PRP and hypertonic glucose injections improve outcomes in patients with early- to middle-stage knee osteoarthritis: a multicenter retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection therapy and hyperosmotic glucose hyperplasia therapy are commonly used methods for treating knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This study evaluates the differences in efficacy and cost-effectiveness between the two therapies. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed 257 patients with knee osteoarthritis from October 2021 to November 2023, and divided them into PRP injection group and hypertonic glucose injection group according to their different treatment methods. All patients underwent a 4-week treatment. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores were compared at baseline and 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32 weeks after treatment. Additionally, differences in the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores and total expenses during the treatment period were assessed between the two groups at the same time points. RESULTS: At 2 and 4 weeks post-treatment, the VAS and WOMAC scores of the hypertonic glucose injection group were lower than those of the PRP injection group. Conversely, at 16 and 32 weeks post-treatment, the PRP injection group demonstrated lower VAS and WOMAC scores than the hypertonic glucose injection group. Similarly, SF-36 scores at 2 and 4 weeks post-treatment were higher in the hypertonic glucose injection group, whereas at 16 and 32 weeks, the PRP injection group achieved higher SF-36 scores. Regarding cost-effectiveness, the total cost for the PRP injection group was 362.4, while for the hypertonic glucose injection group, it was 87.4, making the latter more economical. CONCLUSION: Both PRP and hypertonic glucose injections significantly alleviate knee pain and improve joint function, enhancing patients’ quality of life. However, hypertonic glucose injections demonstrate superior short-term efficacy and lower costs. PRP injections, in contrast, provide better medium- to long-term outcomes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".