Comparison of ultrasound guidance with landmark guidance for symptomatic benefits in knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Win Min Oo, James Linklater, Md Abu Bakar Siddiq, Kai Fu, David J. Hunter
{"title":"Comparison of ultrasound guidance with landmark guidance for symptomatic benefits in knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials","authors":"Win Min Oo, James Linklater, Md Abu Bakar Siddiq, Kai Fu, David J. Hunter","doi":"10.1002/ajum.12386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>More than half of the patients with moderate and severe osteoarthritis (OA) report unsatisfactory pain relief, requiring consideration of intra-articular (IA) injections as the second-line management. Ultrasound-guided IA injection has proven evidence of higher accuracy in administering IA injectates into the joints than landmark-guided or blind IA injections. However, questions remain about translating higher accuracy rates of ultrasound-guided injection into better clinical improvements. Therefore, we examined the symptomatic benefits (pain, function and patient satisfaction) of ultrasound-guided injection in knee, hip and hand OA compared with blind injections by synthesising a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>PubMed, Medline and Embase databases were searched for eligible studies from their inception to August 28, 2023.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Out of 295 records, our meta-analysis included four RCTs (338 patients with knee OA), demonstrating significant improvement in procedural pain [−0.89 (95% CI −1.25, −0.53)], pain at follow-up [−0.51 (95% CI −0.98, −0.04)] and function [1.30 (95% CI 0.86, 1.73)], favouring ultrasound guidance. One single study showed higher patient satisfaction with ultrasound guidance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Ultrasound-guided IA injection provided superior clinical outcomes compared with landmark-guided IA injection.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36517,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","volume":"27 2","pages":"97-105"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajum.12386","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajum.12386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
More than half of the patients with moderate and severe osteoarthritis (OA) report unsatisfactory pain relief, requiring consideration of intra-articular (IA) injections as the second-line management. Ultrasound-guided IA injection has proven evidence of higher accuracy in administering IA injectates into the joints than landmark-guided or blind IA injections. However, questions remain about translating higher accuracy rates of ultrasound-guided injection into better clinical improvements. Therefore, we examined the symptomatic benefits (pain, function and patient satisfaction) of ultrasound-guided injection in knee, hip and hand OA compared with blind injections by synthesising a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCT).
Methods
PubMed, Medline and Embase databases were searched for eligible studies from their inception to August 28, 2023.
Results
Out of 295 records, our meta-analysis included four RCTs (338 patients with knee OA), demonstrating significant improvement in procedural pain [−0.89 (95% CI −1.25, −0.53)], pain at follow-up [−0.51 (95% CI −0.98, −0.04)] and function [1.30 (95% CI 0.86, 1.73)], favouring ultrasound guidance. One single study showed higher patient satisfaction with ultrasound guidance.
Conclusion
Ultrasound-guided IA injection provided superior clinical outcomes compared with landmark-guided IA injection.
一半以上的中度和重度骨关节炎(OA)患者对疼痛缓解效果不满意,需要考虑将关节腔内注射(IA)作为二线治疗方法。有证据表明,超声引导下的关节腔内注射比地标引导下或盲目的关节腔内注射更准确。然而,如何将超声引导注射的更高准确率转化为更好的临床疗效仍是一个问题。因此,我们通过对随机对照试验(RCT)进行系统综述和荟萃分析,研究了超声引导注射与盲法注射相比对膝关节、髋关节和手部OA症状的益处(疼痛、功能和患者满意度)。在295条记录中,我们的荟萃分析包括了四项随机对照试验(338名膝关节OA患者),结果表明超声引导可显著改善手术疼痛[-0.89 (95% CI -1.25, -0.53)]、随访疼痛[-0.51 (95% CI -0.98, -0.04)]和功能[1.30 (95% CI 0.86, 1.73)]。与地标引导的 IA 注射相比,超声引导的 IA 注射能提供更好的临床效果。