Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisPubMed

The efficacy of intra-articular injections in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Anil U., Markus DH., Hurley ET., Manjunath AK., Alaia MJ., Campbell KA.

Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 8761 on Knee Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis, published in Knee (2021) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Meta-analysis
Journal
Knee (2021)
Country
Netherlands
Reported sample size
8761
Source database
PubMed
PMID
34500430
DOI
10.1016/j.knee.2021.08.008
Citations
82

Abstract (original English)

Purpose Osteoarthritis (OA) is a debilitating joint disease characterized by progressive loss of articular cartilage. Intra-articular injections are a mainstay of nonoperative treatment, however, there is controversy as to the optimal injectable for these patients. The purpose of the current study is to perform a network meta-analysis of the randomized control trials in the literature to ascertain whether there is a superior injectable nonoperative treatment for knee OA. Methods The literature search was conducted based on the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized control trials (RCTs) evaluating intra-articular injectables in osteoarthritic knees were included. Data was extracted and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, where available were analyzed at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-Score. Results Seventy-nine RCTs with 8761 patients were included in this review. Intra-articular injectables evaluated included autologous conditioned serum (ACS), bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), botulinum toxin, corticosteroids (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA), mesenchymal stem cells (MSC), ozone, saline placebo, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), plasma ric

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence
HumansHyaluronic AcidInjections, Intra-ArticularOsteoarthritis, KneePlatelet-Rich PlasmaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment Outcome

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research