Pashuck Troy D, Kuroki Keiichi, Cook Cristi R, Stoker Aaron M, Cook James L
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.
Comparative Orthopaedic Laboratory, University of Missouri, Missouri Orthopaedic Institute (4028A), 1100 Virginia Ave., Columbia, 65212, Missouri.
J Orthop Res. 2016 Oct;34(10):1772-1779. doi: 10.1002/jor.23191. Epub 2016 Mar 7.
The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid (HA) versus saline for symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). Twenty-five adult purpose-bred dogs underwent meniscal release of one knee. Clinical, arthroscopic, and radiographic signs of OA were confirmed in all dogs prior to treatment. Dogs were randomized into five groups: HA-1 (n = 5), HA-3 (n = 5), HA-5 (n = 5), Saline-1 (n = 5), and Saline-3 (n = 5). Each dog received intra-articular injections of the respective substance into the affected knee at the pre-determined time points. Dogs were assessed for heat, swelling, and erythema after each injection and for lameness, pain, effusion, range of motion, kinetics, radiographic OA scoring, and arthroscopic scoring prior to treatment and for 6 months after injection. Dogs were then humanely euthanatized and the knees assessed grossly and histologically. Only mild heat, swelling, and/or erythema were noted in some dogs following injection and resolved within 1 week. Dogs treated with HA-1, HA-3, and HA-5 were significantly (p < 0.05) better than dogs treated with Saline-1 and Saline-3 at the 4, 8, and 12 week time points based on at least one outcome measure. OA severity was not significantly different among groups at any time point, but increased in severity over time in all groups. Gross and histologic OA scores were not significantly different among groups. These data suggest the three HA injection protocols were safe, superior to saline for short-term amelioration of symptoms associated with chronic OA, and can be translated to human OA treatment. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 34:1772-1779, 2016.
本研究的目的是评估关节内注射透明质酸(HA)与注射生理盐水用于症状性治疗骨关节炎(OA)的安全性和有效性。25只成年良种犬接受了一侧膝关节半月板松解术。在治疗前,所有犬均经临床、关节镜和影像学检查确诊为OA。将犬随机分为五组:HA - 1组(n = 5)、HA - 3组(n = 5)、HA - 5组(n = 5)、生理盐水 - 1组(n = 5)和生理盐水 - 3组(n = 5)。在预定时间点,每只犬均接受将相应物质关节内注射至患膝。每次注射后评估犬的发热、肿胀和红斑情况,并在治疗前及注射后6个月评估跛行、疼痛、积液、活动范围、动力学、影像学OA评分和关节镜评分。然后对犬实施安乐死,并对膝关节进行大体和组织学评估。注射后部分犬仅出现轻微发热、肿胀和/或红斑,并在1周内消退。基于至少一项结局指标,在第4、8和12周时间点,接受HA - 1、HA - 3和HA - 5治疗的犬明显(p < 0.05)优于接受生理盐水 - 1和生理盐水 - 3治疗的犬。在任何时间点,各组间OA严重程度均无显著差异,但所有组的严重程度均随时间增加。各组间大体和组织学OA评分无显著差异。这些数据表明,三种HA注射方案是安全的,在短期改善与慢性OA相关的症状方面优于生理盐水,并且可转化应用于人类OA治疗。© 2016骨科学研究协会。由威利期刊公司出版。《矫形外科学研究杂志》34:1772 - 1779,2016年。