scholarly journals Comparison of the Effectiveness of Intraarticular Ozone Therapy and Platelet Rich Plasma Treatment in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (04) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ümit Yalçın
Keyword(s):  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Pain Scale ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Womac Pain ◽  
Ozone Therapy ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Long Time

Background: Platelet rich plasma (PRP) has been applied for a long time in osteoarthritis (OA). Although there are studies about PRP that examining the effectiveness with agents such as hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid, there are few published literature comparing with ozone therapy (OT). The aim of this study is to compare the pain severity and functional status of OA patients undergoing intraarticular ozone and PRP injections. Methods: In a study which is made as prospective, randomized controlled study (RCS), 49 patients were included the study. In the first group (n = 24) OT, in the second group (n = 25) PRP injections were administered intraarticularly 3 times in total with one week intervals. Visual pain scale (VAS) and severity of pain were compared with Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Results: In the PRP group, WOMAC pain, physical function and WOMAC total score were significantly lower than the OT group (p ˂ 0.05). Although VAS score decreased significantly (p ˂ 0.05) after treatment in both groups compared to pretreatment, the VAS score in the PRP group was significantly (p ˂ 0.05) lower than the OT group after treatment. Conclusion: Our study contributes to the literature in terms of limited publication about OT. However, this study shows that the results of PRP treatment are superior to OT in the treatment of knee OA.

scholarly journals High molecular weight Intraarticular hyaluronic acid for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles D. Hummer ◽  
Felix Angst ◽  
Wilson Ngai ◽  
Craig Whittington ◽  
Sophie S. Yoon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Treated Patient ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Credible Interval ◽  
Pain Scale ◽  
Womac Pain ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Mean Differences

Abstract Background The 2013 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) guidelines made strong recommendations against intraarticular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), as evidence supporting improvements in pain did not meet the minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) threshold. However, there may be important distinctions based on IAHA molecular weight (MW). Hence our objective was to evaluate the efficacy of IAHAs in knee OA based on molecular weight. Methods Randomized controlled trials were searched within MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL and selected based on AAOS criteria. A pain measure hierarchy and longest follow-up were used to select one effect size from each trial. Mean differences between interventions were converted to standardized mean differences (SMDs) and incorporated into a random-effects Bayesian network meta-analysis. High MW (HMW) was defined as ≥6000 kDa, and low MW (LMW) as < 750 kDa. Results HMW IAHA was associated with a statistically significant and possibly clinically significant improvement in pain (SMD − 0.57 (95% credible interval [Crl]: − 1.04, − 0.11), exceeding the − 0.50 MCII threshold. LMW IAHA had a lesser, non-significant improvement (− 0.23, 95% Crl: − 0.67, 0.20). Back-transforming SMDs to the WOMAC pain scale indicated a 14.65 (95% CI: 13.93, 15.62) point improvement over IA placebo, substantially better than the 8.3 AAOS MCII threshold. Conclusions Unlike LMW IAHA, HMW IAHA exceeded the MCII threshold for pain relief, suggesting that improvements can be subjectively perceived by the treated patient. Amalgamation of LMW and HMW may have blurred the benefits of IAHA in the past, leading to negative recommendations. Differentiation according to MW offers refined insight for treatment with IAHA.

Intra-Articular Injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid in Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis (Systematic Review and Meta-analysis)

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Atef Mohamed El-beltagy ◽  
Zeiad M Zakaria ◽  
; Mohamed Abdel-Samei Ibrahim
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Although PRP is one of the options in the management of knee OA, its effectiveness and wide application is still controversial. Therefore, we conducted the present systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and effectiveness of PRP versus HA injection for knee OA. Objective The purpose of this study is to compare between the efficacy of intra-articular injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid in treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Methods We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement. PRISMA and MOOSE are reporting checklists for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers of Meta-analyses of interventional and observational studies. According to International committee of medical journal association (ICJME), reviewers must report their findings according to each of the items listed in those checklists. Results The overall effect favoured PRP over HA for WOMAC function score, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC stiffness score, and WOMAC total score; mostly 6 and 12 months after treatment. According VAS score, we found that the overall effect favoured PRP over HA at 12 months only. In contrary, the overall effect did not favour PRP over HA for VAS score at 3 and 6 months. PRP is superior to HA for IKDC scores at 6 and 12 months with similar results at 3 months. Conclusion Intra-articular PRP injection is more effective in terms of pain relief and function improvement at short-term follow-up in the treatment of knee OA than HA, and there is no significant difference in the risk of adverse events between PRP and HA. A randomized controlled trial with larger group sizes is necessary to find the predictors of the response to PRP and HA intra-articular injection.

scholarly journals A Randomized Controlled Single-Blind Study Demonstrating Superiority of Amniotic Suspension Allograft Injection Over Hyaluronic Acid and Saline Control for Modification of Knee Osteoarthritis Symptoms

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (11) ◽  
pp. 1143-1154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Farr ◽  
Andreas H. Gomoll ◽  
Adam B. Yanke ◽  
Eric J. Strauss ◽  
Katie C. Mowry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Saline Control ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Symptomatic Knee ◽  
Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Patient Reported

AbstractPlacental-derived tissues are a known source of anti-inflammatory and immune modulating factors. Published pilot data on amniotic suspension allograft (ASA) for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) demonstrated safety and trends for improved pain and function. A multicenter randomized controlled trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of symptom modulation with ASA compared with saline and hyaluronic acid (HA) in subjects with knee OA. A total of 200 subjects were randomized 1:1:1 to ASA, HA, or saline, with subjects blinded to their allocation. Changes from baseline of patient-reported outcomes (PROs)—EQ-5D-5L, Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), visual analog scale (VAS), Tegner, and Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE)—were compared between groups. Patients reporting unacceptable pain at 3 months were considered treatment failures and withdrawn from the study. Statistical analysis was completed by comparing changes in PROs from baseline to 3 and 6 months for all groups. Comparison of demographics between treatment groups showed no significant differences between groups. Patients reporting unacceptable pain at 3 months in each group were ASA (13.2%), HA (68.8%), and saline (75%). Patients receiving ASA demonstrated significantly greater improvements from baseline for overall pain (VAS), KOOS pain, and KOOS-activities of daily living scores compared with those in the HA group (3 months) and both groups (6 months). ASA patients had significantly greater improvements in KOOS symptom scores compared with HA and saline at 3 and 6 months, respectively. OMERACT-OARSI responder rates for ASA, HA, and saline groups were 69.1, 39.1, and 42.6%, respectively (p = 0.0007). Subjects receiving ASA treatment showed greater improvements in PROs and fewer patients reported unacceptable pain compared with HA and saline. The evidence presented in this Level I Randomized Controlled Trial suggests that ASA injection is an effective treatment for the nonoperative management of symptomatic knee OA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document