MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of Intra-articular Concentrated Growth Factor, Platelet-Rich Plasma, and Hyaluronic Acid in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Comparative Analysis

2024· article· en· W4395680538 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sibel Özcan, Aysun Yıldız Altun

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Medical Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyaluronic acidPlatelet-rich plasmaOsteoarthritisIntra articularMedicineArticular cartilagePlateletInternal medicinePathologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a prevalent chronic joint condition causing substantial pain and disability. In recent years, intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), concentrated growth factor (CGF), and hyaluronic acid (HA) have emerged as promising KOA therapies. We aimed to compare the effects of intra-articular CGF, PRP, and HA in KOA patients. Materials and Methods: Patients diagnosed with KOA and who were grade 2-3 according to the Kellgreen-Lawrence classification in radiological imaging were included in the study. Patients were randomized into three groups receiving a single injection of either HA, PRP, or CGF. Patients were evaluated for pain scores using the visual analog scale (VAS) and for pain, stiffness, and physical function using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) before and 1 and 6 months after the procedure. Results: Of 60 patients, 41 were female and 19 were male. According to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification, 27 patients had grade II and 33 patients had grade III KOA, with a similar distribution among the three groups. The VAS scores showed a statistically significant decrease in all groups at 1-month and 6-month follow-up compared to pre-procedural scores. However, there was no significant difference among the groups in terms of VAS scores. The WOMAC-pain, -stiffness, -physical function scores also showed a significant decrease in all groups at 1-month and 6-month follow-up compared to pre-procedural scores. The CGF group had the lowest WOMAC scores at both time points, with a statistically significant difference compared to the PRP group (p<0.05). Patient satisfaction rates were high in all groups, while the satisfaction rate was highest in the CGF group. Conclusion: CGF demonstrated superior pain alleviation and functional improvement compared to PRP and HA. Although the results of this study demonstrate the potential of regenerative treatments for KOA, more research with larger samples and longer follow-up is needed for robust validation. Additionally, the standardization of treatment protocols is important.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Medical ResearchSame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207