Campbell Kirk A, Erickson Brandon J, Saltzman Bryan M, Mascarenhas Randy, Bach Bernard R, Cole Brian J, Verma Nikhil N
Midwest Orthopaedics at Rush, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A..
Midwest Orthopaedics at Rush, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2015 Oct;31(10):2036-45.e14. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.03.030. Epub 2015 May 19.
To conduct a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) with intra-articular viscosupplementation (intra-articular hyaluronic acid [IA-HA]) versus oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), intra-articular corticosteroids (IA-corticosteroids), intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (IA-PRP), or intra-articular placebo (IA-placebo) to determine which meta-analyses provide the best current evidence and identify potential causes of discordance.
Literature searches were performed for meta-analyses examining use of IA-HA versus NSAIDs, IA-corticosteroids, IA-PRP, or IA-placebo. Clinical data were extracted, and meta-analysis quality was assessed. The Jadad algorithm was applied to determine which meta-analyses provided the highest level of evidence.
Fourteen meta-analyses met the eligibility criteria and ranged in quality from Level I to IV evidence. In studies reporting patient numbers, there were a total of 20,049 patients: 13,698 receiving IA-HA, 355 receiving NSAIDs, 294 receiving IA-corticosteroids, and 5,702 receiving IA-placebo. Ten studies examined the effects of IA-HA versus IA-placebo; of these, 5 found that IA-HA improved pain and 4 found that IA-HA improved function. No clinically relevant differences in the efficacy of IA-HA versus NSAIDs regarding pain and function were found. Regarding IA-HA versus IA-PRP, IA-HA improved knee function at 2 and 6 months after injection but the effects were less robust than those of IA-PRP. Regarding IA-HA versus IA-corticosteroids, the positive effects of IA-HA were greater at 5 to 13 weeks and persisted for up to 26 weeks. After application of the Jadad algorithm, 2 concordant high-quality meta-analyses were selected and both showed that IA-HA provided clinically relevant improvements in pain and function compared with IA-placebo.
This systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing IA-HA with other nonoperative treatment modalities for knee OA shows that the current highest level of evidence suggests that IA-HA is a viable option for knee OA. Its use results in improvements in knee pain and function that can persist for up to 26 weeks. IA-HA has a good safety profile, and its use should be considered in patients with early knee OA.
Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.
对重叠的荟萃分析进行系统评价,比较关节内注射透明质酸(IA-HA)与口服非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)、关节内注射皮质类固醇(IA-皮质类固醇)、关节内注射富血小板血浆(IA-PRP)或关节内注射安慰剂(IA-安慰剂)治疗膝骨关节炎(OA)的效果,以确定哪些荟萃分析提供了当前最佳证据,并找出不一致的潜在原因。
检索关于IA-HA与NSAIDs、IA-皮质类固醇、IA-PRP或IA-安慰剂对比使用的荟萃分析文献。提取临床数据,并评估荟萃分析的质量。应用Jadad算法确定哪些荟萃分析提供了最高级别的证据。
14项荟萃分析符合纳入标准,质量等级从I级到IV级证据不等。在报告患者数量的研究中,共有20,049例患者:13,698例接受IA-HA治疗,355例接受NSAIDs治疗,294例接受IA-皮质类固醇治疗,5,702例接受IA-安慰剂治疗。10项研究比较了IA-HA与IA-安慰剂的效果;其中5项发现IA-HA可改善疼痛,4项发现IA-HA可改善功能。未发现IA-HA与NSAIDs在疼痛和功能疗效上存在临床相关差异。在IA-HA与IA-PRP的比较中,IA-HA在注射后2个月和6个月可改善膝关节功能,但效果不如IA-PRP显著。在IA-HA与IA-皮质类固醇的比较中,IA-HA在5至13周时的积极效果更明显,且可持续长达26周。应用Jadad算法后,选择了2项一致的高质量荟萃分析,二者均显示与IA-安慰剂相比,IA-HA在疼痛和功能方面有临床相关改善。
这项对比较IA-HA与膝OA其他非手术治疗方式的重叠荟萃分析的系统评价表明,当前最高级别的证据表明IA-HA是膝OA的一种可行选择。其使用可改善膝关节疼痛和功能,且效果可持续长达26周。IA-HA具有良好的安全性,对于早期膝OA患者应考虑使用。
IV级,对I级至IV级研究的系统评价。