The promising potential of polynucleotide injections for knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review of literature and meta-analysis of randomized control trials

多核苷酸注射治疗膝骨关节炎的潜在疗效:文献系统综述和随机对照试验荟萃分析

阅读:2

Abstract

PURPOSE: The present study aims to synthesize and evaluate the evidence on the effectiveness of intra-articular polynucleotides (PNs) for knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In March 2024, we searched MEDLINE, Emcare, Web of Science and Cochrane Library for studies involving PNs for knee OA in human subjects. Inclusion criteria consisted of human subjects with knee OA and the use of intra-articular PNs. Studies were excluded if they were basic science, included non-knee OA pathology, did not use PNs, were case reports, or if there was no available full-text article. The primary outcome was pain, and secondary measures were functional outcome scores and adverse events. Risk of bias was analyzed using Cochrane's Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials and ROBINS-I for non-randomized studies. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included for systematic review and five for meta-analysis. Two studies evaluated a combined treatment of PN and HA (PNHA) to HA but were included only for qualitative analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated significantly better pain improvement in PN than HA at 2 months (mean difference [MD] = -1.04 [-1.63 to -0.45], p = 0.0006) and four months (MD = -0.84 [-1.45 to -0.24], p = 0.006). Functional outcomes also favoured PNs at 2 months (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.46 [0.17-0.74], p = 0.002) and 4 months (SMD = 0.25 [0.00-0.50], p = 0.05) over HA. Data from PNHA studies suggested better pain and functional outcomes than those from HA. Adverse events with PNs were not significantly different from those receiving HA (RR = 1.97 [0.72-5.37], p = 0.187). CONCLUSION: PN injections are a safe and more effective option for treating knee OA than conventional HA. Treatments combining PN and HA also appear to be a promising therapeutic option. However, limited statistical power and potential publication bias warrant further research to enhance confidence in these findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Levels II-IV studies. Level I, meta-analysis of Level I studies.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。