Dataset Information

Intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide injections in hands osteoarthritis ‒ A double-blinded randomized controlled trial with a one year follow-up.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

to evaluate the effectiveness of triamcinolone Hexacetonide (TH) Intra-Articular Injection (IAI) in hand Interphalangeal Joints (IP) of Osteoarthritis (OA) patients to improve pain and joint swelling; improve function, goniometry, and grasping force, and assess IAI influence on radiographic evolution over 1-year.

Methods

A randomized, double-blind study. 60 patients who underwent IAI at the most symptomatic IP joint were randomly assigned to receive TH+Lidocaine (LD) (TH/LD group) or just LD (LD group). Patients were assessed blindly for 1-year, at baseline and 1, 4, 8, 12, and 48 weeks. The following variables were assessed: articular pain and swelling, AUSCAN and COCHIN functional questionnaires, grip and pinch strength, goniometry, perception of improvement, acetaminophen consumption, and simple radiography. Repeated-measures ANOVA test was used to analyze the intervention response.

Results

Sixty patients completed the follow-up. There were nine missed assessments. 97% were women; mean age of 61-years (SD = 8.2), and approximately 5-years of disease (SD = 3.6). Half of the patients present radiographic classification Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) grades I and II, and the other half grades III and IV. The two groups evolved similarly at 48-weeks. TH/LD group had a better evaluation in joint swelling and acetaminophen consumption (p = 0.04 and p < 0.001, respectively) at 48-weeks. Radiographically there was no statistical difference between groups (KL, p = 0.564; erosive OA, p = 0.999; worsening, p = 0.573).

Conclusion

The IAI IP hands OA is effective for the improvement of joint swelling and decrease of analgesic consumption and does not influence the radiographic evolution of the injected joint.

SUBMITTER: Paschoal NOS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9335385 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide injections in hands osteoarthritis ‒ A double-blinded randomized controlled trial with a one year follow-up.

Paschoal Natalia de Oliva Spolidoro NOS Natour Jamil J Machado Flavia Soares FS Oliveira Hilda Alcântara Veiga de HAV Fernandes Artur da Rocha Correa ADRC Furtado Rita Nely Vilar RNV

Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) 20220726

<h4>Objective</h4>to evaluate the effectiveness of triamcinolone Hexacetonide (TH) Intra-Articular Injection (IAI) in hand Interphalangeal Joints (IP) of Osteoarthritis (OA) patients to improve pain and joint swelling; improve function, goniometry, and grasping force, and assess IAI influence on radiographic evolution over 1-year.<h4>Methods</h4>A randomized, double-blind study. 60 patients who underwent IAI at the most symptomatic IP joint were randomly assigned to receive TH+Lidocaine (LD) (TH ...[more]

PMID: 35905573

Similar Datasets

Project description:The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical and economic benefits of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) in Chinese patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). A total of 86 patients (42 treated with PRP and 44 with HA) were treated with three weekly intra-articular injections. The inclusion criteria included patients between 18 and 75 years of age, with chronic knee pain or swelling lasting >3 months and X-ray findings of degenerative joint alterations according to the Kellgren-Lawrence score grade I-III. Clinical examinations were performed before treatment, at 1- and 6-month post-injection intervals. International Knee Documentation Committee subjective, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities and visual analogue scale scores were determined at each examination. Adverse reactions, average cost, treatment time and patient satisfaction were also recorded. Compared with patients injected with HA, PRP was found to be associated with increased and more severe post-injection pain and swelling, where the duration of adverse reactions was greater in the PRP group (P=0.02). During the follow-up evaluations, both groups showed statistically significant improvements in all clinical scores from pre-injection to 1- and 6-month assessments (P<0.05). However, no significant inter-group (PRP vs. HA) differences were observed in the clinical scores between the two follow-up time points. There were also no significant differences in clinical score between the groups with regards to the Kellgren-Lawrence grade I, II or III. The average cost of PRP injections was 22.8X that of HA administration and the average treatment time was 5X that of HA, but there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction. These preliminary results indicate that although PRP injections can significantly improve clinical outcome in patients with knee OA, PRP is not any more effective compared with HA. Furthermore, PRP injections are associated with higher costs and treatment times. Therefore, additional clinical studies are required before PRP injections can be considered as a first-line treatment option for knee OA.

Project description:BackgroundIntra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic management in knee osteoarthritis (OA), particularly in the UK. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are a promising alternative, but no systematic reviews to date have compared them to the current standard of care, IA CS injections. We aim to investigate the effect of IA PRP injections versus IA corticosteroid injections for the symptomatic management of knee OA.MethodsAll published trials comparing IA PRP and CS injections for knee OA were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval in WOMAC/VAS score (or subscores), comparing IA PRP to CS injections across studies.ResultsIncluded were eight studies and 648 patients, 443 (68%) were female, mean age 59 years, with a mean BMI of 28.4. Overall, the studies were considered at low risk of bias. Compared with CS injections, PRP was significantly better in reducing OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, functionality) at 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention (P < 0.01). The greatest effect was observed at 6 and 9 months (- 0.78 (- 1.34 to - 0.23) standard mean deviations (SMD) and - 1.63 (- 2.14 to - 1.12) SMD respectively). At 6 months, this equates to an additional reduction of 9.51 in WOMAC or 0.97 on the VAS pain scales. At 6 months PRP allowed greater return to sporting activities than CS, measured by the KOOS subscale for sporting activity, of magnitude 9.7 (- 0.45 to 19.85) (P = 0.06). Triple injections of PRP, generally separated by a week, were superior to single injections over 12 months follow-up (P < 0.01).ConclusionsIA-PRP injections produce superior outcomes when compared with CS injections for symptomatic management of knee OA, including improved pain management, less joint stiffness and better participation in exercise/sporting activity at 12 months follow-up. Giving three IA-PRP, with injections separated by a week, appears more effective than 1 IA-PRP injection.Prospero trial registration numberCRD42020181928 .

Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis is a leading cause of joint pain and disability. Intra-articular corticosteroid injections (IACs) are often used in primary care once other recommended treatments have failed. Evidence shows that IACs provide short-term relief of osteoarthritis symptoms, yet little is known about patients' and primary care clinicians' experiences and beliefs about their use. We explored patients' and primary care clinicians' views about IACs, including the benefits, disadvantages, perceived risks of treatment, when they are used, and factors that affect decision-making.MethodsWe conducted individual interviews with patients and primary care clinicians and used inductive thematic analysis to investigate their views and experiences of intra-articular corticosteroid injections for osteoarthritis (IACs).FindingsWe interviewed 38 patients and 19 primary care clinicians. We identified 6 patient themes: variation in access; awareness of IACs; views of risk and trust; effectiveness of IACs; variation in onset and effect duration; and an alternative to undesirable treatments. In the interviews with clinicians, we identified an overarching theme of caution and competence, which included eight subthemes: confidence and (dis)comfort with practical procedures; risk of adverse outcomes; training; uncertainty about evidence and guidelines; technical uncertainties; IACs use on the osteoarthritis pathway; perceived benefits and impacts of IACs; and the possibility of placebo.ConclusionPatients and clinicians valued IACs' potential to relieve symptoms and improve quality of life. Variability in patients' access to treatment appears related to clinicians' confidence in delivering injections and their concerns about the evidence base. Variation in dose frequency and timing reflect clinicians' uncertainty about current guidance. Despite variation in effectiveness patients preferred IACs to other forms of pain medication and to delay or avoid surgery. IACs were mostly used as an adjunct treatment before surgery was offered. These findings can inform further research into the effectiveness of IACs and improvements in information and guidance.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Intra-articular corticosteroids relieve osteoarthritis pain, but rapid systemic absorption limits efficacy. FX006, a novel, microsphere-based, extended-release triamcinolone acetonide (TA) formulation, prolongs TA joint residence and reduces systemic exposure compared with standard TA crystalline suspension (TAcs). We assessed symptomatic benefits and safety of FX006 compared with saline-solution placebo and TAcs. METHODS:In this Phase-3, multicenter, double-blinded, 24-week study, adults ≥40 years of age with knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3) and average-daily-pain (ADP)-intensity scores of ≥5 and ≤9 (0 to 10 numeric rating scale) were centrally randomized (1:1:1) to a single intra-articular injection of FX006 (32 mg), saline-solution placebo, or TAcs (40 mg). The primary end point was change from baseline to week 12 in weekly mean ADP-intensity scores for FX006 compared with saline-solution placebo. Secondary end points were area-under-effect (AUE) curves of the change in weekly mean ADP-intensity scores from baseline to week 12 for FX006 compared with saline-solution placebo, AUE curves of the change in weekly mean ADP-intensity scores from baseline to week 12 for FX006 compared with TAcs, change in weekly mean ADP-intensity scores from baseline to week 12 for FX006 compared with TAcs, and AUE curves of the change in weekly mean ADP-intensity scores from baseline to week 24 for FX006 compared with saline-solution placebo. Exploratory end points included week-12 changes in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Quality of Life (KOOS-QOL) subscale scores for FX006 compared with saline-solution placebo and TAcs. Adverse events were elicited at each inpatient visit. RESULTS:The primary end point was met. Among 484 treated patients (n = 161 for FX006, n = 162 for saline-solution placebo, and n = 161 for TAcs), FX006 provided significant week-12 improvement in ADP intensity compared with that observed for saline-solution placebo (least-squares mean change from baseline: -3.12 versus -2.14; p < 0.0001) indicating ∼50% improvement. FX006 afforded improvements over saline-solution placebo for all secondary and exploratory end points (p < 0.05). Improvements in osteoarthritis pain were not significant for FX006 compared with TAcs using the ADP-based secondary measures. Exploratory analyses of WOMAC-A, B, and C and KOOS-QOL subscales favored FX006 (p ≤ 0.05). Adverse events were generally mild, occurring at similar frequencies across treatments. CONCLUSIONS:FX006 provided significant, clinically meaningful pain reduction compared with saline-solution placebo at week 12 (primary end point). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Project description:Purpose The aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical effects of HYADD® 4, an hydrogel based on a hyaluronic acid derivative, in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, on symptoms, and joint function. Methods This retrospective study of patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade II to IV knee osteoarthritis (American College of Rheumatology criteria) enrolled patients who had received two infiltrations of HYADD® 4, (24 mg/3 mL) 1 week apart, and evaluated: pain at rest, pain with movement, change in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score; change in nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)/acetaminophen use; satisfaction with therapy; tolerability. Study duration was 6 months for all predefined endpoints, with a 6-month extension for pain symptoms only. Results After 6 months, all predefined endpoints were evaluable in 698 of 937 enrolled patients (74.5%). Mean WOMAC scores were reduced by 56.3% from baseline ( p < 0.05). NSAIDs/acetaminophen use ≥2 times/week (48.8% of patients at baseline) was substantially reduced after 1 month and was 19.6% after 6 months. After 6 months, 85.6% of patients were satisfied about efficacy. There were no significant adverse effects. The effect on resting pain was rapid, strong, and lasting: reduction from baseline was 45.1% at 1 month ( p < 0.05), 56.8% at 6 months ( p < 0.05), and 53.6% at 12 months ( p < 0.05). Pain on moving was reduced by 47.4% after 6 months ( p < 0.05) and 46.0% after 12 months ( p < 0.05), results at 6 and 12 months were similar. Conclusion HYADD® 4 is a new-generation hyaluronic acid with distinctive viscoelastic and rheological properties. In patients with mild-to-severe knee OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grades II-IV), two consecutive infiltrations 1 week apart reduced WOMAC scores and NSAIDs/acetaminophen consumption for at least 6 months. In a subpopulation ( n = 106), efficacy on pain lasted approximately 12 months. Adverse events were reported in 11.2% of patients; the most frequent were arthralgias. No cases of allergic reactions or systemic effects were recorded. Level of Evidence Level IV, retrospective case series.

Dataset Information

Intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide injections in hands osteoarthritis ‒ A double-blinded randomized controlled trial with a one year follow-up.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide injections in hands osteoarthritis ‒ A double-blinded randomized controlled trial with a one year follow-up.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets