Safety and Efficacy of Genicular Artery Embolization for the Treatment of Knee Pain Secondary to Osteoarthritis—Initial Indian Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Osteoarthritis (OA) is the commonest form of arthritis with pain and disability as hallmark symptoms. Despite various nonpharmacologic, pharmacologic, and surgical approaches, pain control may be hard to achieve. Over the last few years, few studies have been conducted on managing knee OA using novel endovascular genicular artery embolization (GAE) with varied outcomes. No such study has been reported in India yet to the best of our knowledge. Purpose The main aim of this article was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transcatheter GAE in relieving knee pain in patients with mild-to-moderate OA. Materials and Methods Ten patients with radiographic knee OA and moderate-to-severe pain refractory to conservative therapy were enrolled in a prospective observational study. GAE was performed with 100 to 300-μm spherical particles. Patients were assessed with magnetic resonance imaging at the baseline. Visual analog scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were used to assess pain and disability respectively at the baseline, 1 month, and 3 months. Clinical success was asserted by the downstaging of VAS and WOMAC scores. Adverse events were recorded at all-time points. Descriptive and inferential statistics have been performed using SPSS. A p-Value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results Embolization of at least 1 genicular artery was achieved in all the patients (100%). Clinical success was demonstrated in 08 (80%) of the patients. Median VAS reduced from 07 at baseline to 3.5 at 3-month follow-up (p < 0.001). Median WOMAC score improved from 53 to 23.50 at 3-month follow-up (p < 0.001). Minor complications were seen in two patients in the form of puncture site hematoma and mild petechial spots over the knee. Conclusion Our pilot study demonstrates GAE as a safe and efficacious procedure to treat knee pain secondary to OA. Further randomized comparative studies with a larger sample size are needed to determine the true treatment effect versus the placebo effect.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".