Treatment of primary and secondary osteoarthritis of the knee.

David J Samson, Mark D Grant, Thomas A Ratko, Claudia J Bonnell, Kathleen M Ziegler, Naomi Aronson
{"title":"Treatment of primary and secondary osteoarthritis of the knee.","authors":"David J Samson,&nbsp;Mark D Grant,&nbsp;Thomas A Ratko,&nbsp;Claudia J Bonnell,&nbsp;Kathleen M Ziegler,&nbsp;Naomi Aronson","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Systematic review of outcomes of three treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee: intra-articular viscosupplementation; oral glucosamine, chondroitin or the combination; and arthroscopic lavage or debridement.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We abstracted data from: 42 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of viscosupplementation, all but one synthesized among six meta-analyses; 21 RCTs of glucosamine/chondroitin, 16 synthesized among 6 meta-analyses; and 23 articles on arthroscopy. The search included foreign-language studies and relevant conference proceedings.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>The review methods were defined prospectively in a written protocol. We sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and RCTs published in full or in abstract. Where randomized trials were few, we sought other study designs. We independently assessed the quality of all primary studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Viscosupplementation trials generally report positive effects on pain and function scores compared to placebo, but the evidence on clinical benefit is uncertain, due to variable trial quality, potential publication bias, and unclear clinical significance of the changes reported. The Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT), a large (n=1,583), high-quality, National Institutes of Health-funded, multicenter RCT showed no significant difference compared to placebo. Glucosamine sulfate has been reported to be more effective than glucosamine hydrochloride, which was used in GAIT, but the evidence is not sufficient to draw conclusions. Clinical studies of glucosamine effect on glucose metabolism are short term, or if longer (e.g., 3 years), excluded patients with metabolic disorders. The best available evidence for arthroscopy, a single sham-controlled RCT (n=180), showed that arthroscopic lavage with or without debridement was equivalent to placebo. The main limitations of this trial are the use of a single surgeon and enrollment of patients at a single Veterans Affairs Medical Center. No studies reported separately on patients with secondary OA of the knee. The only comparative study was an underpowered, poor-quality trial comparing viscosupplementation to arthroscopy with debridement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Osteoarthritis of the knee is a common condition. The three interventions reviewed in this report are widely used in the treatment of OA of the knee, yet the best available evidence does not clearly demonstrate clinical benefit. Uncertainty regarding clinical benefit can be resolved only by rigorous, multicenter RCTs. In addition, given the public health impact of OA of the knee, research on new approaches to prevention and treatment should be given high priority.</p>","PeriodicalId":72991,"journal":{"name":"Evidence report/technology assessment","volume":" 157","pages":"1-157"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4781439/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence report/technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Systematic review of outcomes of three treatments for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee: intra-articular viscosupplementation; oral glucosamine, chondroitin or the combination; and arthroscopic lavage or debridement.

Data sources: We abstracted data from: 42 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of viscosupplementation, all but one synthesized among six meta-analyses; 21 RCTs of glucosamine/chondroitin, 16 synthesized among 6 meta-analyses; and 23 articles on arthroscopy. The search included foreign-language studies and relevant conference proceedings.

Review methods: The review methods were defined prospectively in a written protocol. We sought systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and RCTs published in full or in abstract. Where randomized trials were few, we sought other study designs. We independently assessed the quality of all primary studies.

Results: Viscosupplementation trials generally report positive effects on pain and function scores compared to placebo, but the evidence on clinical benefit is uncertain, due to variable trial quality, potential publication bias, and unclear clinical significance of the changes reported. The Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trial (GAIT), a large (n=1,583), high-quality, National Institutes of Health-funded, multicenter RCT showed no significant difference compared to placebo. Glucosamine sulfate has been reported to be more effective than glucosamine hydrochloride, which was used in GAIT, but the evidence is not sufficient to draw conclusions. Clinical studies of glucosamine effect on glucose metabolism are short term, or if longer (e.g., 3 years), excluded patients with metabolic disorders. The best available evidence for arthroscopy, a single sham-controlled RCT (n=180), showed that arthroscopic lavage with or without debridement was equivalent to placebo. The main limitations of this trial are the use of a single surgeon and enrollment of patients at a single Veterans Affairs Medical Center. No studies reported separately on patients with secondary OA of the knee. The only comparative study was an underpowered, poor-quality trial comparing viscosupplementation to arthroscopy with debridement.

Conclusions: Osteoarthritis of the knee is a common condition. The three interventions reviewed in this report are widely used in the treatment of OA of the knee, yet the best available evidence does not clearly demonstrate clinical benefit. Uncertainty regarding clinical benefit can be resolved only by rigorous, multicenter RCTs. In addition, given the public health impact of OA of the knee, research on new approaches to prevention and treatment should be given high priority.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
膝关节原发性和继发性骨关节炎的治疗。
目的:系统回顾三种治疗膝关节骨关节炎(OA)的结果:关节内粘剂补充;口服氨基葡萄糖、软骨素或联合用药;关节镜冲洗或清创。数据来源:我们提取的数据来自:42项关于粘剂补充的随机对照试验(rct),除一项外,其余试验均来自6项荟萃分析;21项葡萄糖胺/软骨素随机对照试验,其中16项在6项meta分析中合成;还有23篇关于关节镜的文章。搜索包括外语研究和相关的会议记录。评价方法:前瞻性地在书面方案中定义评价方法。我们检索了全文或摘要发表的系统综述、荟萃分析和随机对照试验。在随机试验较少的情况下,我们寻求其他研究设计。我们独立评估了所有初步研究的质量。结果:与安慰剂相比,粘胶补充剂试验通常报告了对疼痛和功能评分的积极影响,但由于试验质量的变化、潜在的发表偏倚以及所报道的变化的临床意义不明确,临床益处的证据尚不确定。葡萄糖胺/软骨素关节炎干预试验(步态)是一项大型(n= 1583)、高质量、美国国立卫生研究院资助的多中心随机对照试验,与安慰剂相比无显著差异。据报道,硫酸氨基葡萄糖比用于步态的盐酸氨基葡萄糖更有效,但证据不足以得出结论。葡萄糖胺对葡萄糖代谢影响的临床研究是短期的,如果更长(如3年),则排除了代谢紊乱患者。关节镜检查的最佳证据是一项假对照随机对照试验(n=180),该试验显示,关节镜下洗胃伴或不伴清创与安慰剂效果相当。该试验的主要限制是使用单一外科医生和在单一退伍军人事务医疗中心登记患者。没有关于继发性膝关节炎患者的单独研究报道。唯一的比较研究是一项力度不足、质量较差的试验,该试验比较了关节镜下补充粘胶和清创。结论:膝关节骨关节炎是一种常见的疾病。本报告中回顾的三种干预措施被广泛用于治疗膝关节OA,但现有的最佳证据并不能清楚地证明其临床益处。临床获益的不确定性只能通过严格的多中心随机对照试验来解决。此外,考虑到膝关节OA对公众健康的影响,研究新的预防和治疗方法应得到高度重视。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Maternal and Child Health: An Updated Systematic Review. Data Linkage Strategies to Advance Youth Suicide Prevention. Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Cardiovascular Disease: An Updated Systematic Review. Health Information Exchange. Diagnosis and Treatment of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1