Butler James J, Hartman Hayden, Mener Amanda, Mercer Nathaniel P, Randall Grace W, Petropoulos Stephen, Rosenbaum Andrew J, Kennedy John G
Foot and Ankle Division, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, NYU Langone Health, New York City, USA.
LMU-DeBusk College of Osteopathic Medicine, Knoxville, TN, USA.
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2024 Jul 29;9(3):24730114241265109. doi: 10.1177/24730114241265109. eCollection 2024 Jul.
The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate outcomes following intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) for the treatment of hallux rigidus.
During April 2024, a systematic review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data collected and analyzed were number of patients, patient age, follow-up, subjective clinical outcomes, complications, and failures.
Five studies were included. In total, 218 patients (218 feet) underwent intra-articular injection of HA at a weighted mean follow-up time of 4.4 ± 1.4 months (range, 3-6). There was an improvement in postinjection visual analog scale (VAS) pain at rest scores, VAS pain during activity scores, American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, and Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) scores. In total, 21 complications (10.0%) were observed, the most common of which was transient postinjection pain in 20 patients (9.6%). There were 7 patients (3.2%) who underwent secondary procedures (3.2%). One randomized control trial (RCT) demonstrated no difference in outcomes between an intra-articular injection of HA compared to an intra-articular injection of saline. One RCT demonstrated superior FHSQ scores following between an intra-articular injection of HA compared to an intra-articular injection of triamcinolone acetonide.
This systematic review suggests that intra-articular injection of HA for the treatment of hallux rigidus may lead to improved clinical outcomes with a low complication rate at short-term follow-up. However, the low level and quality of evidence underscores the need for further high-quality studies to be conducted to identify the precise role of HA in the treatment of hallux rigidus.
本系统评价的目的是评估关节腔内注射透明质酸(HA)治疗僵硬拇趾的疗效。
2024年4月,根据系统评价和Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,对MEDLINE、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库进行了系统评价。收集和分析的数据包括患者数量、患者年龄、随访情况、主观临床疗效、并发症和治疗失败情况。
纳入了5项研究。共有218例患者(218足)接受了关节腔内注射HA,加权平均随访时间为4.4±1.4个月(范围3 - 6个月)。注射后静息视觉模拟量表(VAS)疼痛评分、活动时VAS疼痛评分、美国矫形足踝协会(AOFAS)评分和足部健康状况问卷(FHSQ)评分均有所改善。共观察到21例并发症(10.0%),最常见的是20例患者(9.6%)出现注射后短暂疼痛。有7例患者(3.2%)接受了二次手术(3.2%)。一项随机对照试验(RCT)表明,关节腔内注射HA与注射生理盐水相比,疗效无差异。一项RCT表明,关节腔内注射HA后的FHSQ评分优于注射曲安奈德。
本系统评价表明,关节腔内注射HA治疗僵硬拇趾在短期随访中可能会改善临床疗效,且并发症发生率较低。然而,证据的低水平和质量强调需要进行进一步的高质量研究,以确定HA在治疗僵硬拇趾中的精确作用。