduction of sophisticated investigation techniques, a variety of cardiac abnormalities have been recognised.61,62 As in other inherited disorders of connective tissue, a ‘floppy mitral valve’ is fairly common and mild dilation of the aortic root may occur. Cardiac assessment of all affected persons is warranted and if cardiac abnormalities are detected, annual cardiological surveillance is recommended. The potentially lethal complications of dissection of the aorta and spontaneous rupture of large arteries are virtually confined to the Vascular form of the EDS. These problems have been reviewed by Pepin et al.63

9.1.7.2

Abdominal

Structural anomalies of the gastrointestinal tract result form the undue tissue laxity. These abnormalities include hiatus hernia, gastric, duodenal and colonic diverticulae, and rectal prolapse. Inguinal, femoral and umbilical herniae are also common, and urinary bladder diverticulae may occur. Gastrointestinal haemorrhage, with or without perforation, is a feature of the Vascular form of the EDS. These events may be spontaneous, or follow minor trauma, and several deaths have been reported.

9.1.7.3

Neurological

Intracranial vascular abnormalities are uncommon but dangerous complications of EDS. They are probably due to distensibility and fragility of the walls of the blood vessels, and the problems which arise can be compounded by a bleeding tendency. Aneurysms of the internal carotid arteries, carotid cavernous sinus fistulae and subarachnoid haemorrhage have all been reported. Angiographic investigations of intracranial lesions of this type are hazardous. Haematomata may compress peripheral nerves and the occurrence of recurrent neuropathy in the EDS has been documented. Spinal malalignment can result in cord compression, but this complication is rare.

9.1.7.4

Ophthalmological

Involvement of the scleral connective tissue permits distortion of the eyeball leading to myopia and divergent strabismus. Uncomplicated convergent squint is common, due to laxity of the tendons of the extrinsic muscles of the eye. Scleral perforation and potential visual loss are features of the Kyphoscoliosis form of the EDS.

166

9


Epicanthic folds and redundant skin on the upper eyelid may produce undesirable cosmetic effects. In this context, Méténier’s sign (ease of eversion of the upper eyelid) is one of the minor diagnostic features of EDS.

9.1.7.5

Obstetric

Although there are many potential complications in pregnancy, the majority of women with the Classic form of the EDS do not experience any difficulties. Nevertheless, antenatal surveillance and hospital delivery are desirable. One aspect of the EDS which is regarded as advantageous is the fact that striae gravidarum do not usually develop during pregnancy. Antepartum and postpartum haemorrhage are not infrequent, and it may be difficult to achieve haemostasis. Precipitate labour, severe lacerations of the perineum and uterine prolapse are relatively common.64 If the foetus has inherited the condition, the amniotic and chorionic membranes will be fragile. These may rupture at an early stage, causing premature labour. The sequelae of pregnancy include uterine prolapse leading to dyspareunia and urinary incontinence. The vascular form of the EDS is especially liable to serious obstetrical complications. The tissue fragility and bleeding tendency pose special hazards during pregnancy, and expert antenatal care and delivery is essential. In one horrific episode, forceps delivery in an affected woman resulted in extraction of the infant, together with the uterus, bladder and ureters.

9.1.7.6

Dental

Tissue fragility in the EDS can lead to damage to the gums on brushing the teeth, with consequent gingival periodontitis.65,66 Dental extraction may also be complicated by this fragility, with the additional hazard of abnormal bleeding, especially in EDS IV.67 Articular hypermobility underlies pain and instability of the temporomandibular joints, and accidental dislocation can occur during extraction of teeth from the mandible. Numerical and structural abnormalities of the teeth are uncommon and inconsistent.68

9.1.7.7

Breast Mammography

Routine mammographic screening for neoplasia of the breasts has revealed that tissue calcification is a feature of the Classical form of the EDS.69,70, 71 This abnormality is probably analogous to the subcutaneous spheroids found in the limbs. Breast calcification may arouse suspicion of neoplasia, and awareness that it can be a syndromic complication in the EDS can avert an unnecessary mastectomy.

9.2

Familial Articular Hypermobility Syndromes

9.1.8

167

Resources: Patient Support Groups

Ehlers-Danlos Support Group PO Box 337 Aldershot Surrey GU12 6WZ UK Phone: 01252 690940 Email: [email protected] www.ehlers-danlos.org Ehlers-Danlos National Foundation 3200 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1601 South Tower Los Angeles CA 90010 Phone: 800-956-2902; 213-368-3800 Fax: 213-427-0057 Email: [email protected] www.ednf.org Canadian Ehlers-Danlos Association 88 De Rose Avenue Bolton ON L7E 1AB Canada Phone: 905-951-7559 Fax: 905-761-7567 Email: [email protected] www.ehlersdanlos.ca Association Francaise des Syndrome d’Ehlers Danlos 34 rue Léon Joulin 37 000 Tours France Email: [email protected] www.afsed.com

9.2


The familial hypermobility syndromes are a heterogeneous group of disorders in which generalised joint laxity is the primary clinical manifestation. The EDS and other rare genetic conditions which have additional non-articular stigmata are excluded from this category. Semantic confusion still occurs, since the term ‘hypermobility syndrome’ is often employed in a clinical context for any patient with articular symptoms which are the consequence of lax joints, in the absence of a specific syndromic diagnosis. The major problem lies in distinguishing between individuals who are at the upper end of the spectrum of the normal range of joint movements and those who have an inherited connective tissue disorder which presents with articular laxity (i.e. the familial articular hypermobility syndrome). This problem is discussed at length in Chap. 2.

168

9


It is probable that the general category of loose-jointed persons with articular symptoms comprises a very heterogeneous group of simple and complex genetic conditions. The limits of syndromic resolution at a clinical level have been reached and further delineation will depend upon the recognition of specific biochemical or molecular markers. The identification of deficiency of the glycoprotein tenascin-X in a small proportion of persons with the Hypermobility form of the EDS may be a precursor to future molecular categorisation.

9.2.1

Nosology

Early accounts of familial hypermobility were given by Key72 and Sturkie.73 The generation-to-generation transmission of loose-jointedness in association with multiple dislocations was documented by Hass and Hass74 under the designation ‘arthrochalasis multiplex congenita’. The patients reported in this article included individuals with EDS and no attempt was made to differentiate the separate entities. Carter and Sweetnam 75,76 and Carter and Wilkinson77 drew further attention to the association of familial generalised joint laxity and dislocations. In addition to the generalised hypermobility syndromes, familial joint laxity is sometimes localised to a single site. For instance, Whitney78 described autosomal dominant inheritance of hypermobility which was confined to the interphalangeal joint of the thumb, whilst a kindred with joint laxity in four generations and a propensity to recurrent dislocation of the patella was reported by Shapiro et al.79 Beighton and Horan80 documented two kindreds in which joint laxity was transmitted as an autosomal dominant trait and introduced the designation ‘Familial Generalised Articular Hypermobility’ (Figs. 9.6 and 9.7). The first was a family of contortionists who had experienced few orthopaedic problems during their professional activities, while the second family had multiple dislocations and deformities which were attributable to their hypermobility. A further family with autosomal dominant generalised joint laxity and multiple dislocations was described by Horton et al.81 These authors reviewed the literature and proposed the designation ‘familial joint instability syndrome’ for the condition. Thereafter, the Berlin Nosology listed separate ‘uncomplicated’ and ‘dislocating’ types of the familial articular hypermobility syndrome (see Chap. 1). The autosomal dominant Familial Articular Hypermobility Syndrome differs from the Hypermobile type of EDS (formerly EDS III) only by virtue of additional dermal extensibility in the latter disorder. If this manifestation is of minor degree, exact diagnostic categorisation may be impossible. The problem is compounded by the fact that an ill-defined velvety texture to the skin and minimal cutaneous extensibility may be present in both conditions. It is possible that involvement of the tenascin-X gene could explain the similarity of these disorders.20

9.2


Fig. 9.6 A young woman with familial generalised articular hypermobility (From Beighton3)

Fig. 9.7 She was able to maintain her joint laxity without any special training (From Beighton3)

169

170

9


Fig. 9.8 Spontaneous dislocation of the right shoulder in the familial hypermobility syndrome (From Beighton3)

Autosomal recessive inheritance of familial articular hypermobility was recognised in two sisters born in a consanguineous French-Canadian kindred.82 Both had gross generalised joint laxity and a soft, velvety skin. The younger sister had experienced numerous orthopaedic problems but the elder was asymptomatic. With hindsight, it seems possible that the former could have been homozygous for Tenascin-X deficiency, while the latter might have been heterozygous. This concept, however, is speculative. The genetic basis of the articular hypermobility syndromes has been reviewed by Malfait et al.83

9.2.2

Articular Complications

The Familial Articular Hypermobility syndrome and the common, apparently nonfamilial Hypermobility syndrome are very variable in severity. In clinical practice, they may be indistinguishable and the range of their potential complications is probably identical. In some hypermobile families, a wide spectrum of dislocations and subluxations may occur, while in others, there is a predisposition to dislocation or subluxation of a particular joint (Fig. 9.8). Following the reports of Carter and Sweetnam,75,76 recurrent dislocation of the patella and shoulder has been repeatedly recorded in families with hypermobility. Shapiro et al.79 mentioned recurrent dislocations of the patella in four generations of a loose-jointed kindred.

9.3

Miscellaneous Joint Laxity Syndromes

171

The occurrence of hip dislocation in families with hypermobility has been documented by Carter and Wilkinson,77 Wynne-Davis84,85 and Bjerkreim and van der Hagen.86 Fredensborg87 described an unusual patient with unilateral congenital dislocation of the hip and joint laxity which was present only on the same side. Apart from recurrent dislocations and subluxations, hypermobile individuals, familial or otherwise are liable to develop other orthopaedic complications due to their joint laxity. These include sprains, effusions, spinal malalignment and pes planus. Hallux valgus may also occur.88 It has been shown that hypermobility is associated with osteoarthritis at the base of the thumb but not in the interphalangeal joints.89 The issue as to whether or not hypermobility is related to the common forms of degenerative osteoarthropathy remains unsettled.90

9.2.3

Other Phenotypic Manifestations

Inguinal herniae are often encountered in hypermobile individuals and it seems likely that they are a genuine complication of the syndrome. In view of the underlying generalised connective tissue abnormality, this propensity for hernia is not unexpected. A link with the carpal tunnel syndrome and an association with mitral valve prolapse has been recognised.91 There are few, if any, other structural non-articular complications.92 The occurrence of non-specific limb and joint pains in hypermobile persons has attracted considerable attention.93-95 The clinical implications and management of Hypermobility are discussed in Chaps. 5 and 6.

9.3


In addition to EDS and the familial articular hypermobility syndrome, joint laxity is present in a number of inherited disorders. In some it is a major feature, while in others the hypermobility is overshadowed by other syndromic components.

9.3.1

Joint Laxity in Inherited Connective Tissue Disorders

Hypermobility is a clinically important facet of a few well-established connective tissue disorders, the most important of which are Marfan syndrome and osteogenesis imperfecta. A full description of these conditions and related disorders can be found in Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue96 and Connective Tissue and Its Heritable Disorders.5

172

9


Fig. 9.9 A boy with Marfan syndrome; arachnodactyly and thoracic asymmetry are evident

9.3.1.1

Marfan Syndrome [154700] (See also Chap. 3)

The Marfan syndrome is relatively common, with a population frequency of about 1 in 5,000–10,000 individuals. The hallmarks of Marfan syndrome are disproportionate limb length in relation to the trunk and arachnodactyly (long slim digits). The establishment of a firm clinical diagnosis of the Marfan syndrome is often difficult and ‘partial’ examples are frequent.97,98 The most common of these are the mitral valve prolapse syndrome (MVP) and the MASS phenotype (myopia, mitral valve prolapse, mild aortic root dilation and variable skin and skeletal abnormalities). In addition, a marfanoid habitus, including lax joints, are a feature of several rare syndromic entities. These include familial aortic aneurysm, familial ectopic lentis, the Shprintzen– Goldberg syndrome and the Loeys–Dietz syndrome. Other well-established conditions which can be confused with the Marfan syndrome include the EDS, congenital contractural arachnodactyly, homocystinuria and the Stickler syndrome. The promulgation of diagnostic criteria for the Marfan syndrome has been helpful in clarifying this situation.98a In the Marfan syndrome, thoracic asymmetry and spinal malalignment are sometimes present and dislocation of the ocular lenses and aortic and mitral valvular disease are additional features (Fig. 9.9). Aneurysmal dissection of the aorta in adulthood is a common mode of death. Joint laxity is maximal in the wrists, but other joints may be hypermobile to some degree (Fig. 9.10). Orthopaedic complications which are related to the laxity include recurrent dislocation, especially of the shoulder and patella, spinal malalignment, pes planus and hallux valgus.

9.3


173

Fig. 9.10 Articular laxity is maximal in the wrist joint in Marfan syndrome (Reproduced with permission from Beighton et al.12)

Inheritance is autosomal dominant but phenotypic expression is very variable and mildly affected persons may be difficult to distinguish from normal individuals. The identification of the chromosomal locus of the Marfan gene represented a major advance in the elucidation of the disorder. Molecular sequencing has revealed considerable intragenic heterogeneity. Diagnostic confirmation can be obtained by molecular investigation of the FBN-1 gene on 15q21.1 which encodes the protein fibrillin-1.99 The clinical manifestations, management and pathogenesis of the Marfan syndrome have been comprehensively reviewed by Dietz.100

9.3.1.2

Osteogenesis Imperfecta [120150]

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a well-known genetic disorder in which bone fragility is associated with blue sclerae and wormian bones in the skull (Figs. 9.11 and 9.12). Hypermobility of digits is present in some affected persons, and in a minority, joint laxity may be widespread. In a review of the historical background of OI, Weil101 drew attention to several reports in the early literature of hypermobility and recurrent dislocations. Ligamentous laxity probably plays a significant role in the development of the spinal deformities which occur in a small proportion of individuals with OI. In affected persons, joint mobility and muscle strength are significant factors in functional ability and rehabilitation.102 The effective treatment of affected children with bisphosphanates has revolutionised the medical management of OI.103 A rare form of OI, the Bruck syndrome, is characterised by articular rigidity rather than joint laxity.104

174

9


Fig. 9.11 A young man with osteogenesis imperfecta, showing severe deformity of the long bones (Reproduced with permission from Beighton et al.12)

A detailed account of OI has been presented online in the series in ‘GeneReviews’.105

9.3.1.3

Other Bone Fragility-Joint Laxity Syndromes

In the osteoporosis-pseudoglioma syndrome [259770], the radiological appearance of the skeleton and the presence of wormian bone are reminiscent of OI. These features are associated with mild mental retardation and potential blindness in infancy due to pseudogliomatous retinal detachment and the other ocular complications.106 Ligamentous laxity is present but does not cause clinical problems. Using the designation ‘OI associated with the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome’ Biering and Iverson107 reported the occurrence of gross generalised osteoporosis, articular laxity with dislocations, dermal extensibility and blue sclerae. There have been a few additional reports of this unusual condition (see EDS section 9.1.47).

9.3


175

Fig. 9.12 The digits are sometimes lax in osteogenesis imperfecta

A family with autosomal recessive inheritance of blue sclerae, keratoconus, deafness and spondylolisthesis was described by Greenfield et al.108 Biglan et al.109 reported five patients from two families with a similar disorder in which keratoglobus, blue sclerae, hearing loss, mottling of the teeth and generalised joint laxity were the main features. Inheritance was autosomal recessive. Robertson110 detected hypermobility in 50% of a series of 44 patients with keratoconus and made a reasonable suggestion that the ocular and ligamentous abnormalities shared a common pathogenesis.

9.3.2

Skeletal Dysplasias with Predominant Joint Laxity

Joint laxity is a major feature of a few uncommon genetic skeletal dysplasias and malformation syndromes. In these conditions, multiple dislocations may result from alteration in the mechanical properties of ligaments and joint capsules. Moreover, disordered growth may lead to alteration of bony contours in the joints, thereby

176

9


Fig. 9.13 A girl with Larsen syndrome, showing epicanthus and the characteristic broad flat nasal bridge

increasing the liability to dislocation. If ligamentous laxity is a significant syndromic component, this propensity is greatly enhanced. In these circumstances, concomitant dysplasia of the odontoid peg and marked joint laxity can render the cervical spine unstable and predispose to atlanto-axial subluxation and potentially lethal spinal cord compression. Articular hypermobility with or without subluxation and dislocation of single joints is a frequent but inconsistent feature of numerous malformation syndromes. In this context, joint laxity is not an important diagnostic indicator. It is also relevant that unilateral congenital dislocation of the hip is the most frequent abnormality in this category. Bilateral dislocation of multiple joints, notably the hips and elbows, is strongly suggestive of syndromic identity, and the more important conditions of this type are outlined below. In these disorders, lack of full extension and rotation of the elbows may be present; this paradoxical situation is the result of dislocation of the radial heads and it can be misleading in the clinical context.

9.3.2.1

Larsen Syndrome [150250; 245600]

Larsen syndrome is characterised by marked generalised hypermobility in association with stunted stature, mid-facial hypoplasia, flattening of the nasal bridge and spatulate digits (Figs. 9.13 and 9.14). Joint laxity is maximal in the knees, and genu

9.3


177

Fig. 9.14 In the Larsen syndrome, the digits are lax and their tips are spatulate

recurvatum and instability commonly occur. Initial presentation is as a ‘floppy infant’ and other complications include dislocation of the hips and radial heads, and talipes equinovarus.111 In later childhood, the ligamentous laxity predisposes to spinal malalignment, which may be progressive and difficult to manage.112,113 Distinct mild autosomal dominant and severe autosomal recessive forms of the Larsen syndrome have been documented.114,115 The basic defect in the latter is carbohydrate sulfotransferase 3 deficiency.116

9.3.2.2

Desbuquois Syndrome [251400]

Desbuquois syndrome is a rare autosomal disorder in which joint laxity is associated with stunted stature, broad terminal phalanges, polydactyly and protuberant eyes. Supernumerary ossification centres are present in the carpus and there is a characteristic prominence of the lesser trochanter of the femur.117 Desbuquois syndrome is potentially lethal118 but survival time is very variable.119

9.3.2.3

Spondyloepimetaphyseal Dysplasia with Joint Laxity and Severe Progressive Kyphoscoliosis (SEMDJL) [271640]

More than 20 children with a syndrome comprising skeletal dysplasia, gross generalised joint laxity and severe spinal malalignment have been documented in South

178

9


Fig. 9.15 A boy with spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity (SEMHJL) in which dwarfism, gross kyphoscoliosis and articular laxity are the major features

Africa (Fig. 9.15). The skin is rubbery and extensible but not fragile. Numerous orthopaedic problems are related to the hypermobility, including dislocation, subluxation, genu valgum, genu recurvatum, talipes equinovarus and pes planus.120,121 Inheritance is autosomal recessive.122 The biomolecular defect has not yet been elucidated in this disorder. 9.3.2.4

Spondyloepimetaphyseal Dysplasia with Leptodactyly [603546]

The leptodactylic type or Hall type of SEMDJL has been documented in Europe123 and the USA.124 The term ‘leptodactyly’ pertains to the length and slender configuration of the tubular bones of the hands and feet. The clinical and radiological manifestations of both forms of SEMDJL are otherwise similar.125 In distinction to the South African form of SEMDJL, however, the leptodactylic type is inherited as an autosomal dominant trait.126

9.3.3

Dwarfing Dysplasias with Variable Joint Laxity

9.3.3.1

Pseudoachondroplasia [177170]

Pseudoachondroplasia is a comparatively common dwarfing skeletal dysplasia in which joint laxity is a variable component (Fig. 9.16). The digits are often stubby, with an impressive range of movement. In some affected persons

9.3


179

Fig. 9.16 Pseudoachondroplasia; short-limbed dwarfism and genu varum are the major stigmata. Loose stubby digits are characteristic of some forms of this heterogeneous disorder

the hypermobility is sufficiently severe to cause dislocation, deformities and spinal malalignment, while in others the range of articular movement is normal.127,128 9.3.3.2

Morquio Syndrome [253000]

The eponymous designation ‘Morquio’ is sometimes applied to any dwarfing syndrome in which spinal malalignment is a major feature, but in the strict sense, the term pertains to Mucopolysaccharidosis type IV (MPS IV). Dwarfism, thoracic deformity, aortic incompetence and progressive corneal clouding are the major clinical features, and the diagnosis may be confirmed by demonstration of the radiographic changes of dysostosis multiplex and excessive excretion of keratan sulphate in the urine. In distinction to the other Mucopolysaccharidoses, the joints are lax in MPS IV. This feature is most obvious in the digits, but the hypermobility predisposes to orthopaedic complications including genu valgum, spinal malalignment and pes

180

9


Fig. 9.17 A boy with MPS IV showing the typical barrel chest, short neck and spinal malalignment. The digital laxity which is present in this condition is a useful diagnostic discriminant from the other mucopolysaccharidoses

planus (Fig. 9.17).129 It is of special clinical importance that the odontoid process is often hypoplastic in MPS IV, as the combination of this defect and joint laxity places affected persons at risk of subluxation of the cervical vertebrae and spinal cord compression.130 9.3.3.3

Metaphyseal Chondrodysplasia Type McKusick [250500]

This condition, also known as cartilage-hair hypoplasia, is characterised by fine hair, disproportionate dwarfism and lax stubby digits. Affected persons have a propensity to Hirschsprung disease and severe varicella. The disorder has been extensively studied among the inbred Amish community of Pennsylvania131 and in the population of Finland.132

9.3.3.4

Hypochondroplasia [146000]

Hypochondroplasia is a relatively common dwarfing dysplasia, in which the clinical and radiographic features are similar to, but milder than, those of Achondroplasia. There may be some generalised joint laxity in hypochondroplasia, but this rarely causes clinical problems.133

9.3


9.3.3.5

181

Other Dwarfing Skeletal Dysplasias

The knee joints are lax in the Ellis–van Creveld syndrome [225500]134 and the digits may be hypermobile in acromesomelic dysplasia [201250].135 Hypermobility is also present in the classical form of spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenita [183900]136 and in metatropic dysplasia [156203].137,138 These disorders are all rare and unlikely to be encountered in routine practice.

9.3.4

Genetic Syndromes in Which Hypermobility Is Overshadowed by Other Manifestations

9.3.4.1

Hajdu-Cheney Syndrome [102500]

The Hajdu-Cheney syndrome is a rare autosomal dominant disorder which was first identified in a small family in Michigan, USA. The major stigmata are acro-osteolysis, osteoporosis, hypoplasia of the mandible, stunted stature, bone fragility, early loss of teeth and multiple wormian bones. Articular laxity is a variable feature which does not cause significant complications. Polycystic kidneys are an occasional syndromic component.139 9.3.4.2

FG Syndrome (Opitz–Kaveggia) [305450]

The Opitz–Kaveggia FG syndrome is an X-linked multiple malformation disorder in which a characteristic facies, mental retardation and imperforate anus are the most constant features.140,141 The designation FG is derived from the initials of the patients’ surnames, and more than 50 affected males have been reported. Articular laxity predisposes to sloping shoulders, lumbar lordosis and club feet. 9.3.4.3

Trichorhinophalangeal Syndrome, Type II (Langer–Giedion Syndrome) [120230]

The manifestations of the Trichorhinophalangeal syndrome (TRP) type II resemble those of the better-known TRP type I. The most obvious features of both are sparse scalp hair, a bulbous nose and cone-shaped phalangeal epiphyses.142 Mental retardation and multiple exostoses are diagnostic features of TRP type II. Articular laxity is variable, but may cause spinal curvature and lead to presentation as a ‘floppy infant’. 9.3.4.4

Aarskog Syndrome [305400]

The main features of the Aarskog syndrome are short stature, cryptorchidism, a shawl scrotum and a characteristic facies.143 The metacarpophalangeal joints are

182

9


very lax and when they are extended concomitant flexion occurs at the proximal interphalangeal joints. The hypermobility is sometimes generalised, with secondary consequences such as genu recurvatum, pes planus and metatarsus adductus. Bilateral anterior dislocation of the hips has been documented.144 Hypermobility of the cervical spine in conjunction with odontoid hypoplasia may lead to spinal cord compression. Inheritance is X-linked with minor manifestations in some females who carry the determinant gene.

9.3.4.5

Cohen Syndrome [216550]

The major features of the Cohen syndrome are variable mental retardation, truncal obesity with onset in the first decade, muscle hypotonia, narrow hands and feet and delayed puberty. Generalised joint laxity predisposes to genu valgum and spinal malalignment.145

9.3.4.6

Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Type 2 [171400]

Persons with multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, also known as the multiple neuroma syndrome, have a marfanoid habitus, a characteristic facies and a propensity to medullary thyroid carcinoma and phaeochromocytoma. Abdominal symptoms may result from colonic ganglioneuromata. Joint laxity leads to spinal malalignment, genu valgum and foot deformity.146

9.3.4.7

Down Syndrome

Down syndrome, or trisomy 21, is a common chromosomal disorder characterised by mental retardation, stunted stature and a typical facies. Joint laxity is a variable feature, which has been incriminated in the pathogenesis of atlanto-axial subluxation.147 Other orthopaedic and articular complications are inconsistent.

9.3.4.8


Joint laxity is a variable component of several rare genetic disorders. The best known of these are listed below, with relevant references: Lowe oculocerebrorenal syndrome [309000]148 Coffin–Lowry syndrome [303600]149 Kabuki syndrome [147920]150 Seckel syndrome [210600]151 RAPADILINO syndrome [266280]152 De Barsy syndrome [219150]153 Coffin–Siris syndrome [135900]154 Stickler syndrome [108300:184840]155

References

183

It can be anticipated that this list will continue to expand, with the continuing delineation of new genetic conditions. In this respect, computerised databases have proved to be of value in the diagnostic process.

References 1. Ehlers E. Cutis Laxa, Neigung zu Haemorrhagien in der Haut, Lockerung Mehrer Artikulationen. Derm Zschr [Denmark]. 1901;8:173-175. 2. Danlos M. Un cas de cutis laxa avec tumeurs par contusion chronique des coudes et des genous (xanthome juvenile pseudodiabetique de MM Hallopeau et Mace de Lepinay). Bull Soc Franc Derm Syph. 1908;19:70-72. 3. Beighton P. The Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome. London: William Heinemann Medical Books; 1970. 4. Beighton P, ed. McKusick’s Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue). 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1993. 5. Royce PM, Steinmann B, eds. Connective Tissue and Its Heritable Disorders: Molecular, Genetic, and Medical Aspects. New York/Chichester/Brisbane/Toronto/Singapore: Wiley; 1993. 6. Wenstrup R, De Paepe A. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, classic type: reviews at Gene-Tests-GeneClinics [database online]. Available at http://www.geneclinics.org, 2010. 7. Levy HP. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, hypermobility type: reviews at Gene-Tests-GeneClinics [database online]. Available at http://www.geneclinics.org, 2007. 8. Pepin MG, Byers PH. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, vascular type: reviews at Gene-Tests-GeneClinics [database online]. Available at http://www.geneclinics.org, 2006. 9. Yeowel HN, Steinmann B. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, kyphoscoliotic form; reviews at Gene-Tests-GeneClinics [database online]. Available at http://www.geneclinics.org, 2008. 10. Yeowell HN, Steinmann B. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, kyphoscoliotic form: gene reviews [Internet]. Seattle: University of Washington, Seattle. Initial Posting: 2 February 2000; Last Update: 19 February 2008. 11. Barabas AP. Heterogeneity of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: description of three clinical types and a hypothesis to explain the basic defect(s). Br Med J. 1967;2:612-616. 11a. Beighton P. Inherited disorders of the skeleton. 2nd ed. Edinburgh/London/New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1988. 12. Beighton P, Murdoch JL, Votteler T. Gastrointestinal complication of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Gut. 1969;10:1004-1008. 13. Beighton P, De Paepe A, Steinmann B, Tsipouras P, Wenstrup RJ. Ehlers-Danlos syndromes: revised nosology, Villefranche, 1997. Am J Med Genet. 1998;77:31-37. 14. Bristow J, Carey W, Egging D, Schalkwijk J. Tenascin-X, collagen, elastin, and the Ehlers– Danlos syndrome. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2005;139C:24-30. 15. Giunta C, Nuytinck L, Raghunath M, Hausser I, De Paepe A, Steinmann B. Homozygous Gly530Ser substitution in COL5A1 causes mild classical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 2002;109:284-290. 16. Malfait F, Coucke P, Symoens S, Loeys B, Nuytinck L, De Paepe A. The molecular basis of classic Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a comprehensive study of biochemical and molecular findings in 48 unrelated patients. Hum Mutat. 2005;25:28-37. 17. Malfait F, De Paepe A. Molecular genetics in classic Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2005;139C:17-23. 17a. Grahame R. Joint hypermobility and genetic collagen disorders: are they related? Arch Dis Child. 1999;80:188-191. 18. Malfait F, Hakim AJ, De Paepe A, Grahame R. The genetic basis of joint hypermobility syndromes. Rheumatology. 2006;45:502-507. 19. Schalkwijk J, Zweers MC, Steijlen PM, et al. A recessive form of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome caused by tenascin-X deficiency. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1167-1175.

184

9


20. Zweers MC, Bristow J, Steijlen PM, et al. Haploinsufficiency of TNXB is associated with hypermobility type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;73:214-217. 21. Zweers MC, Hakim AJ, Grahame R, Schalkwijk J. Joint hypermobility syndromes: the pathphysiologic role of tenascin-X gene defects. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50(9):2742-2749. 22. Zweers MC, Dean WB, van Kuppevelt TH, Bristow J, Schalkwijk J. Elastic fiber abnormalities in hypermobility type Ehlers-Danlos syndrome patients with tenascin-X mutations. Clin Genet. 2005;67:330-334. 23. Fuchs JR, Fishman SJ. Management of spontaneous colonic perforation in Ehlers and Danlos syndrome type IV. J Pediatr Surg. 2004;39:e1-e3. 24. Chuman H, Trobe JD, Petty EM, et al. Spontaneous direct carotid-cavernous fistula in EhlersDanlos syndrome type IV: two case reports and a review of the literature. J Neuroophthalmol. 2002;22(2):73-74. 25. Hollands JK, Santarius T, Kirkpatrick PJ, Higgins JN. Treatment of a direct carotid-cavernous fistula in a patient with type IV Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a novel approach. Neuroradiology. 2006;48(7):491-494, Epub 2006 May 6. 26. Naidu SG, Chong BW, Huettl EA, Stone WM. Percutaneous embolization of a lumbar pseudoaneurysm in a patient with type IV Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Vasc Surg. 2008;47(6):1376. 27. Freeman RK, Swegle J, Sise MJ. The surgical complications of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Am Surg. 1996;62:869-873. 28. Oderich GS, Panneton JM, Bower TC, et al. The spectrum, management and clinical outcome of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type IV: a 30-year experience. J Vasc Surg. 2005;42:98-106. 29. Pepin M, Schwarze U, Superti-Furga A, Byers PH. Clinical and genetic features of EhlersDanlos syndrome type IV, the vascular type. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:673-680. 30. Okamoto O, Ando T, Watanabe A, Mimata H, Shimada T, Fujiwara SA. A novel point mutation in type III collagen gene resulting in exon 24 skipping in a case of vascular type Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Arch Dermatol Res. 2008;300:525-529. 31. Combeer EL, Combeer AD. A rare cause of maternal death: liver and inferior vena cava rupture due to previously undiagnosed Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome type IV. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2008;25:765-767. 32. Al-Hussain H, Zeisberger SM, Huber PR, Giunta C, Steinmann B. Brittle cornea syndrome and its delineation from the kyphoscoliotic type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS VI): report on 23 patients and review of the literature. Am J Med Genet A. 2004;124:28-34. 33. Yeowell HN, Walker LC. Mutations in the lysyl hydroxylase 1 gene that result in enzyme deficiency and the clinical phenotype of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type VI. Mol Genet Metab. 2000;71:212-224. 34. Giunta C, Randolph A, Steinmann B. Mutation analysis of the PLOD1 gene: an efficient multistep approach to the molecular diagnosis of the kyphoscoliotic type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS VIA). Mol Genet Metab. 2005;86:269-276. 35. Viljoen D, Goldblatt J, Thompson D, Beighton P. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: yet another type. Clin Genet. 1987;32:196-201. 36. Giunta C, Chambaz C, Pedemonte M, Scapolan S, Steinmann B. The arthrochalasia type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS VIIA and VIIB): the diagnostic value of collagen fibril ultrastructure. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A(10):1341-1346. 37. Schwarze U, Hata R, et al. Rare autosomal recessive cardiac valvular form of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome results from mutations in the COL1A2 gene that activate the nonsense-mediated RNA decay pathway. Am J Hum Genet. 2004;74(5):917-930. 38. Malfait F, Symoens S, Coucke P, Nunes L, De Almeida S, De Paepe A. Total absence of the alpha2(I) chain of collagen type I causes a rare form of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome with hypermobility and propensity to cardiac valvular problems. J Med Genet. 2006;43(7):e36. 39. Malfait F, Symoens S, De Backer J, et al. Three arginine to cysteine substitutions in the pro-alpha (I)-collagen chain cause Ehlers-Danlos syndrome with a propensity to arterial rupture in early adulthood. Hum Mutat. 2007;28:387-395. 40. Giunta C, Elçioglu NH, Albrecht B, et al. Spondylocheiro dysplastic form of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome–an autosomal-recessive entity caused by mutations in the zinc transporter gene SLC39A13. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;82(6):1290-1305.

References

185

41. Raff ML, Craigen WJ, Smith LT, et al. Partial COL1A2 gene duplication produces features of osteogenesis imperfecta and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type VII. Hum Genet. 2000;106: 19-28. 42. Cabral WA, Chung W, Barnes AM, et al. Prolyl 3-hydroxylase 1 deficiency causes a recessive metabolic bone disorder resembling lethal/severe osteogenesis imperfecta. Nat Genet. 2007;39:359-365. 43. Beighton P, Horan F. Orthopaedic aspects of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1969;51B:414-449. 44. Kay RM, Skaggs DL. Bilateral hip dislocations in a father and son with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Orthopedics. 2001;24:1165-1166. 45. Hagberg C, Korpe L, Berglund B. Temporomandibular joint problems and self-registration of mandibular opening capacity among adults with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a questionnaire study. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2004;7:40-46. 46. Dabbas N, Saker R, Blakeley C. Multiple spontaneous dislocations in a patient with Ehlers– Danlos syndrome. Emerg Med J. 2008;25:175-176. 47. Schroeder EL, Lavallee ME. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome in athletes. Curr Sports Med Rep. 2006;6:327-334. 48. Giordano P, Del Vecchio GC, Scaraggi R, et al. Hemarthrosis due to a rare cause of hemorrhagic diathesis: Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2008;25(3):205-209. 49. Yis U, Dirik E, Chambaz C, et al. Differential diagnosis of muscular hypotonia in infants: the kyphoscoliotic type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS VI). Neuromuscul Disord. 2008;18(3):210-214. 50. Nematbakhsh A, Crawford A. Non-adjacent spondylolisthesis in Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2004;13(5):336-339. 51. Wenstrup RJ, Meyer RA, Lyle JS, et al. Prevalence of aortic root dilation in the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Genet Med. 2002;4:112-117. 52. Berglund B, Nordstrom G, Hagberg C, Mattiasson AC. Foot pain and disability in individuals with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS): impact on daily life activities. Disabil Rehabil. 2005;27(4):164-169. 53. Sacheti A, Szemere J, Bernstein B, Tafas T, Schechter N, Tsipouras P. Chronic pain is a manifestation of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1997;14(2):88-93. 54. Hulme JR, Wilmshurst CC. Acute appendicitis in the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Am J Surg. 1976;132:103-104. 55. Umekoji A, Fukai K, Hosomi N, et al. Vascular type of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome associated with mild haemophilia A. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2009;34(1):101. 56. Akpina S, Gogus A, Talu U, Hamzaoglu A, Dikici F. Surgical management of the spinal deformity in Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type VI. Eur Spine J. 2003;12:135-140. 57. Rose PS, Johnson CA, Hungerford DS, McFarland EG. Total knee arthroplasty in EhlersDanlos syndrome. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19(2):190-196. 58. Qureshi SA, Shah AK, Pruzansky ME. Using the semitendinosus tendon to stabilize sternoclavicular joints in a patient with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a case report. Am J Orthop. 2005;34(7):315-318. 59. Badia A, Riano F, Young LC. Bilateral arthroscopic tendon interposition arthroplasty of the thumb carpometacarpal joint in a patient with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: a case report. J Hand Surg [Am]. 2005;30(4):673-676. 60. Lane D. Anaesthetic implications of vascular type Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2006;34(4):501-505. 61. Hakim AJ, Grahame R, Norris P, Hopper C. Local anaesthetic failure in joint hypermobility syndrome. J R Soc Med. 2005;98:84-85. 62. Dolan AL, Mishra MB, Chambers JB, Grahame R. Clinical and echocardiographic survey of the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Br J Rheumatol. 1997;36(4):459-462. 63. McDonnell NB, Gorman BL, Mandel KW, et al. Echocardiographic findings in classical and hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndromes. Am J Med Genet A. 2006;140(2):129-136. 64. Volkov N, Nisenblat V, Ohel G, Gonen R. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: insights on obstetric aspects. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2007;62:51-57.

186

9


65. Carley ME, Schaffer J. Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women with Marfan or Ehlers Danlos syndrome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:1021-1023. 66. De Coster PJ, Martens LC, De Paepe A. Oral health in prevalent types of Ehlers-Danlos syndromes. J Oral Pathol Med. 2005;34(5):298-307. 67. Abel MD, Carrasco LR. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome: classifications, oral manifestations, and dental considerations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2006;102(5): 582-590. 68. De Coster PJ, Martens LC, Van den Berghe L. Prevalence of temporomandibular joint dysfunction in Ehlers–Danlos syndromes. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2004;7:237-240. 69. Ferreira O Jr, Cardoso CL, Capelozza AL, Yaedú RY, da Costa AR. Odontogenic keratocyst and multiple supernumerary teeth in a patient with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome–a case report and review of the literature. Quintessence Int. 2008;39(3):251-256. 70. Villan S, Sever A, Mills P, Mounter NA, Sever AR. Unusual breast calcification due to Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, detected by mammography. Clin Radiol. 2005;60(11): 1216-1218. 71. Tapley E, Beighton P. Calcification of breast tissue in the Ehlers–Danlos syndrome. Breast J. 2009;15:537-539. 72. Key JA. Hypermobility of joints as a sex-linked hereditary characteristic. JAMA. 1927;88: 1710-1712. 73. Sturkie PD. Hypermobile joints in all descendants for two generations. J Hered. 1941;32: 232-234. 74. Haas J, Hass R. Arthrochalasis multiplex congenita; congenital flaccidity of the joints. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958;40A:663-674. 75. Carter C, Sweetnam R. Familial joint laxity and recurrent dislocations of the patella. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1958;40B:664-667. 76. Carter C, Sweetman R. Recurrent dislocation of the patella and of the shoulder, their association with familial laxity. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1960;42B:721-727. 77. Carter C, Wilkinson J. Persistent joint laxity and congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1964;46B:40-45. 78. Whitney LF. Inheritance of double-jointedness of the thumb. J Hered. 1932;23:425-426. 79. Shapiro SD, Jorgenson RJ, Salinas CF. Recurrent dislocation of the patella versus generalized joint laxity. The National Foundation. Birth Defects. 1976;XII:287-291. 80. Beighton P, Horan FT. Dominant inheritance in familial generalized articular hypermobility. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1970;52B:145-147. 81. Horton WA, Collins DL, Desmet AA, Kennedy JA, Schimke RN. Familial joint instability syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 1980;6:221-228. 82. Horan FT, Beighton P. Recessive inheritance of generalized joint hypermobility. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1973;12:47-49. 83. Malfait F, AJ Hakim, De Paepe A, De Paepe A, Grahame R. The genetic basis of the joint hypermobility syndromes. Rheumatology. 2006;45:502-507. 84. Wynne-Davis R. Acetabular dysplasia and familial joint laxity, two etiologic factors in congenital dislocation of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1970;52B:704-716. 85. Wynne-Davis R. A familial study of neonatal and late-diagnosis congenital dislocation of the hip. J Med Genet. 1970;7:315-333. 86. Bjerkreim I, van der Hagen CB. Congenital dislocation of the hip in Norway. Clin Genet. 1974;5:433-448. 87. Fredensborg N. Unilateral joint laxity in unilateral congenital dislocation of the hip. Int Orthop. 1978;2:177-178. 88. Smith BW, Coughlin MJ. The first metatarsocuneiform joint, hypermobility, and hallux valgus: what does it all mean? Foot Ankle Surg. 2008;14(3):138-141. 89. Jonsson H, Valtysdottir ST, Kjartansson O, Brekkan A. Hypermobility associated with osteoarthritis of the thumb base: a clinical and radiological subset of hand osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1996;55:540-543.

References

187

90. Chen HC, Shah SH, Li YJ, Stabler TV, Jordan JM, Kraus VB. Inverse association of general joint hypermobility with hand and knee osteoarthritis and serum cartilage oligometric matrix protein levels. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(12):3854-3864. 91. Grahame R, Edwards JC, Pitcher D, Gabell A, Harvey W. A clinical and echocardiographic study of patients with the hypermobility syndrome. Ann Rheum Dis. 1981;40:541-546. 92. Mishra MB, Ryan P, Atkinson P, et al. Extra-articular features of benign joint hypermobility syndrome. Br J Rheumatol. 1996;35:861-866. 93. Grahame R. Hypermobility: an important but often neglected area within rheumatology. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2008;4(10):522-524. 94. Lowe RM, Hashkes PJ. Growing pains: a noninflammatory pain syndrome of early childhood. Nat Clin Pract Rheumatol. 2008;4(10):542-549. 95. Viswanathan V, Khubchandani RP. Joint hypermobility and growing pains in school children. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2008;26(5):962-966. 96. Beighton P. The Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. In: McKusick’s Heritable Disorders of Connective Tissue. 5th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 1993:189-251. 97. Viljoen D, Beighton P. Marfan syndrome: a diagnostic dilemma. Clin Genet. 1990;37: 417-422. 98. Svensson LG, Blackstone EH, Feng J, et al. Are Marfan syndrome and marfanoid patients distinguishable on long-term follow-up? Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83(3):1067-1074. 98a. Halliday DJ, Hutchinson S, Lonie L, et al. Twelve novel FBN1 mutations in Marfan syndrome and Marfan related phenotypes test the feasibility of FBN1 mutation testing in clinical practice. J Med Genet. 2002;39:589-593. 99. De Paepe A, Devereux RB, Dietz HC, Hennekam RC, Pyertitz RE. Revised diagnostic criteria for the Marfan syndrome. Am J Med Genet. 1996;62:417-426. 100. Dietz HC. Marfan syndrome: reviews at GeneTests-GeneClinics [databse online]. Available at http://www.geneclinics.org, update 2005. 101. Weil UH. Osteogenesis imperfecta. Clin Orthop. 1981;159:6-10. 102. Engelbert RHH, van der Graaf Y, van Empelen R, Beemer FA, Helders PJM. Osteogenesis imperfecta in childhood: impairment and disability. Pediatrics. 1997;99:E3. 103. Antoniazzi F, Zamboni G, Lauriola S, Donadi L, Adami S, Tatò L. Early bisphosphonate treatment in infants with severe osteogenesis imperfecta. J Pediatr. 2006;149(2): 174-179. 104. Viljoen D, Versfield G, Beighton P. Osteogenesis imperfecta with congenital joint contractures (Bruck syndrome). Clin Genet. 1989;36:122-126. 105. Steiner RD, Pepin MG, Byers PH. Osteogenesis imperfecta: reviews at Gene TestsGeneClinics [database online]. Available at http://www.geneclinics.org, 2005. 106. Teebi AS, Al Awadi SA, Marafie MJ, Bushnaq RA, Satyanath S. Osteoporosis-pseudoglioma syndrome with congenital heart disease: a new association. J Med Genet. 1988;25:32-36. 107. Biering A, Iversson T. Osteogenesis imperfecta associated with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. Acta Paediatr. 1955;44:279-283. 108. Greenfield G, Romano A, Stein R, Goodman RM. Blue sclerae and keratoconus: key features of a distinct heritable disorder of connective tissue. Clin Genet. 1973;4:8-16. 109. Biglan AW, Brown SI, Johnson BL. Keratoglobus and blue sclerae. Am J Ophthalmol. 1977;83:225-233. 110. Robertson FW. Keratoconus and the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome; a new aspect keratoconus. Med J Aust. 1975;1:571-573. 111. Larsen LJ, Schottstaedt ER, Bost FC. Multiple congenital dislocations associated with characteristic facial abnormality. J Pediatr. 1950;37:574-581. 112. Martin Fernández-Mayoralas D, Fernández-Jaén A, Munoz-Jareno N, Calleja-Pérez B, San Antonio-Arce V, Martínez-Boniche H. Larsen syndrome: two reports of cases with spinal cord compromise. Rev Neurol. 2008;47(2):79-82. 113. Madera M, Crawford A, Mangano FT. Management of severe cervical kyphosis in a patient with Larsen syndrome: case report. J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2008;1(4):320-324.

188

9


114. Stanley D, Seymoor N. The Larsen syndrome occurring in four generations of one family. Int Orthop. 1985;8:267-272. 115. Clayton-Smith J, Donnai D. A further patient with the lethal type of Larsen syndrome. J Med Genet. 1988;25:499-500. 116. Hermanns P, Unger S, Rossi A, et al. Congenital joint dislocations caused by carbohydrate sulfotransferase 3 deficiency in recessive Larsen syndrome and humero-spinal dysostosis. Am J Hum Genet. 2008;82(6):1368-1374. 117. Desbuquois G, Grenier B, Michel J, Rossignot C. Nanisme chondrodystrophique avec ossification ararchique et polymalformations chez deux soeurs. Arch Fr Pediatr. 1966;23: 573-587. 118. Hall BD. Lethality in Desbuquois dysplasia: three new cases. Pediatr Radiol. 2001;39: 589-593. 119. Lloyd AR, Ragosta KG, Bryke CR, Hoo JJ. Desbuquois syndrome in three sisters with significantly different lengths of survival. Am J Med Genet A. 2006;140:125-135. 120. Beighton PH, Kozlowski K. Spondo-epi-metaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity and severe progressive kyphoscoliosis. Skeletal Radiol. 1980;5:205-317. 121. Beighton P. Spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity (SEMDJL). J Med Genet. 1994;31:136-140. 122. Torrington M, Beighton P. The ancestry of spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity (SEMDJL) in South Africa. Clin Genet. 1991;39:210-213. 123. Hall CM, Elcioglu NH, Shaw DG. A distinct form of Spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with multiple dislocations. J Med Genet. 1998;35(7):566-572. 124. Smith W, Ji HP, Mouradian W, Pagon RA. Spondlyoepimetaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity (SEMDJL): presentation in two unrelated patients in the United States. Am J Med Genet. 1999;86(3):245-252. 125. Sulko J, Kozlowski K. Spondyloepimetaphsyeal dysplasia with joint laxity, leptodactylic or Hall type: report of a case with normal face and literature review. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2008;17(6):323-327. 126. Hall CM, Elcioglu NH, MacDermot KD, Offiah AC, Winter RM. Spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with multiple dislocations (Hall type): three further cases and evidence of autosomal dominant inheritance. J Med Genet. 2002;39(9):666-670. 127. Heselson NG, Cremin BJ, Beighton P. Pseudoachondroplasia, a report of 13 cases. Br J Radiol. 1977;50:473-482. 128. Vatanavicham N, Lachman RS, Rimoin DL. Multilayered patella: similar radiographic findings in pseudoachondroplasia and recessive multiple epiphyseal dysplasia. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146(A):1682-1686. 129. Atinga M, Hamer AJ. Total knee replacements in a patient with the Morquio syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(12):1631-1633. 130. Beighton P, Craig J. Atlanto-axial dislocation in the Morquio syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1973;55B:478-480. 131. McKusick VA, Eldridge R, Hostetler JA, Egeland JA, Ruangwit U. Dwarfism in the Amish. II: cartilage-hair hypoplasia. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp. 1965;116:285-326. 132. Makitie O, Sulisalo T, de la Chapelle A, Kaitila I. Cartilage-hair hypoplasia. J Med Genet. 1995;32:39-43. 133. Hall BD, Spranger J. Hypochondroplasia: clinical and radiological aspects in 39 cases. Radiology. 1979;133:95-100. 134. McKusick VA, Egeland JA, Eldridge R, Krusen DE. Dwarfism in the Amish: the Ellis-van Creveld syndrome. Bull Johns Hopkins Hosp. 1964;115:306-336. 135. Beighton P. Autosomal recessive inheritance in the mesomelic dwarfism of Campailla and Martinelli. Clin Genet. 1974;5:363-367. 136. Spranger J, Langer LO. Spondyloepiphyseal dysplasia congenital. Radiology. 1970;94: 313-322. 137. Kannu P, Aftimos S, Mayne V, Donnan L, Savarirayan R. Metatropic dysplasia: clinical and radiographic findings in 11 patients demonstrating long-term natural history. Am J Med Genet A. 2007;143A:2512-2522.

References

189

138. Geneviève D, Le Merrer M, Feingold J, Munnich A, Maroteaux P, Cormier-Daire V. Revisiting metatropic dysplasia: presentation of a sseries of 19 novel patients and review of the literature. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146A(8):992-996. 139. Currarino G. Hajdu-Cheney syndrome associated with serpentine fibulae and polycystic kidney disease. Pediatr Radiol. 2009;39(1):47-52. 140. Opitz JM, Smith JF, Santoro L. The FG syndromes: perspectives in 2008. Adv Pediatr. 2008;55:123-170. 141. Lyons MJ, Graham JM Jr, Neri G, et al. Clinical experience in the evaluation of 30 patients with a prior diagnosis of FG syndrome. J Med Genet. 2009;46(1):9-13. 142. Sayad CJ, Matheis P, Morrell DS. Hypotrichosis, bulbous nose, and cone-shaped epiphyses in an 8 year-old girl: trichorhinophalangeal syndrome type I. Pediatr Dermatol. 2008;25(5): 557-558. 143. Aarskog D. A familial syndrome of short stature associated with facial dysplasia and genital anomalies. J Pediatr. 1970;77:856-861. 144. Zielinski JA, Pack LL. Bilateral anterior hip dislocation in a child with Aarskog syndrome: a case report. J Pediatr Orthop. 2008;28(7):729-732. 145. Young ID, Moore JR. Intrafamilial variation in Cohen syndrome. J Med Genet. 1987;28: 488-492. 146. Saltzman CL, Herzenberg JE, Phillips WA, Hensinger RN, Hopwood NJ. Thick lips, bumpy tongue and slipped capital femoral epiphysis; a deadly combination. J Pediatr Orthop. 1988;8:219-222. 147. Pueschel SM, Scola FH, Pezzullo JC. A longitudinal study of atlanto-dens relationships in asymptomatic individuals with Down syndrome. Pediatrics. 1992;89:1194-1198. 148. Holtgrewe JL, Kalen V. Orthopaedic manifestations of the Lowe (oculocerebrorenal) syndrome. J Pediatr Orthop. 1986;6:165-171. 149. Herrera-Soto JA, Santiago-Cornier A, Segal LS, Ramirez N, Tamai J. The musculoskeletal manifestations of the Coffin-Lowry syndrome. J Pediatr Orthop. 2007;27(1):85-89. 150. Kawame H, Hannibal MC, Hudgins L, Pagon RA. Phenotypic spectrum and management issues in Kabuki syndrome. J Pediatr. 1999;134(4):480-485. 151. Sommer A. Photo essay-Sekel syndrome. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2007;145C(3):230-231. 152. Kääriäinen H, Ryöppy S, Norio R. RAPADILINO syndrome with radial and patellar aplasia/ hypoplasia as main manifestations. Am J Med Genet. 1989;33(3):346-351. 153. Kivuva EC, Parker MJ, Cohen MC, Wagner BE, Sobey G. De Barsy syndrome: a review of the phenotype. Clin Dysmorphol. 2008;17:99-107. 154. Fleck BJ, Pandya A, Vanner L, Kerkering K, Bodurtha J. Coffin-Siris syndrome: review and presentation of new cases from a questionnaire. Am J Med Genet. 2001;99(1):1-7. 155. Snead MP, Yates JRN. Clinical and molecular genetics of Stickler syndrome. J Med Genet. 1999;3:192-196.

Chapter 10

Future Avenues for Research

This edition, the fourth in a series spanning some 25 years since the publication of the first edition in 1983, is likely to be the last prepared under the current authorship. In addition to chronicling further progress in the field, it seems appropriate to add a final chapter concerning areas that might be suitable, even ripe, for translational research in the future. This chapter, at times unashamedly speculative, synthesises the ideas of all three authors, each approaching the field from their slightly different perspectives. We apologise to readers if some of our suggestions prove impractical or if we have failed to consider their own areas of particular interest in this wide field.

10.1

Arterial Elasticity

Inflammatory polyarthritis and cardiovascular disease are undoubtedly closely related. Some experts have suggested that occlusive cardiovascular disease and autoimmune inflammation in joints represent extremes of organ involvement within the same pathological spectrum. Much attention has been devoted to the inflammatory seed; much less attention to the soil on which it is sown. Whether hyperlaxity of tissue with hypermobile joints acting as a surrogate for its detection behaves as a graded trait, as has been suggested for the joint,1 or whether separate clinical conditions exist such that the degree of hyperlaxity of the tissues is required to cross a certain threshold before a clinical syndrome can be diagnosed, is open to debate. Nevertheless, the familial hypermobility syndromes are well documented. More importantly, it is evident that hypermobility of joints alone can be associated with cardiovascular manifestations such as prolapse of the mitral valve and aggravated Raynaud’s phenomenon. There is also likely to be a graded variation in arterial elasticity between individuals for which joint hypermobility may or may not act as a clue. By implication, hypermobility consequent upon collagen structure rather than hypermobility consequent upon the shape of the bony articulating surfaces is likely to be the better surrogate for detection of this situation. P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2_10, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

191

192

10


An increasing number of imaging methods are available for the assessment of vascular disease, with varying degrees of sensitivity. Central atherosclerosis is often measured with high-resolution carotid ultrasound for the detection of plaque, although the extent of carotid artery intima-media thickness (CIMT) conveys different information which is possibly just as important. B-mode ultrasound is a safe, reliable and non-invasive method of measuring CIMT.2 The combined thickness of the intima and media can be measured in various sections of the carotid artery, although the common carotid artery appears to be the most reproducible and accurate site for assessment.3 The internal carotid is presently more difficult to measure than the common carotid though techniques are improving all the time. Nevertheless, a wide variety of confounding factors are emerging that impinge upon CIMT including age, gender and blood pressure for which allowance is required. Amongst the other parameters for vascular change, distensibility is sometimes quoted, presumably because it is easily visualised. This feature which may or may not be synonymous with the more frequently described ‘arterial stiffness’, often correspondingly impaired though usually measured by different methods. Confounding factors also apply to stiffness, which is increased in most chronic inflammatory disorders4 including rheumatoid arthritis5 and SLE.6 Stiffness is also increased in the presence of vasculitis.7 One of the determinants of stiffness, only occasionally dissected out, is likely to be elasticity. By implication, this reflects collagen structure that, in the case of the arterial wall, is likely to be predominantly inherited. It is conceivable, however, that once arterial disease becomes established, stiffness, of which elasticity is likely to be only one component, will become impaired. Evidence from genetic disorders suggests that the natural distribution of elasticity may vary along the length of a blood vessel, not least as a consequence of mechanical anatomical tethering at certain anatomical sites such as bifurcation. It is likely to be also influenced considerably by non-vascular factors such as bony foramina and ligamentous bands that tether the course of blood vessels. Even in the absence of pathology, linear flow will surely be interrupted by variation in angle of the vessel wall, producing eddies well before such dynamic variations are further influenced by local pathology and anatomy. Imaging is becoming increasingly sophisticated with improved techniques for Doppler sonography as well as improved resolution of MRI scans through the advent of 3 T MRI scanners. Computer modelling is also increasingly available to give a measure of arterial distensibility, in part correlating with elasticity. We are not aware of any basic studies that might show whether or not the prevalence of acquired cardiovascular disease is less in persons with distensible arteries, in whom hypermobile joints act as a surrogate and simple method for their detection. Consideration of local confounding factors would need to be added to such studies. The uncommon genetic disorders such as Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS) and Marfan syndrome might also be used as models in this situation. Relations between collagens are complex but it seems likely that collagen types I, III, V and VI are those most likely to be involved in the determination of vascular elasticity. Some collagens may even be key players in this field. Abundance of collagen III, as

10.2

Cytokine Modulation

193

in the vascular or arterial forms of the EDS [EDS IV] for example, confers particular delicacy, even fragility.8 This may have more pathogenetical relevance than simple mutation of the gene which determines collagen V, which determines EDS types I and II in the classical nosology. Conditions such as EDS type IV (the vascular variant), where a specific feature is bursting of blood vessels (possibly micro-aneurysms) leading to catastrophic haemorrhage, might be a particularly fertile area for study as vascular imaging improves. A modest degree of hyper-elasticity might yet be shown to be an asset in conveying protection from acquired cardiovascular disease while more severe hyper-elasticity, especially localised at the site of micro-aneurysm, might be a decided liability.

10.2

Cytokine Modulation

Recent advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis of Marfan syndrome provide insight into the possible direction of specific therapy for the management of inherited abnormalities, although cytokine modulation may be still at least a decade away. In earlier molecular research, the Marfan syndrome was linked to the gene for fibrillin-1 on chromosome 15.9 Many accept this was not the whole story since it failed to take account of overlap between Marfan syndrome and other conditions (e.g. the ‘marfanoid EDS’).10 Fibrillin-1 shares a high degree of homology with the latent transforming growth factor-b (TGF-b) binding proteins.11,12 TGF-b cytokines are secreted as large latent complexes, which, after secretion, are sequestered by the extracellular matrix. This homology has prompted the hypothesis that extracellular microfibrils might participate in the regulation of TGF-b activation, and this might additionally explain some clinical manifestations of Marfan syndrome such as the bone overgrowth and even changes in the heart valve. Increased local activity of TGF-b has recently been shown to be responsible for myxomatous cardiac valve disease in fibrillin-1 deficient mice.13 It was subsequently shown that mutations in the gene encoding the type II TGF-b receptor exactly recapitulate the classic Marfan phenotype.14 Patients with Loeys–Dietz aortic aneurysm syndrome are also heterozygous for loss of function mutations in either of the genes encoding the type I or type II TGF-b receptor.15 This scientific background has challenged conventional dogma on Marfan syndrome, which has been that susceptible individuals were born with a genetically determined structural weakness in the tissues. An alternative possibility, gaining in credibility, is that clinical manifestations of the Marfan syndrome may be in part or entirely determined by a failed regulatory (as opposed to a structural) role of the extracellular matrix. Suspicion points to deregulation of TGF-b activity and signalling, raising the theoretical prospect of prophylactic and, perhaps ultimately, even preventative intervention with cytokines. In mice, the use of drug therapy to modify TGF-b activity demonstrates that phenotypes can be manipulated by this means in the post-natal period. That such manipulation might ultimately be available in man

194

10


is not too distant a step, with turnover upregulated such that artificially increased formation of slightly faulty protein compensates for its biomechanical weakness.

10.3

Candidate Genes

In general, recent searches for candidate genes have proved disappointing. The classical research study is based on the identification of a clear and discreet clinical entity, present in several members of each of three generations in the same family, all of whom are available to contribute material for DNA analysis. This material can then be put out for testing against a panel of candidate genes. Many have been suggested, and tenascin is especially favoured. Unfortunately, a recent seminal study in this area has been disappointing (M. Pope and P. Turnpenny 2009, personal communication). In this investigation, the selection of a candidate gene panel was impeccable, including conventional genes for collagen, and others thought, with good reason, to be relevant. Perhaps the dilemma is that we are dealing with a very heterogeneous a group of conditions. If joint hypermobility simply serves as a phenotypic marker to any of the many factors that contribute to it, the search for candidate genes would need to be extremely widespread, taking on board not only those that relate to collagen structure but also those that relate to bony shape of the joints. In the event that appropriate candidate genes were to be identified, the number of families to which each appertained might also be quite restricted. In turn, arguably, cytokine modulation remains the more attractive way forward, on current evidence.

10.4

Disease Association: True or Artefactual?

The last three decades have seen an increasing realisation that symptoms can arise from organ systems other than the musculoskeletal in hypermobile patients. Research into such associations, although lacking some of the fundamental interest of genetic research, is actually the approach most frequently requested by the patients. This is also perhaps the most likely to provide immediate practical improvement in management. For all these reasons, it should not be neglected. Traditionally, the unifying link has been considered to be the structure of collagen, including the laxity in the collagen of the arterial wall that produces vasospasm and the laxity in the collagen of the bowel wall that leads to sacculation mimicking irritable bowel syndrome; both are entirely plausible. A refinement, in the case of the vasospasm, argues that abnormal neurological tone (perhaps analogous to the muscular flaccidity that aggravates joint hypermobility in certain other conditions such as Down’s syndrome) is a further contributing factor. Recently, however, firm evidence has emerged to suggest that there might be an abnormality of the autonomic

10.5

Neurological Aspects

195

nervous system in its own right. Elegant functional studies on the bowel convincingly confirm the presence of autonomic neuropathy, which is specifically highly correlated with joint hypermobility, even when confounding factors such as the laxity of collagen in the bowel wall are considered.16 A further surprise has been the convincing association of mild asthma with joint hypermobility, demonstrated in controlled studies on both non-specific hypermobile persons and individuals with the EDS.17 Several possible explanations arise. Conventional interest has centred on tracheal and bronchiolar collapse but an abnormality detected by intrinsic respiratory function tests perhaps points to a more ubiquitous abnormality in the collagenous ground substance that contributes to the lung structure, even though this is only distantly related to the collagen sub-types that contribute to joint stability. Abnormal elastin is recognised to cause emphysema in cutis laxa. Attention has recently also been drawn to difficulty in phonation experienced by some persons with hypermobility of joints. The possible association between hypermobility and fibromyalgia is more contentious. That individuals with hyperlax joints should experience tiredness on exertion is plausible given the extra effort required to stabilise hypermobile joints before they are put to use. Clinical support for this concept is provided when the symptoms of tiredness are restricted in an individual to the muscles acting around the joints that are the most hypermobile. It is also plausible that such persons, with a tendency to nocturnal compression neuropathy depending on the position in which they lie, might experience disturbed sleep.18 The link to a true more widespread fibromyalgia with sleep disturbance (assuming such a syndrome exists) is more controversial. Some medicinal therapy which is effective in the management of putative widespread fibromyalgia also seems to help to relieve the daytime joint symptoms of individuals with hypermobility. The nocturnal use of a small dose of antidepressant, normally a tricyclic, seems to be effective in this regard.19,20

10.5

Neurological Aspects

The contribution of proprioception to hypermobility has been long accepted (see Chaps. 2 and 4), and impairment and abnormality in the reflex arc serving the hypermobile joint is also established.21 Recent work from Ghent, Belgium, has further refined the understanding of proprioceptive abnormalities, suggesting that an abnormality in proprioception is a result of deficits in joint and muscle-tendon receptors and not in cutaneous tactile receptors (L. Rombaut 2009, personal communication). A further feature, partly related, is the propensity of hypermobile patients to have orthopaedic abnormalities of the spine. These are often scolioses, either a conventional scoliosis or a corkscrew twist or a forward slip leading to a spondylolisthesis, but other features such as transitional vertebrae are often seen. This area of association perhaps reaches its zenith in the suggested association between EDS and the Arnold–Chiari malformation. The latter is a structural condition (as opposed to the

196

10


autonomic neuropathy associated with hypermobility, which is arguably functional); the basic abnormality is at the base of the skull with inadequate space for the cerebellar tonsils, sometimes requiring surgical decompression. A syrinx can be associated with this in the cervical spine or at lower levels of the lumbar spine. These abnormalities can impinge on neurological functional capacity, even developmental milestones. This issue remains an area of ongoing medical debate.

10.6

Podiatry

Even more immediate practical help may be available for patients from research into podiatric aspects of hypermobility. Although the common hypermobile variant is flat footedness, sometimes a high arch is found. A recent Arthritis Research Campaign-funded study in Leeds has studied the use of orthoses. A striking feature of the study was the variability of the different foot shapes in hypermobile subjects. In particular, the involvement of the mid-foot (not always suspected) and the poor correlation between different contours and hypermobility at other joints when only the Beighton score of measurement is used (A. Redmond 2009, personal communication). Existing work in this field has been discussed in Chap. 4.

10.7

Hormonal Aspects

This area is ripe for further research. Accepted hormonal aspects of hypermobility are the invariable changes during pregnancy when joints become more lax and more symptomatic, and the delay in return to normal occasioned by breastfeeding when prolactin levels are high. The frequent cyclical deterioration with menstruation has already been discussed (see Chap. 6). By implication, hormones contribute symptomatically or probably through a direct loosening effect on collagen. It follows that progestogens and prolactin are likely to enhance symptoms at hypermobile joints, possibly by enhancing laxity. By contrast, oestrogens might even be protective. In the experience of clinicians in the field, this hypothesis is upheld. A common cause of deterioration in previously stable hypermobile joints, either manifested by increased propensity to subluxation or by greater discomfort, is well-intentioned hormonal manipulation. In the experience of one of the authors, the Mirena coil (with its progesterone reservoir even though this is claimed to exhibit controlled gradual release and therefore not to be a risk factor), the injected progesterone contraceptives and progesterone based oral contraceptive pills frequently aggravate hypermobility. In the majority (though not all) cases, if the causative contraceptive is replaced, symptoms improve. The preferred replacement would normally be a combined oral contraceptive providing the progestogen component is not Drospirenone, which is unusual amongst progestogens in view of its close chemical relationship to Spironolactone. There is also an impression that the higher the dose

References

197

of oestrogen that can be tolerated in a combined oral contraceptive, the greater the protection. Some menopausal women have also found symptoms from hypermobile joints are reduced by the commencement of oestrogen replacement therapy.

10.8

Joint Hypermobility as a Model of Accelerated Osteoarthritis

The putative and contentious link between hypermobility and osteoarthritis is discussed in Chaps. 4 and 5. A joint that is rendered hypermobile by poor proprioception bears a close relationship to the traumatic osteoarthritis induced in the Pond-Nuki dog model. If it were to be accepted that hypermobility might provide an accelerated model of osteoarthritis, such patients would provide a fertile testing ground for new generations of drugs that purport to have a disease-modifying effect in osteoarthritis. The problem with developing such drugs in the past has been the lack of an accelerated human model of osteoarthritis, as clinical trial design has to span at least 2 and sometimes 5 years, making development unattractive. As national organisations group their resources for the more efficient testing of disease-modifying drugs in osteoarthritis, accelerated human models are likely to be at a premium. Subjects with joint hypermobility might yet find themselves at the forefront of drug development.

References 1. Wood PH. Is hypermobility a discrete entity? Proc R Soc Med. 1971;64:690-692. 2. Heiss G, Sharrett AR, Barnes R, et al. Carotid atherosclerosis measured by B-mode ultrasound in populations: associations with cardiovascular risk factors in the ARIC study. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;134:250-256. 3. O’Leary DH, Polak JF, Kronmal RA, et al. Thickening of the carotid wall. A marker of atherosclerosis in the elderly? Stroke. 1996;27:224-231. 4. Roman MJ, Devereux RB, Schwartz JE, et al. Arterial stiffness in chronic inflammatory diseases. Hypertension. 2005;46:194. 5. Inaba M, Tanaka K, Goto H, et al. Independent association of increased trunk fat with increased arterial stiffening in postmenopausal patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2007;34:290-295. 6. Chow P-C, Ho MH-K, Lee T-L, Lau Y-L, Cheung Y-F. Relation of arterial stiffness to left ventricular structure and function in adolescents and young adults with paediatric-onset systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol. 2007;34:1345-1352. 7. Ng WF, Fantin F, Ng C, et al. Takayasu’s arteritis: a cause of prolonged arterial stiffness. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:741-745. 8. Pope FM, Narcisi P, Nicholls AC, Germaine D, Pals G, Richards AJ. COL3A1 mutations cause variable clinical phenotypes including acrogeria and vascular rupture. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:163-181. 9. Sakai LY, Keene DR, Engvall E. Fibrillin, a new 350-kD glycoprotein, is a component of extracellular microfibrils. J Cell Biol. 1986;103:2499-2509.

198

10


10. Bird HA. Heritable collagen disorder. In: Reports on the Rheumatic Diseases (Series 5): Topical Reviews. Chesterfield: Arthritis Research Campaign; 2005. 11. Pereira L, D’Alessio M, Ramirez F, et al. Genomic organization of the sequence coding for fibrillin, the defective gene product in Marfan syndrome. Hum Mol Genet. 1993;2:961-968. 12. Saharinen J, Hyytiäinen M, Taipale J, Keski-Oja J. Latent transforming growth factor-b binding proteins (LTBPs) – structural extracellular matrix proteins for targeting TGF-b action. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 1999;10:99-117. 13. Ng CM, Cheng A, Myers LA, et al. TGF-b-dependent pathogenesis of mitral valve prolapse in a mouse model of Marfan syndrome. J Clin Invest. 2004;114:1586-1592. 14. Mizuguchi T, Collod-Beroud G, Akiyama T, et al. Heterozygous TGFBR2 mutations in Marfan syndrome. Nat Genet. 2004;36:855-860. 15. Loeys BL, Chen J, Neptune ER, et al. A syndrome of altered cardiovascular, craniofacial, neurocognitive and skeletal development caused by mutations in TGFBR1 or TGFBR2. Nat Genet. 2005;37:275-281. 16. Farmer AD, Zarate-Lopez N, Mohammed S, Scott SM, Knowles CH, Grahame R, Aziz Q. Joint hypermobility and functional gastrointestinal disorders: is connective tissue the missing link? Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009;48(suppl 1):Abstract 217, 95. 17. Morgan AW, Pearson SB, Davies S, Gooi HC, Bird HA. Asthma and airways collapse in two heritable disorders of connective tissue. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007;66:1369-1373. 18. Aktas I, Ofluoglu D, Albay T. The relationship between benign joint hypermobility syndrome and carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Rheumatol. 2008;27:1283-1297. 19. Ofluoglu D, Gunduz OH, Kul-Panza E, Guven Z. Hypermobility in women with fibromyalgia syndrome. Clin Rheumatol. 2006;25:291-293. 20. Sendur OF, Gurer G, Bozbas GT. The frequency of hypermobility and its relationship with clinical findings of fibromyalgia patients. Clin Rheumatol. 2007;26:485-487. 21. Ferrell WR, Tennant N, Sturrock RD, et al. Amelioration of symptoms by enhancement of proprioception in patients with joint hypermobility syndrome. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50: 3323-3328.

Index

A Aarskog syndrome, 181–182 Accelerated osteoarthritis, 197 A Disintegrin-like And Metalloprotease domain with ThromboSpondin (ADAMTS2), 36–38 Arnold–Chiari malformation, 120–121, 195 Arterial elasticity ‘arterial stiffness,’ 192 CIMT, 192 EDS, 192, 193 inflammatory polyarthritis and cardiovascular disease, 191 Marfan syndrome, 192 Raynaud’s phenomenon, 191 Arthrochalasia, 154 Articular hypermobility syndrome, 7 Arts performance ballet dancers Cincinnati Ballet Company, 128 metacarpophalangeal joint, 126, 128 metatarsal shaft, 129 oestrogen deficiency, 129 Royal Ballet School, 125 ‘stress lesion,’ 129, 130 ‘swayback knee,’ 126, 127 voluntary muscular control, 126, 127 wrist hyperflexion and elbow hyperextension, 125, 126 contortionists ‘elastic lady,’ 131 front bender/back bender, 132 ‘India rubber man,’ 131 ‘slippery worm oil,’ 131 socio-medical implications, 133 training, 132–133

instrumentalists, occupational ills joint laxity, 136 osteoarthritis, violinist, 139–140 repetitive strain syndrome, 140 rheumatic complaints spectrum, 135 rheumatology clinic, 137 traumatic synovitis, 137–139 violin and viola players, 136 woodwind players, 135–136 musicians, 133, 135 plantar and dorsi flexor, 130 spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis, 131

B Beighton score, 14, 15, 118 Benign joint hypermobility syndrome (BJHS), 22, 67, 119 Boston osteoarthritis knee, 59 British Association of Performing Arts Medicine, 121

C Carotid artery intima-media thickness (CIMT), 192 Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), 106–107 Chronic pain syndrome, 117 Chronic regional pain syndrome (CRPS), 105 Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 93 Congenital dislocation of the hip (CDH), 68 Cytokine modulation, 193–194

D Dermatosporaxis, 154–155 Desbuquois syndrome, 177

P. Beighton et al., Hypermobility of Joints, DOI 10.1007/978-1-84882-085-2, © Springer-Verlag London Limited 2012

199

200 DNA analysis, 194 Down’s syndrome, 194 Drospirenone, 196

E Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS), 101, 102 arterial rupture, 158 arthrochalasis type, 36, 157 articular hypermobility, 152, 154 articular manifestation articular laxity implications, 158 bony abnormalities, 163 bursae, 162 disclocations, 158–159 foot involvement, 161–162 gait, 163 handshake, 163 hypotonicity, 160–161 joint effusions, 160 joint instability, 159–160 limb pain and osteoarthritis, 162 peripheral circulatory phenomena, 162 spinal abnormalities, 161 thoracic asymmetry, 161 ‘Berlin nosology,’ 154 biochemical abnormality, 152, 154 biomolecular determinants, 152 cardiac valvular type, 157 classical form, 155–156 collagen fibril assembly, 32–34 compression neuropathy, 2 congenital dislocation, 1 dermal extensibility, 152, 153 dermatosparaxis type, 36, 38, 157 elastic fibre abnormalities, 42 extra-articular manifestations, 3 fibril-forming collagens, 28–30 genotype and phenotype, 27 hypermobility form, 156 joint laxity, 1, 7, 12, 151 kyphoscoliotic, 38, 156–157 Marfan syndrome, 42 measurement of, 4 non-articular complications abdominal, 165 breast mammography, 166 cardiovascular, 165 connective tissue abnormality, 164 dental, 166 neurological, 165 obstetric, 166 ophthalmological, 165–166

Index occipital horn syndrome, 158 orthopaedic and rheumatological symptoms, 1 orthopaedic management, 163–164 osteogenesis imperfecta phenotype, 158 patient support groups, resources, 167 premature osteoarthritis, 3 progeroid type, 157 raisin-like swelling, 152 rheumatological manifestations, 2–3 skin split, 152 SLRP, 36 spondylocheiro dysplastic form, 39, 158 syndromic associations, 5 tenascin-X, 40–41 traumatic synovitis, 4 trivial trauma, 152, 153 type I collagens arthrochalasia, 35 biosynthesis, 31, 32 cardiac valvular, 34 COL1A1 and COL2A1 genes, 34–35 genes encoding, 30–31 N-propeptide, 35–37 proa1(I) and proa2(I) chains, 34–35 types, 154–155 types I, III, V and VI, 192–193 type V collagen, 39–40 biosynthesis, 31–32 genes encoding, 30–31 type VI collagen, 41 vascular form, 156 Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (EDS) II/III, 113–115 Electronic gravity goniometer, 19 Ellis–van Creveld syndrome, 181 Extracellular matrix (ECM) Marfan syndrome, 193 mechanical properties, 27 tenascin-X, 40 TGF-b cytokines, 193

F Fibrillin–1, 193 Fibro-fatty tissue, 161 Fibromyalgia (FM), 106–107, 195

H Hajdu–Cheney syndrome, 181 Heritable disorder on connective tissue (HDCT), 101, 102

Index Heritable hypermobility syndromes EDS arterial rupture, 158 arthrochalasis type, 157 articular hypermobility, 152, 154 articular manifestation and non-articular complications (see Ehlers–Danlos syndrome) ‘Berlin nosology,’ 154 biochemical abnormality, 152, 154 biomolecular determinants, 152 cardiac valvular type, 157 classical form, 155–156 dermal extensibility, 152, 153 dermatosparaxis type, 157 hypermobility form, 156 joint laxity, 151 kyphoscoliotic, 156–157 occipital horn syndrome, 158 orthopaedic management, 163–164 osteogenesis imperfecta phenotype, 158 patient support groups, resources, 167 progeroid type, 157 raisin-like swelling, 152 skin split, 152 spondylocheiro dysplastic form, 158 trivial trauma, 152, 153 types, 154–155 vascular form, 156 familial articular hypermobility syndromes arthrochalasis multiplex congenita, 168 articular complications, 170–171 autosomal dominant trait, 168, 169 inguinal herniae, 171 joint laxity, 167 syndromic resolution limitation, 168 tenascin-X deficiency, 170 ‘uncomplicated’ and ‘dislocating’ types, 168 joint laxity syndromes (see Joint laxity syndromes) Hypermobility biomechanics anaesthetised cats, 50 artificial lubricants, 57 autopsy specimens, 49 bony surfaces, 50–51 cartilage deformation, 49 collagen, 51–53 cryosectioning and cryodissection, 49 joint laxity, 50 knee joints, 49 neuromuscular control, 53–54 osteoarthritis

201 bisphosphonate therapy, 60 Boston osteoarthritis knee, 59 joint hyperlaxity, 57 joint instability, 58 knee internal derangement, 59 mechanical aetiology, 59 seronegative inflammatory polyarthritis, 58 varus–valgus motion, 59 weight-bearing trauma, 58 podiatric aspects, 55 proprioception, 54 stiffness measurement, 56–57 surgical intervention, 60–61 synovial membrane lubrication, 55–56

I Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), 108

J Joint hypermobility syndrome (JHS) autonomic dysfunction, 106–107 Brighton criteria, 66 children, 70 chronic pain, 105–106 dancers, 78 EDS, 101, 102 gastrointestinal tract, 108–109 HDCT, 101, 102 impaired healing, 66 lax joints, 101 ligament and bone, 80 local anaesthetics, 106 MFS, 101, 102 mimic juvenile chronic arthritis, 71 musculoskeletal elements, 65 MVP, 104–105 OI, 101, 102 oxygen consumption, 72 pelvic floor chronic pain, 105–106 hernia, 103 rectal prolapse, 103 uterine prolapse, 103–104 physiotherapy, 85–86 proprioceptive impairment, 106 psychiatric disorders, 107–108 scoliosis, 71 wind straws, 109 Joint laxity syndromes dwarfing dysplasias, variable joint laxity

202 Joint laxity syndromes (cont.) Ellis–van Creveld syndrome, 181 hypochondroplasia, 180 metaphyseal chondrodysplasia type Mckusick, 180 Morquio syndrome, 179–180 pseudoachondroplasia, 178–179 genetic syndromes Aarskog syndrome, 181–182 Cohen syndrome, 182 Down syndrome, 182 genetic disorders, 182–183 Hajdu–Cheney syndrome, 181 multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2, 182 Opitz–Kaveggia FG syndrome, 181 TRP type II, 181 inherited connective tissue disorder, 171 autosomal recessive inheritance, 175 Marfan syndrome, 172–173 OI, 173–175 osteoporosis-pseudoglioma syndrome, 174 skeletal dysplasias atlanto-axial subluxation, 176 Desbuquois syndrome, 177 Larsen syndrome, 176–177 leptodactylic type, 178 multiple dislocations, 175 SEMDJL and severe progressive kyphoscoliosis, 177–178

K Kyphoscoliosis, 154

L Labral tear and autonomic dysfunction, 116–118 Langer–Giedion syndrome, 181 Larsen syndrome, 176–177 Leeds finger hyperextensometer, 19, 20 Loeys–Dietz aortic aneurysm syndrome, 193 Lysyl hydroxylase, 38–39

M Marfan syndrome, 172–173, 192 autosomal dominant disorder, 42 connective tissue disorders, 5, 171 cytokine modulation, 193 elastic fibre components, 42 HDCTs, 101 instability-induced osteoarthritis, 59

Index Metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joint measurement, 18–19 Mitral valve prolapse (MVP), 104–105 Morquio syndrome, 179–180 Muscle-tendon receptor, 195 Musculoskeletal features adults acute articular and peri-articular traumatic lesions, 76–77 arthralgia and myalgia, 75–76 bone fragility, 79–80 chondromalacia patellae, 76 chronic pain, 80–81 chronic polyarthritis/monoarticular arthritis, 77 clinical manifestations, 74–75 joints dislocation, 77 lax ligaments, 74 premature osteoarthritis, 78 prevalence, 73–74 soft tissue lesions, 76 spinal complications, 78–79 TMJ, 77–78 articular complications acupuncture and TENS, 93–94 analgesic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 92 CBT, 93 cervical/lumbar discectomy, 90 chronic symptoms, 84 denervation procedures, 94 exercise therapy, 85–87 foot surgery, 91 general management, 82 home exercise regime, 84, 85 hypermobile patients, 81 local steroid injections, 83 massage, mobilisation, hydrotherapy and water immersion, 92–93 osteoarthritis, 91 pain, 84 passive mobilisations, 84, 85 patient support and information, 94 persistent synovitis, 88 physiotherapy, 83–84 podiatry, 69, 87 postural awareness, 85 recurrent dislocation/joint instability, 89–90 rest, 82–83 soft tissue lesions, 88 specific management, 82 surgical intervention, 87–88 symptomatic treatment, 91

Index Brighton criteria, 66 children arthralgia and muscle pain, 70–71 CDH, 68 epidemiology, 68 ‘growing pains,’ 72 hypermobility and motor development, 68–70 joint instability, 72, 73 soft tissue lesions, 72–73 spinal complications, 71 temporomandibular dysfunction, 73 clinical significance, 66–67 fibrous protein genes, 65 impaired healing, 66 ligamentous laxity, 65 musculoskeletal features, 67 soft tissue injuries, 65–66

203

R Raynaud’s phenomenon, 120

EDS, 12 foot flexibility tests, 14 hinge goniometer, 15 hydrogoniometer, 15 joint hypolaxity, 22–23 joint laxity, 12, 21 joint proprioception, 19 limbs rotation, 18 manoeuvre, 12–13 MCP joint measurement, 18–19 measuring joint movement, 17 MIE clinical goniometer, 15, 16 Myrin goniometer, 17 passive dorsiflexion, 12 populations, joint laxity, 21–22 single joint requirements, 15 surface goniometry, 17 Small leucine-rich proteoglycans (SLRP), 36 Spironolactone, 196 Spondyloepimetaphyseal dysplasia with joint laxity (SEMDJL), 177–178 Sport performance acetabular dysplasia/ligamentous laxity, 141 American football, 144 athletics, 142 biomechanical joint laxity, 145 cricket, 143 ‘flexibility,’ 140 Gaussian distribution, 140 gymnastics, 141–142 hormonal aspects, 146–147 knee meniscus injury, 145 physiotherapy programmes and training schedules, 144 racquet sports, 142 swimmers, 142 training methods, 145–146 yoga, 143–144 Stickler syndrome, 118 Subluxation bony abnormality, 119–120 Subluxation complications, 119–120

S Schmorl’s node, 122 Scolioses, 195 Scoring systems back and spinal mobility, 17–18 ballet dancers, 12 Brighton criteria, 14–15 clinical applications, 22–23

T Temporomandibular joint dysfunction (TMJ), 77–78 Thoracolumbar scoliosis, 161 Transcutaneous nerve stimulator (TENS), 93–94 Transforming growth factor-b (TGF-b) binding protein, 193

N Nocturnal Idiopathic Musculoskeletal Syndrome (NIMS), 72

O Occipital horn syndrome, 158 Opitz–Kaveggia FG syndrome, 181 Oral prednisolone, 139 Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI), 173–175

P Pelvic floor problems, 115–116 Podiatry, 196 Postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (PoTS), 107 Progestogens and prolactin, 196 Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF), 146

204 Traumatic synovitis acute lesions, 76 guitarist, 137–139 joint hyperlaxity, 4 soft tissue lesions, 72 violinist, 139

Index Trichorhinophalangeal (TRP) syndrome type II, 181

U Urinary tract symptoms, 119

Hypermobility of Joints, 4th Edition

Principles of Biochemistry 4th Edition

Strength of Materials (4th Edition)

Handbook of Diabetes, 4th Edition

ABC of Nutrition, 4th Edition

Atlas of Gastroenterology, 4th Edition

Manual Mobilization of the Joints: The Spine Vol 2 (4th Edition)

Principles of Biochemistry (4th Edition)

Diseases of Sheep 4th Edition

Principles of Econometrics, 4th Edition

Real Analysis (4th Edition)

Powers (GURPS, 4th Edition)

Discrete Mathematics (4th Edition)

Comprehensive Ophthalmology 4th Edition

Essential Psychiatry, 4th edition

Discrete Mathematics (4th Edition)

Modelling Transport, 4th Edition

Project Management, 4th Edition

Global Marketing, 4th Edition

Clinical Anesthesiology, 4th Edition

Digital Design (4th Edition)

Precalculus, 4th Edition

Equine Surgery, 4th Edition

Super Joints

Calculus, 4th Edition

Precalculus, 4th Edition

Characters (GURPS, 4th Edition)

Learning Python, 4th Edition

Angina, 4th edition

Property Development, 4th Edition

Hypermobility of Joints, 4th Edition

Principles of Biochemistry 4th Edition

Strength of Materials (4th Edition)

Handbook of Diabetes, 4th Edition

ABC of Nutrition, 4th Edition

Atlas of Gastroenterology, 4th Edition

Manual Mobilization of the Joints: The Spine Vol 2 (4th Edition)

Principles of Biochemistry (4th Edition)

Diseases of Sheep 4th Edition

Principles of Econometrics, 4th Edition

Real Analysis (4th Edition)

Powers (GURPS, 4th Edition)

Discrete Mathematics (4th Edition)

Comprehensive Ophthalmology 4th Edition

Essential Psychiatry, 4th edition

Discrete Mathematics (4th Edition)

Modelling Transport, 4th Edition

Project Management, 4th Edition

Global Marketing, 4th Edition

Clinical Anesthesiology, 4th Edition

Digital Design (4th Edition)

Precalculus, 4th Edition

Equine Surgery, 4th Edition

Super Joints

Calculus, 4th Edition

Precalculus, 4th Edition

Characters (GURPS, 4th Edition)

Learning Python, 4th Edition

Angina, 4th edition

Property Development, 4th Edition

Recommend Documents