Efficacy of hydrolyzed collagen injections compared to platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid in the treatment of patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a retrospective clinical study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Hydrolyzed collagen (CHG) is an emerging infiltrative therapy for the treatment of osteoarthritis. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare its effectiveness with that of hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). METHODS: The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores of 72 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 1-4 osteoarthritis were recorded and analyzed over a 12-month follow-up period. Patients received either three CHG injections, a single HA injection, or three PRP injections and the results were compared. Of the participants, 23 were treated with CHG, 25 with HA, and 24 with PRP. RESULTS: Treatment effectiveness was assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months. At the 12-month follow-up, the CHG group showed a 56% improvement in the WOMAC total score, compared to 22.5% for the HA group and 47% for the PRP group. Pain reduction was also greatest in the CHG group, with a 52% decrease at 12 months, versus 16% in the HA group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, CHG demonstrated a more sustained therapeutic effect in terms of pain relief and functional improvement compared to HA and PRP over a one-year period. No side effects were observed in any of the treatment groups.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".