Viscosupplementation for osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Viscosupplementation, the intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid, is widely used for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

What is the evidence supporting the prevention of osteoarthritis and improved femoral coverage after shelf procedure for Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease?

The evidence supporting continued use of shelf acetabuloplasty in Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease (LCPD) is not well-defined, and there is controversy regarding the long-term benefits related to clinical and functional improvement.

Comparison of cartilage histopathology assessment systems on human knee joints at all stages of osteoarthritis development

To compare the MANKIN and OARSI cartilage histopathology assessment systems using human articular cartilage from a large number of donors across the adult age spectrum representing all levels of cartilage degradation.

Osteoarthritis: rational approach to treating the individual

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of joint disease and the leading cause of pain and physical disability in older people. Risk factors for incidence and progression of osteoarthritis vary considerably according to the type of joint. Disease assessment is difficult and the relationship between the radiographic severity of joint damage and the incidence and severity of pain is only modest. Psychosocial and socio-economic factors play an important role. This chapter will discuss four main guiding principles to the management of OA: (1) to avoid overtreating people with mild symptoms; (2) to attempt to avoid doing more harm than good ('primum non nocere'); (3) to base patient management on the severity of pain, disability and distress, and not on the severity of joint damage or radiographic change; and (4) to start with advice about simple measures that patients can take to help themselves, and only progress to interventions that require supervision or specialist knowledge if simple measures fail. Effect sizes derived from meta-analyses of large randomized trials in OA are only small to moderate for most therapeutic interventions, but they are still valuable for patients and clinically relevant for physicians. Joint replacement may be the only option with a large effect size, but is only appropriate for the relatively small number of people with OA who have advanced disease and severe symptoms. The key to successful management involves patient and health professionals working together to develop optimal treatment strategies for the individual.

Efficacy and safety of intraarticular hylan or hyaluronic acids for osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of intraarticular hylan and 2 hyaluronic acids (HAs) in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. METHODS: This was a multicenter, patient-blind, randomized controlled trial in 660 patients with symptomatic knee OA. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 cycle of 3 intraarticular injections per knee of 1 of 3 preparations: a high molecular weight cross-linked hylan, a non-cross-linked medium molecular weight HA of avian origin, or a non-cross-linked low molecular weight HA of bacterial origin. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score at 6 months. Secondary outcome measures included local adverse events (effusions or flares) in injected knees. During months 7-12, patients were offered a second cycle of viscosupplementation. RESULTS: Pain relief was similar in all 3 groups. The difference in changes between baseline and 6 months between hylan and the combined HAs was 0.1 on the WOMAC pain score (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.2, 0.3). No relevant differences were observed in any of the secondary efficacy outcomes, and stratified analyses provided no evidence for differences in effects across different patient groups. There was a trend toward more local adverse events in the hylan group than in the HA groups during the first cycle (difference 2.2% [95% CI -2.4, 6.7]), and this trend became more pronounced during the second cycle (difference 6.4% [95% CI 0.6, 12.2]). CONCLUSION: We found no evidence for a difference in efficacy between hylan and HAs. In view of its higher costs and potential for more local adverse events, we see no rationale for the continued use of hylan in patients with knee OA.

MRI characteristics and histology of bone marrow lesions in dogs with experimentally induced osteoarthritis

Signal changes within the bone marrow adjacent to osteoarthritic joints are commonly seen on magnetic resonance (MR) images in humans and in dogs. The histological nature of these lesions is poorly known. In this study, we describe the MR imaging of bone marrow lesions adjacent to the stifle joints of dogs with experimental osteoarthritis over 13 months. Histology of the proximal tibia at the end of the study was compared with the last MR imaging findings. In five adult dogs, the left cranial cruciate ligament was transected. Post-operatively, MR imaging was performed at 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 13 months. Dogs were euthanised after 13 months and histological specimen of the proximal tibia were evaluated. Bone marrow edema like MR imaging signal changes were seen in every MR examination of all dogs in one or more locations of the proximal tibia and the distal femur. Lesions varied in size and location throughout the whole study with the exception of constantly seen lesions in the epiphyseal and metaphyseal region at the level of the tibial eminence. On histology, hematopoiesis and myxomatous transformation of the bone marrow and/or intertrabecular fibrosis without signs of bone marrow edema were consistent findings in the areas corresponding to the MR imaging signal changes. We conclude that within the bone marrow, zones of increased signal intensity on fat suppressed MR images do not necessarily represent edema but can be due to cellular infiltration. Contrary to humans, hematopoiesis is seen in bone marrow edema-like lesions in this canine model of osteoarthritis.

Hylan versus hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intraarticular high-molecular hylan with standard preparations of hyaluronic acids in osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing hylan with a hyaluronic acid in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Trials were identified by systematic searches of Central, Medline, EMBase, Cinahl, the Food and Drug Administration, and Science Citation Index supplemented by hand searches of conference proceedings and reference lists (last update November 2006). Literature screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Effect sizes were calculated from differences in means of pain-related outcomes between treatment and control groups at the end of the trial, divided by the pooled standard deviation. Trials were combined using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen trials with a pooled total of 2,085 patients contributed to the meta-analysis. The pooled effect size was -0.27 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.55, 0.01), favoring hylan, but between-trial heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 88%). Trials with blinded patients, adequate concealment of allocation, and an intent-to-treat analysis had pooled effect sizes near null. The meta-analyses on safety revealed an increased risk associated with hylan for any local adverse events (relative risk [RR] 1.91; 95% CI 1.04, 3.49; I(2) = 28%) and for flares (RR 2.04; 95% CI 1.18, 3.53; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSION: Given the likely lack of a superior effectiveness of hylan over hyaluronic acids and the increased risk of local adverse events associated with hylan, we discourage the use of intraarticular hylan in patients with knee osteoarthritis in clinical research or practice.

Meta-analysis: chondroitin for osteoarthritis of the knee or hip

BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses described moderate to large benefits of chondroitin in patients with osteoarthritis. However, recent large-scale trials did not find evidence of an effect. PURPOSE: To determine the effects of chondroitin on pain in patients with osteoarthritis. DATA SOURCES: The authors searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (1970 to 2006), MEDLINE (1966 to 2006), EMBASE (1980 to 2006), CINAHL (1970 to 2006), and conference proceedings; checked reference lists; and contacted authors. The last update of searches was performed on 30 November 2006. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they were randomized or quasi-randomized, controlled trials that compared chondroitin with placebo or with no treatment in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. There were no language restrictions. DATA EXTRACTION: The authors extracted data in duplicate. Effect sizes were calculated from the differences in means of pain-related outcomes between treatment and control groups at the end of the trial, divided by the pooled SD. Trials were combined by using random-effects meta-analysis. DATA SYNTHESIS: 20 trials (3846 patients) contributed to the meta-analysis, which revealed a high degree of heterogeneity among the trials (I2 = 92%). Small trials, trials with unclear concealment of allocation, and trials that were not analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle showed larger effects in favor of chondroitin than did the remaining trials. When the authors restricted the analysis to the 3 trials with large sample sizes and an intention-to-treat analysis, 40% of patients were included. This resulted in an effect size of -0.03 (95% CI, -0.13 to 0.07; I2 = 0%) and corresponded to a difference of 0.6 mm on a 10-cm visual analogue scale. A meta-analysis of 12 trials showed a pooled relative risk of 0.99 (CI, 0.76 to 1.31) for any adverse event. LIMITATIONS: For 9 trials, the authors had to use approximations to calculate effect sizes. Trial quality was generally low, heterogeneity among the trials made initial interpretation of results difficult, and exploring sources of heterogeneity in meta-regression and stratified analyses may be unreliable. CONCLUSIONS: Large-scale, methodologically sound trials indicate that the symptomatic benefit of chondroitin is minimal or nonexistent. Use of chondroitin in routine clinical practice should therefore be discouraged.

Imaging structural abnormalities in the hip joint: instability and impingement as a cause of osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis is thought to be caused by a combination of intrinsic vulnerabilities of the joint, such as anatomic shape and alignment, and environmental factors, such as body weight, injury, and overuse. It has been postulated that much of osteoarthritis is due to anatomic deformities. Advances in surgical techniques such as the periacetabular osteotomy, safe surgical dislocation of the hip, and hip arthroscopy have provided us with effective and safe tools to correct these anatomical problems. The limiting factor in treatment outcome in many mechanically compromised hips is the degree of cartilage damage which has occurred prior to treatment. In this regard, the role of imaging, utilizing plain radiographs in conjunction with magnetic resonance imaging, is becoming vitally important for the detection of these anatomic deformities and pre-radiographic arthritis. In this article, we will outline the plain radiographic features of hip deformities that can cause instability or impingement. Additionally, we will illustrate the use of MRI imaging to detect subtle anatomic abnormalities, as well as the use of biochemical imaging techniques such as dGEMRIC to guide clinical decision making.

Effect of therapeutic exercise for hip osteoarthritis pain: results of a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Recommendations for lower extremity osteoarthritis (OA) and exercise have been primarily based on knee studies. To provide more targeted recommendations for the hip, we gathered evidence for the efficacy of exercise for hip OA from randomized controlled trials. METHODS: A bibliographic search identified trials that were randomized, controlled, completed by >or=60% of subjects, and involved an exercise group (strengthening and/or aerobic) versus a non exercise control group for pain relief in hip OA. Two reviewers independently performed the data extraction and contacted the authors when necessary. Effect sizes (ES) of treatment versus control and the I(2) statistic to assess heterogeneity across trials were calculated. Trial data were combined using a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Nine trials met the inclusion criteria (1,234 subjects), 7 of which combined hip and knee OA; therefore, we contacted the authors who provided the data on hip OA patients. In comparing exercise treatment versus control, we found a beneficial effect of exercise with an ES of -0.38 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.68, -0.08; P = 0.01), but with high heterogeneity (I(2) = 75%) among trials. Heterogeneity was caused by 1 trial consisting of an exercise intervention that was not administered in person. Removing this study left 8 trials (n = 493) with similar exercise strategy (specialized hands-on exercise training, all of which included at least some element of muscle strengthening), and demonstrated exercise benefit with an ES of -0.46 (95% CI -0.64, -0.28; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Therapeutic exercise, especially with an element of strengthening, is an efficacious treatment for hip OA.