MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ultrasound-guided intra-articular injection: efficacy of hyaluronic acid compared to glucocorticoid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis

2020· article· en· W3001174178 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simone Parisi, Maria Chiara Ditto, Marta Priora, Richard Borrelli, Angela Laganà, Clara Lisa Peroni, Enrico Fusaro

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerva Medica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyaluronic acidOsteoarthritisMedicineGlucocorticoidUltrasoundIntra articularRadiologyInternal medicinePathologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease which causes pain and functional impairment in adults over 50 years old with consequent important disability. Unfortunately, there is no definitive cure for OA, thus the approach is characterized by multiple treatments that can manage its symptoms. Even though data from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses indicate that intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) offers the best benefit/risk balance among the various pharmacologic treatments to improve OA-related knee pain, there is a lack of agreement among national and international guidelines about such uses of IAHA for the medical management of symptomatic knee OA. To minimize confounding factors and biases, the aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of the different weight and concentration of IAHA treatment in patients suffering from knee OA comparing to glucocorticoids (GC) joint injections. Furthermore, to make the procedure more accurate and assessment more objective, we use ultrasonography (US) with power Doppler (PWD) to help us differentiate between active and inactive inflammation within joints and periarticular soft tissues. METHODS: We performed a retrospective evaluation of a cohort of patients with knee OA, diagnosed according to the ACR criteria, treated by US-guided joint injection of HA and GC. The patients were catalogued according to the type of treatment they underwent: group A, patients treated with HA (1.5%) >1500 kDa (three US-guided knee injections one week apart); group B, patients treated with HA (2%) 800-1200 kDa (three US-guided knee injections one week apart); group C, patients treated with glucocorticoids (three US-guided knee injections of triamcinolone acetate 40 mg one week apart). All patients were monitored for 6 months, evaluating: subjective pain using a 10-cm Visual Analogue Scale; pain, stiffness, and functionality using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC); the concomitant intake of anti-inflammatory and/or analgesic drugs through a questionnaire; and US results by grey scale and PWD. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients affected by knee OA were evaluated (women 72.3%) with a mean age of 69.3±4.1 years. All the subjects analyzed showed a pain reduction at 6 months after treatment (group A: -39.5; group B: -36.9; group C: -30.8). The difference between the three groups was statistically significant (Kruskall-Wallis P=0.001) and in particular between group A and group C (P=0.000) and between group B and group C (P=0.005), but not between A and B (P=0.258). WOMAC was statistically significantly improved from baseline in all groups examined (group A: -11.9; group B: -14.9; group C: -11.2). The PWD score showed a statistically significant improvement in group B (-0.64) even after 6 months (P=0.004). All patients in the different groups showed a statistically significant reduction of concomitant therapy compared to baseline with respect to paracetamol and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/COX2 therapy, while only group B showed a statistically significant reduction for opioids. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the efficacy of OA treatment with medium molecular weight HA in favor of the higher concentration of HA that may affect the reduction of pro-inflammatory mediators. Furthermore, US monitoring allowed to evaluate aspects related to synovial involvement, which cannot be appreciated with standard imaging.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Randomized triallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.245
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designRandomized trial · Other design
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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinerva MedicaSame topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207