Suwannaphisit Sitthiphong, Sinnathakorn Nitiphoom, Suwanno Pormes, Fongsri Warangkana, Tangtrakulwanich Boonsin
Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine Vajira Hospital, Navamindradhiraj University, 681 Samsen Road, Dusit, Bangkok, 10300, Thailand.
Department of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, University of Phayao, 19 Village No.2, Maeka Sub-district, Muang Phayao District, Phayao, 56000, Thailand.
Sci Rep. 2025 Feb 7;15(1):4587. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-88202-1.
In addition to topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs that are used in hand osteoarthritis, there are other drugs that can reduce pain in osteoarthritis, such as topical cetylated fatty acids. Previous studies have reported that topical CFAs are effective in all knee OA patients, with slightly higher evidence for those with advanced disease. The mechanism of pain in OA knee and OA hand is similar. Furthermore, there are no previous studies on CFAs in OA hand. Patients fulfilling the American College of Rheumatology criteria for hand OA participated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Eligible patients were over 40 years of age, had at least one tender joint, and had a joint pain visual analog score of 30-60 mm. Patients received topical CFA (n = 36) or placebo (n = 36) twice daily for six weeks. The primary outcome was the Functional Index for Hand Osteoarthritis (FIHOA) at 2, 4, and 6 weeks. The secondary outcome measures included the Visual Analog Score (VAS), Patient Global Assessment (PGA), and skin irritation at 2, 4, and 6 weeks. At baseline, no statistically significant differences were observed among the assessment parameters. Upon concluding the 6-week study period, it was evident that patients in the CFA group exhibited a notably lower mean pain score compared to those in the placebo group (2.2 ± 1.9 vs. 3.2 ± 2.2, P < 0.05) and achieved superior PGA scores (2.1 ± 1.7 vs. 3.1 ± 2.2, P < 0.05). However, no significant disparity was detected in terms of FIHOA between the two groups. Additionally, adverse reactions were reported by two patients in the placebo group, whereas no such reports were documented in the CFA group. Topical CFAs demonstrate efficacy in alleviating pain and enhancing patient global satisfaction in the treatment of hand osteoarthritis. However, a more extended follow-up period is imperative to ascertain whether disparities exist in the safety profile and functional outcomes between topical CFAs and a placebo.
除了用于手部骨关节炎的局部非甾体抗炎药外,还有其他药物可减轻骨关节炎的疼痛,如局部使用的十六烷酸脂肪酸。先前的研究报告称,局部使用十六烷酸脂肪酸对所有膝骨关节炎患者均有效,对病情较重者的证据略多。膝骨关节炎和手骨关节炎的疼痛机制相似。此外,此前尚无关于十六烷酸脂肪酸用于手骨关节炎的研究。符合美国风湿病学会手骨关节炎标准的患者参与了这项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照研究。符合条件的患者年龄超过40岁,至少有一个压痛关节,关节疼痛视觉模拟评分为30 - 60毫米。患者每天两次外用十六烷酸脂肪酸(n = 36)或安慰剂(n = 36),持续六周。主要结局是2周、4周和6周时的手部骨关节炎功能指数(FIHOA)。次要结局指标包括2周、4周和6周时的视觉模拟评分(VAS)、患者整体评估(PGA)和皮肤刺激情况。在基线时,评估参数之间未观察到统计学上的显著差异。在为期6周的研究期结束时,很明显,十六烷酸脂肪酸组患者的平均疼痛评分明显低于安慰剂组(2.2±1.9对vs. 3.2±2.2,P < 0.05),并且获得了更高的PGA评分(2.1±1.7对vs. 3.1±2.2,P < 0.05)。然而,两组之间在FIHOA方面未发现显著差异。此外,安慰剂组有两名患者报告了不良反应,而十六烷酸脂肪酸组未记录到此类报告。局部使用十六烷酸脂肪酸在治疗手骨关节炎时显示出缓解疼痛和提高患者整体满意度的疗效。然而必须进行更长时间的随访,以确定局部使用十六烷酸脂肪酸与安慰剂在安全性和功能结局方面是否存在差异。