MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2907286282 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2018.06.035

Intra‐articular Injection of Platelet‐Rich Plasma Is Superior to Hyaluronic Acid or Saline Solution in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Double‐Blind, Triple‐Parallel, Placebo‐Controlled Clinical Trial

2019· article· en· W2907286282 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kuan-Yu Lin, Chia-Chi Yang, Chien‐Jen Hsu, Ming‐Long Yeh, Jenn-Huei Renn

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Food and Drug Administration
KeywordsWOMACMedicineOsteoarthritisPlatelet-rich plasmaHyaluronic acidSalinePlaceboRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineSurgeryUrologyPlateletPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To prospectively compare the efficacy of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) with a sham control group (normal saline solution [NS]) for knee osteoarthritis in a randomized, dose-controlled, placebo-controlled, double-blind, triple-parallel clinical trial. METHODS: A total of 87 osteoarthritic knees (53 patients) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups receiving 3 weekly injections of either leukocyte-poor PRP (31 knees), HA (29 knees), or NS (27 knees). The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score were collected at baseline and at 1, 2, 6, and 12 months after treatment. Data were analyzed using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: All 3 groups showed statistically significant improvements in both outcome measures at 1 month; however, only the PRP group sustained the significant improvement in both the WOMAC score (63.71 ± 20.67, increased by 21%) and IKDC score (49.93 ± 17.74, increased by 40%) at 12 months. For the intergroup comparison, except for the first month, there was a statistically significant difference between the PRP and NS groups in both scores throughout the study duration (regression coefficients of 8.72 [P = .0015], 7.94 [P = .0155], and 11.92 [P = .0014] at 2, 6, and 12 months, respectively, for WOMAC score, and 9.1 [P = .0001], 10.28 [P = .0002], and 13.97 [P < .0001], respectively, for IKDC score). There was no significant difference in both functional outcomes between the HA and NS groups at any time point. Only the PRP group reached the minimal clinically important difference in the WOMAC score at every evaluation (15%, 21%, 18%, and 21% at 1, 2, 6, and 12 months, respectively) and the minimal clinically important difference in the IKDC score at 6 months (improvement of 11.6). CONCLUSIONS: Intra-articular injections of leukocyte-poor PRP can provide clinically significant functional improvement for at least 1 year in patients with mild to moderate osteoarthritis of the knee. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, randomized controlled single-center trial.

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

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

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

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

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Quick stats

Citations215
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207