PURPOSE: As osteoarthritis (OA) of the trapeziometacarpal (TMC) joint leads to a high degree of disease burden with compromises in rudimentary and fine movements of the hand, intra-articular injections may be a desirable treatment option. However, because there are no evidence-based guidelines, the choice of intra-articular injection type is left to the discretion of the individual surgeon in collaboration with the patient. The purpose of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis using level I studies to compare outcomes following corticosteroid and alternative methods of intra-articular injections for the management of TMC OA. Our hypothesis was that intra-articular corticosteroid injections were no more effective than other methods of intra-articular injections for the management of TMC OA.
METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed. Eligible for inclusion were randomized control trials reporting on intra-articular corticosteroid injection for the management of TMC OA. Clinical outcomes were recorded.
RESULTS: The 10 included studies comprised 673 patients. The mean age was 57.8 ± 8.3 years, with a mean follow-up of 6.4 ± 2.7 months. There was no significant difference in visual analog scale scores, grip strength and tip pinch strength between corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid at short- and medium-term follow-up. Further, there was no difference in visual analog scale pain scores at rest at medium-term follow-up between corticosteroids and platelet-rich plasma.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite short-term improvement with intra-articular corticosteroid injections, there was no significant difference in pain and functional outcomes following intra-articular corticosteroid injections compared to hyaluronic acid or platelet-rich plasma administration. Given the affordability, ease of administration, and efficacy associated with corticosteroids, they are a favorable option when considering the choice of intra-articular injection for the management of TMC OA.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.
BACKGROUND: There is some evidence that corticosteroids may have a beneficial effect in hand osteoarthritis. We examined the efficacy of corticosteroids on symptoms and structural outcomes in hand osteoarthritis.
METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to October 2021 for randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of corticosteroids in hand osteoarthritis. Two authors independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool. Standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean difference (MD) was calculated, and random-effects meta-analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Of 13 included trials, 3 examined oral corticosteroids and clinical outcomes in any hand joints, 9 examined intra-articular injection of corticosteroids and clinical outcomes at the first carpometacarpal joint and one in the interphalangeal joints. In meta-analysis, oral corticosteroids reduced pain (SMD -0.53, 95% CI -0.79 to -0.28) and improved stiffness (MD -5.03, 95% CI -9.91 to -0.15; Australian Canadian Osteoarthritis Hand Index stiffness subscale) and function (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.12) at 4-6 weeks. However, there was no significant persistent effect on pain and function at 3 months which was 6-8 weeks after study medication was stopped. There was no significant effect of intra-articular corticosteroids on pain or function at 4-6 weeks or over 3-12 months in first carpometacarpal osteoarthritis. Two trials evaluated joint structure at 4-6 weeks: one study showed oral corticosteroids reduced synovial thickening, neither showed an effect on synovitis.
CONCLUSIONS: There was low-certainty evidence for a medium effect of oral corticosteroids on pain relief and stiffness improvement and small-to-medium effect on functional improvement at 4-6 weeks, with no significant effect for intra-articular corticosteroids. Corticosteroids had no significant effect on any outcomes over longer term (3-12 months) off treatment. No trials examined the effect of corticosteroids on disease progression. The role of corticosteroids in hand osteoarthritis is limited.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of multiple intra-articular corticosteroid (IACS) injections for the treatment of OA.
METHODS: We conducted electronic searches of several databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Standard mean difference was calculated for efficacy, whereas hazard ratio (HR) was used for adverse effects. Results were combined using the random effects model. Heterogeneity was measured using I2 statistics.
RESULTS: Six RCTs were included for efficacy assessment. The use of multiple IACS appeared to be better than comparator (standard mean difference for pain -0.47, 95% CI -0.62, 0.31). However, there was considerable heterogeneity (I2 92.6%) and subgroup analysis by comparator showed no separation of regular IACS from placebo, though timing of pain assessments was questionable. Fourteen RCTs and two observational studies were assessed for the safety of multiple IACS. Minor local adverse events were similar in both groups. One RCT found that regular IACS every 3 months for 2 years caused greater cartilage loss compared with saline injection (-0.21 vs 0.10 mm). One cohort study found that multiple IACS injections associated with worsening of joint space narrowing (HR 3.02, 95% CI 2.25, 4.05) and increased risk of joint replacement (HR 2.54, 95% CI 1.81, 3.57).
CONCLUSION: Multiple IACS injections are no better than placebo for OA pain according to current evidence. The preliminary finding of a detrimental effect on structural OA progression warrants further investigation. Efficacy and safety of multiple IACS reflecting recommended best practice has yet to be assessed.
OBJECTIVE: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy and safety of intra-articular methylprednisolone and hyaluronic acid (HA) in term of pain reduction and improvements of knee function in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for literature up to January 2018. RCTs involving HA and methylprednisolone in knee OA were included. Two independent reviewers performed independent data abstraction. The I
RESULTS: Five RCTs with 1004 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The present meta-analysis indicated that there were no significant differences in terms of WOMAC pain, physical function and stiffness at 4 week, 12 weeks and 26 weeks between HA and methylprednisolone groups. No increased risk of adverse events were identified in both groups.
CONCLUSION: Both HA and methylprednisolone injections were effective therapies for patients with knee OA. Methylprednisolone showed comparable efficacy in reducing pain and improving functional recovery to HA. And no significant difference was found in long-term of follow-up in terms of adverse effects.
INTRODUCTION: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a significant health problem with lifetime risk of development estimated to be 45%. Effective nonsurgical treatments are needed for the management of symptoms.
METHODS: We designed a network meta-analysis to determine clinically relevant effectiveness of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, acetaminophen, intra-articular (IA) corticosteroids, IA platelet-rich plasma, and IA hyaluronic acid compared with each other as well as with oral and IA placebos. We used PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to perform a systematic search of KOA treatments with no date limits and last search on October 7, 2015. Article inclusion criteria considered the following: target population, randomized controlled study design, English language, human subjects, treatments and outcomes of interest, ≥30 patients per group, and consistent follow-up. Using the best available evidence, two abstractors independently extracted pain and function data at or near the most common follow-up time.
RESULTS: For pain, all active treatments showed significance over oral placebo, with IA corticosteroids having the largest magnitude of effect and significant difference only over IA placebo. For function, no IA treatments showed significance compared with either placebo, and naproxen was the only treatment showing clinical significance compared with oral placebo. Cumulative probabilities showed naproxen to be the most effective individual treatment, and when combined with IA corticosteroids, it is the most probable to improve pain and function.
DISCUSSION: Naproxen ranked most effective among conservative treatments of KOA and should be considered when treating pain and function because of its relative safety and low cost. The best available evidence was analyzed, but there were instances of inconsistency in the design and duration among articles, potentially affecting uniform data inclusion.
OBJETIVO: Actualizar nuestras revisiones sistemáticas anteriores que evaluaron todos los ensayos controlados aleatorios publicados (ECA) que evaluaban terapias farmacológicas y no farmacológicas en pacientes con osteoartritis de la mano (OA). Las terapias quirúrgicas no fueron evaluadas. DISEÑO: Los ECA publicados entre marzo de 2008 y diciembre de 2015 se agregaron a las revisiones sistemáticas anteriores. RESULTADOS: En esta actualización se analizaron un total de 95 ECA que evaluaron diversas terapias farmacológicas y no farmacológicas en OA manual. En general, la calidad metodológica de estos ECA ha mejorado desde la última actualización, con más estudios describiendo sus métodos de asignación al azar, cegamiento y ocultamiento de la asignación. Sin embargo, los ECA continúan debilitados por la falta de una definición de caso consistente y la falta de evaluaciones de resultados estandarizadas específicas para la OA manual. El número y la ubicación de las articulaciones manuales evaluadas continúan siendo subnotificadas, y sólo el 25% de los ECA describieron adecuadamente el método utilizado para garantizar el ocultamiento de la asignación. Estas siguen siendo las principales debilidades de los ECA publicados. No se pudo realizar un metanálisis debido a la marcada heterogeneidad del estudio, datos estadísticos insuficientes disponibles en los ECA publicados y un pequeño número de comparadores idénticos. Conclusión: La OA manual es un área compleja en la que estudiar la eficacia de las terapias. Ha habido una mejora en el diseño y la conducta general de los ECA, sin embargo, se necesitan ECA adicionales grandes con un enfoque metodológico más robusto específico para la OA manual, con el fin de hacer conclusiones clínicamente relevantes sobre la eficacia de las diversas opciones de tratamiento disponibles.
Objetivo Investigar si el número de inyecciones de ácido hialurónico (HA) en un tratamiento con hialuronato de sodio (Hyalgan) altera la efectividad en la reducción del dolor de la osteoartritis de rodilla (OA). Fuentes de datos Las bases de datos electrónicas, incluyendo PubMed y Embase, se registraron desde enero de 1980 hasta noviembre de 2015. Selección del estudio Se incluyeron estudios clínicos que evaluaron la eficacia de un curso de 3 o 5 inyecciones intraarticulares semanales de Hyalgan para tratar el dolor de OA de rodilla. También incluimos estudios clínicos evaluando la efectividad de un curso de 3 semanas de otros tratamientos de HA aprobados por la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos (FDA) sobre el dolor de OA en la rodilla. Se identificaron veinticuatro estudios, que incluyeron 2168 participantes del estudio en 30 cohortes tratadas. Extracción de datos Se determinaron los tamaños de efecto para los estudios seleccionados mediante la extracción de las puntuaciones de dolor de OA de rodilla antes y después de HA o tratamientos de control. Las meta-regresiones fueron implementadas para determinar si el número de inyecciones semanales en un curso de terapia de Hyalgan modificó los resultados. Síntesis de datos La estimación agrupada para el alivio del dolor basal fue de -31,4 (SE, 5,46, intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC], -45,5 a -17,4) con un ciclo de 3 semanas de Hyalgan y -32,2 (SE, 5,25; CI, -45,6 a -18,7) con un curso de 5 semanas de Hyalgan. Los hallazgos del metanálisis indican un alivio del dolor de OA de la rodilla con un curso de Hyalgan de 3 semanas es similar al de un curso de Hyalgan de 5 semanas (p = 0,916). La estimación agrupada para el alivio del dolor basal con un curso de 3 semanas de otros productos de HA fue -29,4 (SE, 4,98; IC del 95%, -42,2 a -16,6), indicando también alivio del dolor con un curso de 3 semanas de Hyalgan Similar a la de un curso de 3 semanas de otros productos de HA (P = 0,696). Conclusiones No hubo diferencias estadísticas entre la reducción en el dolor de OA de rodilla con un curso de 3 semanas de Hyalgan en comparación con la reducción en el dolor de OA de rodilla con un curso de 5 semanas de Hyalgan o un curso de 3 semanas de otros productos de HA. Estos hallazgos demuestran que el alivio comparable del dolor de OA de rodilla se logra con un curso de 3 semanas de Hyalgan y los 2 grupos de control.
OBJECTIVE: A meta analysis to compare efficacy and safety of intraarticular hyaluronic acid (HA) and intraarticular corticosteroids (CS) in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
METHOD: Potential studies were searched from the electronic databases included PubMed, Embase, web of science and the Cochrane Library up to August 2016. High quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected based on inclusion criteria. RevMan 5.3 were used for the meta-analysis.
RESULTS: 12 RCTs containing 1794 patients meet the inclusion criteria. Visual analog scale (VAS) score in CS group decrease more than HA group up to 1 month (p = 0.03) and it shows equal efficacy at 3 months (p = 0.29); HA is more effective than CS at 6 months (p = 0.006). To Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, there is no significant difference for two groups at 3 months (p = 0.29); HA shows greater relative effect than CS at 6 months (p = 0.005). No significant difference is found on proportion of rescue medication use after initiation of treatment (p = 0.58) and proportion of withdrawal for knee pain (p = 0.54). HA and CS exhibit equal efficacy on improvement of active range of knee flexion at 3 months (p = 0.73) and 6 months (p = 0.43). More topical adverse effects occurred in intraarticular HA group when compared with intraarticular CS group.
CONCLUSION: Intraarticular CS is more effective on pain relief than intraarticular HA in short term (up to 1 month), while HA is more effective in long term (up to 6 months). Two therapies benefit similarly for knee function improvement. Both two methods are relatively safe, but intraarticular HA causes more topical adverse effects compared with intraarticular CS.
OBJETIVO: Investigar si el número de inyecciones de ácido hialurónico (HA) en un tratamiento de Hyalgan (®) altera la efectividad en la reducción del dolor de osteoartritis de rodilla (OA). Se realizaron búsquedas en bases de datos electrónicas, incluyendo PubMed y EMBase, desde enero de 1980 hasta noviembre de 2015. SELECCIÓN DE ESTUDIOS: Se incluyeron estudios clínicos que evaluaron la efectividad de un curso de tres o cinco inyecciones intraarticulares semanales de Hyalgan para tratar el dolor de OA de rodilla . También incluimos estudios clínicos evaluando la efectividad de un curso de tres semanas de otros tratamientos HA aprobados por la FDA para el dolor de OA en la rodilla. Se identificaron veinticuatro estudios, que incluyeron 2.168 participantes del estudio en 30 cohortes tratadas. EXTRACCIÓN DE DATOS: Se determinaron los tamaños de efecto para los estudios seleccionados mediante la extracción de las puntuaciones de dolor de OA de rodilla antes y después de HA o tratamientos de control. Las meta-regresiones fueron implementadas para determinar si el número de inyecciones semanales en un curso de terapia de Hyalgan modificó los resultados. SÍNTESIS DE DATOS: La estimación agrupada para el alivio del dolor basal fue de -31,4 (5,46 SE, intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC], -45,5, -17,4) con un ciclo de tres semanas de Hyalgan y -32,2 (5,25, CI, -45,6 , -18,7) con un curso de cinco semanas de Hyalgan. Los hallazgos del metanálisis indican un alivio del dolor de OA de la rodilla con un curso de Hyalgan de tres semanas, similar al de un curso de Hyalgan de cinco semanas (P = 0,916). La estimación agrupada para el alivio del dolor basal con un curso de tres semanas de otros productos de HA fue de -29,4 (4,98, CI, -42,2, -16,6), lo que también indica el alivio del dolor con un curso de tres semanas de Hyalgan es similar a la de Un curso de tres semanas de otros productos HA (P = 0,696). Conclusiones No hubo diferencias estadísticas entre la reducción del dolor de OA de rodilla con un curso de Hyalgan de tres semanas en comparación con la reducción en el dolor de OA de rodilla con un curso de cinco semanas de Hyalgan o un curso de tres semanas de otros productos de HA. Estos hallazgos demuestran que el alivio comparable del dolor de OA de rodilla se logra con un curso de tres semanas de Hyalgan y los dos grupos de control.
As osteoarthritis (OA) of the trapeziometacarpal (TMC) joint leads to a high degree of disease burden with compromises in rudimentary and fine movements of the hand, intra-articular injections may be a desirable treatment option. However, because there are no evidence-based guidelines, the choice of intra-articular injection type is left to the discretion of the individual surgeon in collaboration with the patient. The purpose of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis using level I studies to compare outcomes following corticosteroid and alternative methods of intra-articular injections for the management of TMC OA. Our hypothesis was that intra-articular corticosteroid injections were no more effective than other methods of intra-articular injections for the management of TMC OA.
METHODS:
A systematic literature search was performed. Eligible for inclusion were randomized control trials reporting on intra-articular corticosteroid injection for the management of TMC OA. Clinical outcomes were recorded.
RESULTS:
The 10 included studies comprised 673 patients. The mean age was 57.8 ± 8.3 years, with a mean follow-up of 6.4 ± 2.7 months. There was no significant difference in visual analog scale scores, grip strength and tip pinch strength between corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid at short- and medium-term follow-up. Further, there was no difference in visual analog scale pain scores at rest at medium-term follow-up between corticosteroids and platelet-rich plasma.
CONCLUSIONS:
Despite short-term improvement with intra-articular corticosteroid injections, there was no significant difference in pain and functional outcomes following intra-articular corticosteroid injections compared to hyaluronic acid or platelet-rich plasma administration. Given the affordability, ease of administration, and efficacy associated with corticosteroids, they are a favorable option when considering the choice of intra-articular injection for the management of TMC OA.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:
Therapeutic II.
Pregunta de la revisión sistemática»Revisión sistemática de intervenciones
