O'Hanlon Claire E, Newberry Sydne J, Booth Marika, Grant Sean, Motala Aneesa, Maglione Margaret A, FitzGerald John D, Shekelle Paul G
RAND Corporation, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA, 90407, USA.
Pardee RAND Graduate School, 1776 Main St., Santa Monica, CA, 90407, USA.
Syst Rev. 2016 Nov 4;5(1):186. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0363-9.
The prevalence of knee osteoarthritis (OA)/degenerative joint disease (DJD) is increasing in the USA. Systematic reviews of treatment efficacy and adverse events (AEs) of hyaluronic acid (HA) injections report conflicting evidence about the balance of benefits and harms. We review evidence on efficacy and AEs of intraarticular viscosupplementation with HA in older individuals with knee osteoarthritis and account for differences in these conclusions from another systematic review.
We searched PubMed and eight other databases and gray literature sources from 1990 to December 12, 2014. Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting functional outcomes or quality-of-life; RCTs and observational studies on delay/avoidance of arthroplasty; RCTs, case reports, and large cohort studies and case series assessing safety; and systematic reviews reporting on knee pain were considered for inclusion. A standardized, pre-defined protocol was applied by two independent reviewers to screen titles and abstracts, review full text, and extract details on study design, interventions, outcomes, and quality. We compared our results with those of a prior systematic review and found them to be discrepant; our analysis of why this discrepancy occurred is the focus of this manuscript.
Eighteen RCTs reported functional outcomes: pooled analysis of ten placebo-controlled, blinded trials showed a standardized mean difference of -0.23 (95 % confidence interval (CI) -0.45 to -0.01) favoring HA at 6 months. Studies reported few serious adverse events (SAEs) and no significant differences in non-serious adverse events (NSAEs) (relative risk (RR) [95 % CI] 1.03 [0.93-1.15] or SAEs (RR [95 % CI] 1.39 [0.78-2.47]). A recent prior systematic review reported similar functional outcomes, but significant SAE risk. Differences in SAE inclusion and synthesis accounted for the disparate conclusions.
Trials show a small but significant effect of HA on function on which recent systematic reviews agree, but lack of AE synthesis standardization leads to opposite conclusions about the balance of benefits and harms. A limitation of the re-analysis of the prior systematic review is that it required imputation of missing data.
在美国,膝关节骨关节炎(OA)/退行性关节病(DJD)的患病率正在上升。关于透明质酸(HA)注射治疗效果和不良事件(AE)的系统评价报告了关于利弊平衡的相互矛盾的证据。我们回顾了在老年膝关节骨关节炎患者中关节内注射HA补充粘弹性的疗效和AE的证据,并解释了这些结论与另一项系统评价的差异。
我们检索了1990年至2014年12月12日期间的PubMed和其他八个数据库以及灰色文献来源。纳入报告功能结局或生活质量的双盲安慰剂对照随机对照试验(RCT);关于关节置换延迟/避免的RCT和观察性研究;评估安全性的RCT、病例报告、大型队列研究和病例系列;以及报告膝关节疼痛的系统评价。由两名独立评审员应用标准化的预定义方案筛选标题和摘要、审查全文,并提取关于研究设计、干预措施、结局和质量的详细信息。我们将我们的结果与先前的一项系统评价结果进行比较,发现它们存在差异;我们对这种差异发生原因的分析是本手稿的重点。
18项RCT报告了功能结局:对10项安慰剂对照、盲法试验的汇总分析显示,在6个月时,有利于HA的标准化平均差为-0.23(95%置信区间(CI)-0.45至-0.01)。研究报告的严重不良事件(SAE)很少,非严重不良事件(NSAE)(相对风险(RR)[95%CI]1.03[0.93 - 1.15])或SAE(RR[95%CI]1.39[0.78 - 2.47])无显著差异。最近的一项先前系统评价报告了类似的功能结局,但存在显著的SAE风险。SAE纳入和综合分析的差异导致了不同的结论。
试验表明HA对功能有微小但显著的影响,这是近期系统评价所认同的,但缺乏AE综合分析的标准化导致了关于利弊平衡的相反结论。对先前系统评价重新分析的一个局限性是它需要对缺失数据进行插补。