Euppayo Thippaporn, Punyapornwithaya Veerasak, Chomdej Siriwadee, Ongchai Siriwan, Nganvongpanit Korakot
Animal Bone and Joint Research Laboratory, Department of Veterinary Biosciences and Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50100, Thailand.
Department of Food Animal Clinic, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Sep 6;18(1):387. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1743-6.
The objectives are to compare the efficacy of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) alone and in combination with anti-inflammatory drugs (IA-HA + AI), corticosteroids (CS) or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in clinical trials and in vivo and in vitro studies of osteoarthritis (OA).
Data in the BIOSIS, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Medline databases were collected and analyzed. Random effects models were used to compute the effect size (ES) of the mean difference in pain reduction scores from baseline and the relative risk (RR) of adverse events. The ES of histological scores in vivo and cartilage metabolism in vitro were also calculated. We conducted sensitivity analysis of blinding and intention-to-treat (ITT), compared IA-HA combined with CS vs. IA-HA alone in trials, and compared the effects of HA + AI vs. AI alone in vitro, including anabolic and catabolic gene expression.
Thirteen out of 382 papers were included for data analysis. In clinical trials, the ES of pain reduction scores within the 1st month was -4.24 (-6.19, -2.29); 2nd-12th month, -1.39 (-1.95, -0.82); and within one year, -1.63 (-2.19, -1.08), favoring IA-HA + AI (P < 0.001). The ES of RR was 1.08 (0.59, 1.98), and histological scores was 1.38 (-0.55, 3.31). The ES of anabolic gene expression was 1.22 (0.18, 2.25), favoring HA alone (P < 0.05); catabolic gene expression was 0.74 (-0.44, 1.53), favoring HA alone; and glycosaminoglycans remaining was -2.45 (-5.94, 1.03).
IA-HA + AI had greater efficacy for pain relief than IA-HA alone within a one-year period. However, HA + AI down-regulated the ACAN gene when compared with HA alone in vitro.
目的是在骨关节炎(OA)的临床试验以及体内和体外研究中,比较关节内注射透明质酸(IA-HA)单独使用以及与抗炎药物(IA-HA + AI)、皮质类固醇(CS)或非甾体抗炎药(NSAIDs)联合使用的疗效。
收集并分析BIOSIS、CINAHL、Cochrane图书馆、EMBASE和Medline数据库中的数据。采用随机效应模型计算疼痛减轻评分相对于基线的平均差异的效应量(ES)以及不良事件的相对风险(RR)。还计算了体内组织学评分和体外软骨代谢的ES。我们进行了盲法和意向性分析(ITT)的敏感性分析,在试验中比较了IA-HA联合CS与单独使用IA-HA的情况,并在体外比较了HA + AI与单独使用AI的效果,包括合成代谢和分解代谢基因表达。
382篇论文中有13篇被纳入数据分析。在临床试验中,第1个月内疼痛减轻评分的ES为-4.24(-6.19,-2.29);第2至12个月为-1.39(-1.95,-0.82);一年内为-1.63(-2.19,-1.08),支持IA-HA + AI(P < 0.001)。RR的ES为1.08(0.59,1.98),组织学评分的ES为1.38(-0.55,3.31)。合成代谢基因表达的ES为1.22(0.18,2.25),支持单独使用HA(P < 0.05);分解代谢基因表达的ES为0.74(-0.44,1.53),支持单独使用HA;糖胺聚糖残留量的ES为-2.45(-5.94,1.03)。
在一年期内,IA-HA + AI在缓解疼痛方面比单独使用IA-HA更有效。然而,在体外,与单独使用HA相比,HA + AI下调了ACAN基因。