|
CME
Hyaluronic acid injections for knee osteoarthritis
Systematic review of the literature
Anita Aggarwal, MD, CCFP Ian P. Sempowski, MD,
CCFP(EM)
| ABSTRACT |
| OBJECTIVE
To determine whether viscosupplementation with intra-articular hyaluronic acid
(HA) injections improves pain and function in patients with osteoarthritis (OA)
in their knees.
DATA SOURCES
We searched MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases using the MeSH headings
and key words osteoarthritis (knee) and hyaluronic acid.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language case series and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected.
Studies with biologic, histologic, or arthroscopic outcomes were excluded.
SYNTHESIS
Five case series and 13 RCTs were critically appraised. Data from three case series
and three RCTs using injections of high-molecular-weight HA (Synvisc) demonstrated
significant improvement in pain, activity levels, and function. The beneficial
effect started as early as 12 weeks. Studies using low-molecular-weight HA had
conflicting results.
CONCLUSION
Viscosupplementation with high-molecular-weight HA is an effective treatment for
patients with knee OA who have ongoing pain or are unable to tolerate conservative
treatment or joint replacement. Viscosupplementation appears to have a slower
onset of action than intra-articular steroids, but the effect seems to last longer.
|
| RÉSUMÉ |
| OBJECTIF
Déterminer l’efficacité d’un traitement de viscosuppléance par injection intra-articulaire
d’acide hyaluronique (AH) pour procurer une amélioration fonctionnelle et un soulagement
dans l’arthrose (AR) du genou.
SOURCE DES DONNÉES
Une recherche a été effectuée dans les bases de données MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE et
Cochrane à l’aide des rubriques et mots-clés MeSH osteoarthritis (knee) et hyaluronic
acid.
CHOIX DES ÉTUDES
Les études de cas et essais randomisés (ER) de langue anglaise ont été retenus
tandis que les études d’ordre biologique, histologique ou arthroscopique ont été
exclues.
SYNTHÈSE
L’évaluation a porté sur cinq études de cas et 13 ER. L’injection d’AH de poids
moléculaire élevé (Synvic) a procuré une amélioration fonctionnelle, une augmentation
du niveau d’activité et un soulagement significatifs dans trois études de cas
et trois ER. Les études qui utilisaient l’AH de faible poids moléculaire ont donné
des résultats discordants.
CONCLUSION
L’injection intra-articulaire d’AH de poids moléculaire élevé est un traitement
efficace pour l’AR du genou accompagné de douleurs constantes ou pour les patients
qui ne sont pas aptes à supporter un traitement conservateur ou l’installation
d’une prothèse articulaire.
|
This article has been peer reviewed. Cet article a fait
l’objet d’une évaluation externe. Can Fam Physician 2004;50:249-256.
Dr Aggarwal was a second-year family
medicine resident at the time of writing, and Dr Sempowski
is an Assistant Professor, in the Department of Family Medicine at
Queen’s University in Kingston, Ont.
Osteoarthritis (OA), the most common form of arthritis,
affects more than 10% of the population,1 is
slowly progressive, and results in severe disability in the long term. Standard
nonpharmacologic treatments include patient education, self-management programs,
weight loss, physical and occupational therapy, exercises, and devices that assist
function.2,3 Pharmacologic therapies are outlined
in Table 1.2,4 Surgical therapy
includes arthroscopy and joint replacement.1,2
|
| Acetaminophen |
| Salicylates |
| Traditional NSAIDs |
| Cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors |
| NSAIDS with misoprostol (Arthrotec®) |
| Narcotic analgesics |
| Glucosamine |
| Chondroitin sulfate |
| Topical therapies: capsaicin, methylsalicylate |
| Intra-articular glucocorticoids |
| Low-molecular-weight HA |
| • Orthovisc® |
| • Hyalgan® |
| • Artz® or Supartz® |
| High-molecular-weight HA |
| • Synvisc® (hylan G-F 20) |
| Data from American College of Rheumatology2
and Ayral.4 HA—hyaluronic acid, NSAIDs—nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs. |
Hyaluronic acid (HA) was first used in ophthalmology for
cataract surgery in the 1970s.5,6 Intra-articular
use of HA has been approved in Japan and Italy since 1987, in Canada since 1992,
in most of Europe since 1995, and in the United States since 1997.6,7
A meta-analysis of eight early randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed that
patients treated with HA were doing better than untreated patients at the end
of the treatment cycle and at the end of 6 months.8
Despite this, viscosupplementation for treatment of OA remains
controversial and perhaps underused. The primary objective of this systematic
review was to determine whether HA injections improve pain and function in patients
with OA in their knees. A secondary objective was to compare HA with other therapies,
such as intra-articular steroids.
Osteoarthritic joints contain synovial fluid that has become
less viscous and less concentrated, and has a lower molecular weight. This means
that it offers less shock absorption, lubrication, and protection of joints.8
Synovial fluid contains HA, a polysaccharide containing glucosamine and glucuronic
acid.9 The mechanism of action of HA injections
is unclear, but it seems to inhibit inflammatory mediators, decrease cartilage
degradation, and promote cartilage matrix synthesis.2,7
It also insulates synovial pain fibres, thus decreasing perception of pain.9
Effects of HA have been found to last longer than the actual compound does, suggesting
that intra-articular HA stimulates synthesis of natural HA.10
Preparations of HA can be divided into low and high-molecular-weight
(Table 12,4). Contraindications
to intra-articular HA include joint or skin infection, overlying skin disease,
and allergy to chicken or eggs if using a preparation derived from rooster comb.8,9
Data sources
Articles were obtained from MEDLINE, Pre-MEDLINE, and Cochrane
databases from 1966 to the end of October 2002 using the MeSH terms hyaluronic
acid and osteoarthritis, knee. Key words included variations of hyaluronic acid.
The search was limited by clinical trials (42 trials), English language, and human
studies. Additional articles were obtained by reviewing the references of selected
articles. Finally, we excluded trials published before 1995 in an attempt to examine
the most up-to-date methodology and outcome measures. We were left with 31 articles
for critical appraisal.
Study selection
We chose primary research trials with clinical outcome measures
related to treatment with HA. Studies were excluded if primary outcome measures
were histologic, biologic, or arthroscopic. We were left with 18 primary research
articles: 13 RCTs and five case series. Validity and applicability of the studies
were assessed using published criteria for reviewing articles on therapy.10,11
Synthesis
Case series. The five case series12-16
had no control groups: two were retrospective; three were prospective
(Table 212-16). They
lasted from 6 months to 2.5 years. The population profile for OA was middle-aged
people, more women than men.1
|
| STUDY |
TYPE |
LENGTH |
NUMBER |
POPULATION |
| Lussier et al,13
1996 |
Retrospective case series |
2.5 y |
336: 458 knees, 1537 injections |
Average age 65 with OA |
| Frizziero et al,14 1998 |
Open-label prospective case series
Second investigator blinded to treatment |
6 mo |
40 |
Average age 49.5;
17 of 40 had effusion;
mainly moderate OA;
13 men, 27 women |
| Kotz and Kolarz,15
1999 |
Open-label prospective case series |
1 y |
108; 73 completed |
Average age 57.7; 31 men, 77 women;
symptoms for >1 y; score >3.3 on VAS for pain >20 d in previous
mo |
| Goorman et al,16
2000 |
Prospective case series |
6 mo |
84; 61 completed; 110 knees |
Average age 65.8; 26 men, 35 women;
OA detected on x-ray examination;
no benefit or intolerant of NSAIDs |
| Evanich et al,12
2001 |
Retrospective case series |
10 mo |
84; 70 patients completed; 100 knees |
Average age 66; 39% men, 61% women |
| NA—not applicable, NSAIDS—nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs, OA—osteoarthritis, VAS—visual analogue scale. *Type of
hyaluronic acid. |
|
| STUDY |
EXCLUSION CRITERIA |
TREATMENT* |
OUTCOME MEASURES |
RESULTS |
COMMENTS |
| Lussier et al,13
1996 |
NA |
Three injections of Synvisc; up to four series |
Pain score on ordinal scale; overall response;
change in activity |
76% improved in first series; 84% in second series |
Average interval between courses was 8.2 mo; large
study |
| Frizziero et al,14 1998 |
Severe concomitant disease or treatment; past
intra-articular drugs; poor compliance |
Five injections of Hyalgan; second series at 4-8
mo |
Score on VAS for pain (rest, load); biopsy |
Less synovial inflammation (P = .001);
significantly less pain at rest and with load to 1 y; less effusion |
Results to day 360 |
| Kotz and Kolarz,15
1999 |
NA |
Five injections of Hyalgan; second series at 4-8
mo |
Score on VAS for pain after exercise |
68% had relief of symptoms at 4 wk; 55% maintained
at 1 y |
No intention-to-treat analysis |
| Goorman et al,16
2000 |
Implants, infection, allergy, knee instability,
marked deformity |
Three injections of Synvisc |
SF-36 (functional score) |
Significant improvement in function (P
<.001); no difference in general health or vitality |
No intention-to-treat analysis |
| Evanich et al,12
2001 |
NA |
Three injections of Synvisc |
Radiographs; pain score on scale of 1-10; activity
level; satisfaction; hospitalization for procedures |
Two thirds of knees had two thirds relief; 35%
increased activity; 28% went on to surgery; no difference by age |
With more severe OA, relief declined
(P <.05) and procedures increased (P <.05) |
| NA—not applicable, NSAIDS—nonsteroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs, OA—osteoarthritis, VAS—visual analogue scale. *Type of
hyaluronic acid. |
|
| STUDY |
TYPE |
LENGTH |
N |
POPULATION |
COINTERVENTIONS |
| Adams et al,17
1995 |
Double-blind, parallel study with three arms |
26 wk |
32 in NSAID group, 28 in HA group, 33 received
both |
Patients with OA |
All groups given NSAIDs 30 d earlier |
| Lohmander et al,18
1996 |
Double- blind, parallel |
40 wk |
93 treatment, 93 control |
Patients with OA |
NA |
| Wu et al,19 1997 |
Double-blind, parallel |
26 wk |
90 patients, 116 knees |
Mild-to-moderate OA |
NA |
| Wobig et al,6
1998 |
Triple-blind, parallel, intention to treat |
26 wk |
110 patients, 117 knees |
Average age 62, 62% women, excluded for effusions
or if erythrocyte sedimentation rate >40 or renal failure >1:160 |
Documented use of NSAIDs, analgesics, steroids,
surgery |
| Altman and Mosko-witz,20
1998 |
Double-blind, parallel, with three arms and intention-to-treat
analysis |
26 wk |
495 (162 dropped out) |
ACR criteria for OA, KL grade 2-3, pain score
>20 mm on WOMAC, excluded women of childbearing age and those who had had HA
or other IA injection in last year |
Acetaminophen allowed and recorded, aspiration |
Huskis-
son and Donnelly,21 1999 |
Double-blind, parallel |
26 wk |
100 (19 dropped out) |
Average age 65, 67% women, KL grade 2-3, moderate-to-severe
pain with walking, excluded for grade 4 x-ray results, serious illness, injection
in last 3 mo |
Analgesics and NSAIDs (similar use in both groups) |
| Payne and Petrella,22
2000 |
Double-blind, parallel |
12 wk |
46 (6 dropped out) |
Age 57-67, unilateral OA, pain with activities
of daily living, medial OA, excluded for cognitive impairment, pregnancy, avian
allergy, or IA injections in last 6 mo |
Acetaminophen, exercise |
| Brandt et al,5
2001 |
Double-blind, parallel, intention-to-treat and
post-hoc analysis |
27 wk |
226 (175 completed), 135 analyzed in effectiveness
arm |
Moderate OA, KL grade 2-3, WOMAC score >12
in treated knee, WOMAC score <13 in untreated knee, excluded for recent use
of steroids, IA HA in last year, comorbidity |
Washout of all analgesics, acetaminophen allowed
and recorded |
| Tamir et al,23
2001 |
Open-label, single-blind, parallel |
20 wk |
49 (3 dropped out) |
Age 60-85, KL grade 2-4, Altman criteria for symptomatic
OA, excluded for IA injections in last 6 mo, rheumatoid arthritis, infection in
OA hip, allergy, >15 mL effusion aspirated |
Oral agents not limited |
| Bunya-ratavej et al,24
2001 |
Double-blind, parallel |
26 wk |
49 (? dropped out) |
Average age 59, moderate OA, excluded for rapid
OA, surgery, IA injection in last 3 mo, trauma, pregnancy, NSAIDs taken in last
wk |
Acetaminophen |
| Petrella et al,25
2002 |
Double-blind, parallel |
12 wk |
120 (12 dropped out) |
Average age 67, KL grade 1-3, unilateral OA, excluded
for taking NSAIDs not for OA, intolerance, gastrointestinal bleeding, avian allergy,
IA injection in last 6 mo, taking herbal products |
Acetaminophen, 2-wk washout before study |
| Miltner et al, 26
2002 |
Single-blind, parallel |
6 wk |
43 |
Average age 67, KL grade 2-3, bilateral OA, symptoms
>1 y, excluded for malalignment, instability, fracture, IA injection in last
3 mo |
Acetaminophen |
| Raynauld et al,27
2002 |
Open-label, prospective, parallel, effectiveness
trial, intention-to-treat analysis |
1 y |
255 (24 dropped out) |
Older than 40; x-ray verified OA; ambulatory;
most symptomatic knee treated; excluded for KL grade 4, tense effusion, deformity,
IA injection in last 3 mo, any prior HA |
NA |
| ACR—American College of Rheumatology,
HA—hyaluronic acid, IA—intra-articular, KL—Kellgren-Lawrence (x-ray criteria grade
1-4), MODEMS—Musculoskeletal Outcomes Data Evaluation and Management System, NA—not
applicable, NSAID—nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, OA—osteoarthritis, VAS—visual
analogue scale, WOMAC—Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index. *Appropriate
care includes NSAIDS, education, rest, ice, heat, assisting devices, physical
and occupational therapy, weight loss, arthroscopy, and surgery. |
|
| STUDY |
TREATMENT (TYPE OF HA) |
OUTCOME MEASURES |
RESULTS |
COMMENTS |
| Adams et al,17
1995 |
Synvisc high-molecular-weight preparation (6 MDa),
Arms: NSAID and three aspirations, no NSAID and three HA injections, NSAID and
three HA injections |
Score on VAS for pain at rest, at night, and bearing
weight |
At wk 12, HA plus NSAID reduced pain. At wk 26,
HA superior to NSAID, and HA plus NSAID superior to NSAID alone |
Positive effect, NSAID plus HA superior to HA
alone |
| Lohmander et al,18
1996 |
Low-molecular-weight preparation (1000 kDa) in
five weekly injections |
Score on VAS for pain |
HA same as placebo for whole group. Older patients
with severe OA showed some improvement |
Subgroup benefited |
| Wu et al,19 1997 |
Five weekly injections of Artz |
Symptoms, pain with daily activities |
HA better than placebo up to 3 mo |
Positive effect |
| Wobig et al,6
1998 |
Three injections of Synvisc, saline placebo |
Score on VAS for pain with activity |
At wk 12, 47% in HA group were pain
free vs 8% in placebo group (P <.001). At wk 26, 39% vs
13% (P <.001). Rescue medications required by 11% in HA
group and 53% in placebo group |
Positive effect |
| Altman and Moskowitz,20
1998 |
Five weekly injections of Hyalgan, saline placebo,
oral placebo. Arms: HA and oral placebo, saline injections and oral placebo, naproxen
and subcutaneous local anesthetic |
Score on VAS for pain, score on WOMAC |
At wk 26, less pain walking with HA;
47.6% pain free in HA group vs 33% (P <.005) in saline and
oral placebo groups, and 38.9% (P =.02) in naproxen group;
Scores on WOMAC better with HA than placebo |
Positive effect, high drop-out rate, HA had fewer
side effects than naproxen |
| Huskisson and Donnelly,21
1999 |
Five weekly injections of Hyalgan |
Score on VAS for pain, score on Lequesne functional
index |
At 5 wk and 6 mo, less pain walking
(P =.009) and (P <.005), respectively. Better knee
function up to 4 mo |
Positive results up to 6 mo |
| Payne and Petrella,22
2000 |
Suplasyn (730 kDa) |
Perception of pain |
HA superior to placebo |
Negative response |
| Brandt et al,5
2001 |
Three injections of Orthovisc |
Score on WOMAC |
HA superior to placebo from wk 7-27 in effectiveness
arm. No difference in intention-to-treat group |
Subgroup benefit |
| Tamir et al,23
2001 |
Five weekly injections of BioHy (3 MDa) |
Pain, stiffness, function, score on MODEMS |
HA decreased pain and stiffness up to wk 20 (non-significant) |
Negative response |
| Bunyaratavej et al,24
2001 |
Four injections of Hyalgan, saline placebo |
Score on VAS for pain |
HA superior to placebo |
Positive effect |
| Petrella et al,25
2002 |
Three injections of Suplasyn. Arms: HA and oral
placebo, HA and diclophenac with misoprostol, IA placebo and diclophenac with
misoprostol, IA placebo and oral placebo |
Score on VAS for pain, score on WOMAC index |
HA same as NSAID for pain at rest; HA superior
to placebo or NSAID for pain with activity and function |
HA effect improves over time, NSAID effect unchanged
after 4 weeks |
| Miltner et al,26
2002 |
Five injections of Hyalart; control was opposite
knee |
Score on VAS for pain, score on Lequesne functional
index |
HA reduced pain compared with baseline and improved
peak torque on Lequesne functional index (P <.001) |
Not blinded effectively with other knee as control |
| Raynauld et al,27
2002 |
Three injections of Synvisc, saline placebo. Arms:
appropriate care,* appropriate care and HA |
Score on WOMAC |
Appropriate care plus HA reduced pain in 38% vs
13% receiving appropriate care only (P = .0001); annual cost
per patient receiving appropriate care plus HA for other therapy was
$5 and for assisting devices was $237 compared with $16 and $305 for
patients receiving appropriate care only |
Positive effect; only study to look at comprehensive
conservative therapy and cost effectiveness |
| ACR—American College of Rheumatology,
HA—hyaluronic acid, IA—intra-articular, KL—Kellgren-Lawrence (x-ray criteria grade
1-4), MODEMS—Musculoskeletal Outcomes Data Evaluation and Management System, NA—not
applicable, NSAID—nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug, OA—osteoarthritis, VAS—visual
analogue scale, WOMAC—Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index. *Appropriate
care includes NSAIDS, education, rest, ice, heat, assisting devices, physical
and occupational therapy, weight loss, arthroscopy, and surgery. |
Three trials used three injections of high-molecular-weight
HA (Synvisc®). Lussier et al13 showed that 76%
of patients improved with respect to pain and activity level. Evanich et al12
showed that Synvisc decreased pain by two thirds in two thirds of treated knees,
but pain relief decreased with severity of OA, and there was no significant difference
in effect based on age. In addition to pain relief, Goorman et al16
found that physical and social function also improved.
The two case series using five injections of 20 mg of low-molecular-weight
HA (Hyalgan®), with a possible second course, showed symptom relief from week
4 to up to 1 year.14,15 These were open-label
trials and need to be interpreted with caution.
With the exception of the study by Frizziero et al,14
none of the case series used a blind observer, which could bias results. Lack
of placebo control makes data interpretation difficult. Patients might also have
had difficulty recalling their initial symptoms in retrospective trials. Intention-to-treat
analysis was unclear in all five case series, and cointerventions were poorly
documented.
Randomized controlled trials. Most of
the 13 RCTs summarized in Table 35,6,17-27
lasted from 6 to 52 weeks. Nine were parallel double-blind studies; four
were not.6,23,26,27 Physicians giving
injections were blinded to outcome in only two studies,6,24
but blinding was difficult because HA and saline appear different due
to their viscosity. All RCTs used separate assessors, except one,27
which was an effectiveness rather than an efficacy trial. Patients were
not blinded to outcome in this study, nor in the two open trials.23,26
Two RCTs might have been biased because they were funded by the Hyalgan
and Orthovisc groups.5,20 Heterogeneity
of study design, population studied, length of follow up, and diverse
outcomes made the data unsuitable for meta-analysis.
Three of the 13 RCTs involved three injections of Synvisc.
The study by Wobig et al6 was triple-blinded,
used intention-to-treat analysis, and excluded patients with knee effusions. Synvisc
was found to be superior to placebo: pain and use of rescue medication were both
reduced at weeks 12 and 26. This was one of the studies with the best methodology
except that it did not account for previous intra-articular injections. Synvisc
was also used in an effectiveness trial comparing appropriate care with appropriate
care plus Synvisc.27 Patients taking Synvisc
had significantly less pain at 1 year and lower costs per patient for other therapy
or assisting devices. The third trial had three parallel treatment arms; two included
use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).16
Unfortunately, no oral placebo was used. At week 12, all three groups had improved.
Those taking HA had significantly less pain at rest than those taking NSAIDs alone
(the effect continued at week 26). Combination therapy was more effective than
NSAIDs alone.
The remaining RCTs all studied various low-molecular-weight
preparations of HA. Other medications, such as acetaminophen, were allowed; two
studies allowed anti-inflammatory drugs as well.21,23
Most trials involved middle-aged people with OA defined radiographically as mild
to moderate. Patients with knee effusions were often excluded; effusion was sometimes
aspirated before intra-articular injections. Usually, patients were excluded if
they had had intra-articular injections in the previous 3 to 12 months.
Most studies used visual analogue scales for pain as a primary
measure. Four studies included function as a primary outcome.21,23,25,26
Lohmander et al18 found no difference between
HA and placebo except in poststudy subgroup analysis of patients older than 60
with severe OA. Two studies found no significant differences in pain reduction
in intention-to-treat analysis.5,26 Miltner et
al26 showed that HA improved functional score,
total work, peak torque, and pain compared with baseline with no change in the
control knee from baseline. The study by Petrella et al indicated that HA was
more effective than NSAIDs in reducing pain and improving function, and that this
effect improved with time.25 The remaining studies
showed HA to be superior to placebo in decreasing pain and stiffness for up to
6 months.
Studies involving comparisons with NSAIDs are difficult to
interpret. Compared with naproxen, Hyalgan injections produced similar results
with fewer gastrointestinal side effects.20 Synvisc
and NSAIDs appeared similar at month 3; in combination they were better than NSAIDs
alone.17 For pain with activity and function,
HA was better than NSAIDs alone.25
Side effects
Side effects tended to be minor; injection site pain and swelling
was the most common. In two studies, the overall local adverse reaction rate with
HA was 2% or 2.7% per injection.13,27 Kotz and
Kolarz15 noted 119 adverse effects in 108 patients,
the most common being back pain (16.8%), injection site reaction (11.8%), and
injection site pain (6.7%). Evanich et al12 found
15% of knees (11 patients) treated with HA had adverse reactions an average of
1.2 weeks after first injection. Two studies found injection site pain and swelling
to be equal for HA and placebo.5,21 Another trial,
however, found significantly more injection site pain with HA (23%) than with
placebo (13%).20
Gastrointestinal side effects were less common with HA (29%)
than with naproxen (41%) or placebo (36%).20
Systemic reactions were rare. One case of septic arthritis12;
one case of cutaneous vasculitis within 1 week of injection; one case of skin
peeling at week 6; and three cases of itching, cramps, or hemorrhoids were reported.8,21
Discussion
Results of studies of viscosupplementation with HA injections
are difficult to interpret due to small patient numbers, lack of controls, cointerventions,
placebo response after knee aspiration, and lack of blinding of injectors. Studies
also used HA preparations that varied in molecular weight and had different schedules.
High-molecular-weight HA might stimulate synovial cells to make endogenous HA
to a greater extent than low-molecular-weight preparations. More head-to-head
studies are needed.
Three case series and three RCTs of high-molecular-weight
HA all showed positive effects on pain and function. Treatment with HA was superior
to placebo for pain relief and need for rescue medication at weeks 12 and 26.
In the effectiveness trial, HA lessened pain and reduced costs for other therapy
and devices at 1 year.
The two case series using low-molecular-weight HA improved
pain scores; improvement lasted from 4 weeks to 1 year. Several studies showed
improvement in function, pain, stiffness, and range of motion that lasted from
the first injection up to 6 months. Four studies,5,8,22,23
however, showed no significant improvement in pain or proprioception in intention-to-treat
analysis.
Indications for HA include pain despite other therapy, intolerance
of NSAIDs, mild-to-moderate OA, no or mild effusion, no mechanical symptoms, and
severe inoperable OA. Cost is an issue with treatment. Cost in Ontario without
pharmacy filling fee as of May 2003 was $125 for each syringe of Synvisc or Hyalgan.
Hyaluronic acid or steroids?
Suggested alternatives to HA include intra-articular steroids,
which can decrease acute pain and joint effusion, but are limited to three or
four injections per year.4 Several RCTs have
shown good response at 1 and 4 weeks, but no effect thereafter.28-30
In a head-to-head RCT, Jones et al31 found that
patients in the HA group experienced less pain than those receiving intra-articular
steroids at 6-month follow up; however, there was a high drop-out rate, and intention-to-treat
analysis showed no statistical differences.
Intra-articular steroids and HA might be good combination
therapy. Grecomoro et al32 found that adding
dexamethasone to the first of five Hyalgan injections decreased pain further after
2 months. The effect of steroids occurred earlier (at 4 to 6 weeks); the effect
of HA was delayed but longer lived. Comparing HA injections with corticosteroids
suggests that the former lasts longer but the latter works faster. Also, steroids
might be more effective for joint effusion or other acute inflammation.
Further research is needed to determine whether viscosupplementation
with HA alters the natural history of OA in human beings. We do not yet know what
concomitant therapies should be offered to patients treated with HA and whether
other joints, such as shoulders or hips, could benefit. Combination therapy requires
further study.
Conclusion
Viscosupplementation with HA is a reasonable treatment for
patients with mild-to-moderate OA of the knee who have ongoing pain or are unable
to tolerate conservative treatment or joint replacement. The effect lasts longer
with high-molecular-weight preparations, and patients can experience improvement
in clinical outcomes for up to 1 year. Intra-articular HA appears to have a slower
onset of action than intra-articular steroids but the effects seem to last longer.
Patients should be warned of cost and of potential side effects, including local
swelling.
Competing interests
None declared
Correspondence to: Dr Ian P. Sempowski,
Family Medicine Centre, 220 Bagot St, PO Bag 8888, Kingston, ON K7L 5E9; telephone
(613) 549-4480; fax (613) 544-9899; e-mail sempowsk@post.queensu.ca
References
1. Holbrook AM (Chair) for the Ontario Musculoskeletal Therapy
Review Panel. Ontario treatment guidelines for osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis,
and acute musculoskeletal injury. Toronto, Ont: Queen’s Printer of Ontario; 2000.
2. American College of Rheumatology, Subcommittee on Osteoarthritis Guidelines.
Recommendations for the medical management of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee:
2000 update. Arthritis Rheum 2000;43:1905-15.
3. Manek NJ, Lane NE. Osteoarthritis: current concepts in diagnosis and management.
Am Fam Physician 2000;61(6):1795-804.
4. Ayral X. Injections in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Best Pract Res Clin
Rheumatol 2001;15(4):609-26.
5. Brandt KD, Block JA, Michalski JP, Moreland LW, Caldwell JR, Lavin PT. Efficacy
and safety of intraarticular sodium hyaluronate in knee osteoarthritis. ORTHOVISC
Study Group. Clin Orthopaed Related Res 2001;385:130-43.
6. Wobig M, Dickhut A, Maier R, Vetter G. Viscosupplementation with Hylan G-F
20: a 26-week controlled trial of efficacy and safety in the osteoarthritic knee.
Clin Therapeut 1998;20(3):410-23.
7. Wen DY. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid injections for knee osteoarthritis.
Am Fam Physician 2000;62(3):565-70.
8. George E. Intra-articular hyaluronan treatment for osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum
Dis 1999;57(11):637-40.
9. Simon LS. Viscosupplementation therapy with intra-articular hyaluronic acid:
fact or fantasy? Rheum Dis Clin North Am 1999;25(2):345-57.
10. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature: how
to use an article about therapy or prevention; are the results of the study valid?
JAMA 1993;270(21):2598-601.
11. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature: how
to use an article about therapy or prevention; what were the results and will
they help me in caring for my patients? JAMA 1994;271(1):59-63.
12. Evanich JD, Evanich CJ, Wright MB, Rydlewicz JA. Efficacy of intraarticular
hyaluronic acid injections in knee osteoarthritis. Clin Orthopaed Related Res
2001;390:173-81.
13. Lussier A, Cividino AA, McFarlane CA, Olszynski WP, Potashner WJ, De Medicis
R. Viscosupplementation with hylan for the treatment of osteoarthritis: findings
from clinical practice. Can J Rheumatol 1996;23(9):1579-85.
14. Frizziero L, Govoni E, Bacchini P. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid in the
treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: clinical and morphological study. Clin
Exp Rheumatol 1998;16(4):441-9.
15. Kotz R, Kolarz G. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid: duration of effect and
results of repeated treatment cycles. Am J Orthop 1999;28(11 Suppl):5-7.
16. Goorman SD, Watanabe TK, Miller EH, Perry C. Functional outcome in knee osteoarthritis
after treatment with hylan G-F 20: a prospective study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil
2000;81(4):479-83.
17. Adams ME, Atkinson MH, Lussier AJ, Schulz JI, Siminovitch KA, Wade JP, et
al. The role of viscosupplementation with hylan G-F 20 (Synvisc) in the treatment
of osteoarthritis of the knee: a Canadian multicentre trial comparing hylan G-F
20 alone, hylan G-F 20 with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and
NSAIDs alone. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1995;3(4):213-25.
18. Lohmander LS, Dalen N, Englund G, Hamalainen M, Jensen EM, Karlsson K, et
al. Intra-articular hyaluronan injections in the treatment of osteoarthritis of
the knee: a randomised double blind, placebo controlled multicentre trial. Hyaluronan
Multicentre Trial Group. Ann Rheum Dis 1996;55(7):424-31.
19. Wu JJ, Shih LY, Hsu HC, Chen TH. The double-blind test of sodium hyaluronate
(ARTZ) on osteoarthritis knee. Chinese Med J 1997;59(2):99-106.
20. Altman RD, Moskowitz R. Intraarticular sodium hyaluronate (Hyalgan) in the
treatment of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized clinical trial.
Hyalgan Study Group. J Rheumatol 1998;25(11):2203-12.
21. Huskisson E, Donnelly S. Hyaluronic acid in the treatment of osteoarthritis
of the knee. Rheumatology 1999;38:602-7.
22. Payne MW, Petrella RJ. Viscosupplementation effect on proprioception in the
osteoarthritic knee. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000;81(5):598-603.
23. Tamir E, Robinson D, Koren R, Agar G, Halperin N. Intra-articular hyaluronan
injections for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double
blind, placebo controlled study. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2001;19(3):265-70.
24. Bunyaratavej N, Chan KM, Subramanian N. Treatment of painful osteoarthritis
of the knee with hyaluronic acid: results of a multicenter Asian study. J Med
Assoc Thai 2001;84(Suppl 2):576-81.
25. Petrella RJ, DiSilvestro MD, Hildebrand C. Effects of hyaluronate sodium on
pain and physical functioning in osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled clinical trial. Arch Intern Med 2002;162(3):292-8.
26. Miltner O, Schneider U, Siebert CH, Niedhart C, Niethard FU. Efficacy of intraarticular
hyaluronic acid in patients with osteoarthritis—a prospective clinical trial.
Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2002;10(9):680-86.
27. Raynauld JP, Torrance GW, Band PA, Goldsmith CH, Tugwell P, Walker V, et al.
A prospective, randomized, pragmatic, health outcomes trial evaluating the incorporation
of hylan G-F 20 into the treatment paradigm for patients with knee osteoarthritis
(Part 1 of 2): clinical results. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2002;10(7):506-17.
28. Ravaud P, Moulinier L, Giraudeau B, Ayral X, Guerin C, Noel E, et al. Effects
of joint lavage and steroid injection in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee:
results in a multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 1999;42(3):475-482.
29. Gaffney K, Ledingham J, Perry J. Intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide
in knee osteoarthritis: factors influencing the clinical response. Ann Rheum Dis
1995;54(5):379-81.
30. Jones A, Doherty M. Intra-articular corticosteroids are effective in osteoarthritis
but there are no clinical predictors of response. Ann Rheum Dis 1996;55(11):829-32.
31. Jones AC, Patrick M, Doherty S, Doherty M. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid
compared to intra-articular triamcinolone hexacetonide in inflammatory knee osteoarthritis.
Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1995;3(4):269-73.
32. Grecomoro G, Piccione F, Leizia G. Therapeutic synergism between hyaluronic
acid and dexamethasone in the intraarticular treatment of osteoarthritis of the
knee: a preliminary open study. Curr Med Res Opin 1992;13(1):49-55.
| Editor’s key points
• This systematic review examined five case series and 13 randomized controlled
trials to determine the effectiveness of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA)
injections for reducing osteoarthritic joint pain.
• Trials of low-molecular-weight HA produced conflicting evidence of effectiveness,
although more studies demonstrated improvement.
• Trials of high-molecular-weight HA had more consistent results indicating pain
relief and better functioning.
• The effects of HA appear to begin after 4 to 12 weeks and last up to a year.
This contrasts with intra-articular steroid injections that act more quickly but
lose effectiveness after 3 months.
• Side effects were relatively minor; the main one, local irritation, resolved
spontaneously. There appears to be some rationale for combining steroid and HA
injections.
Points de repère du rédacteur
• Cette revue systématique portant sur cinq études de cas et 13 essais randomisés
visait à déterminer l’efficacité de l’injection intra-articulaire d’acide hyaluronique
(AH) pour soulager des douleurs d’arthrose.
• Les essais portant sur l’AH de faible poids moléculaire ont donné des résultats
discordants, quoiqu’une amélioration ait été notée dans la majorité des cas.
• Lorsque l’AH de poids moléculaire élevé était utilisée, un soulagement et une
amélioration fonctionnelle ont été observés de façon plus régulière.
• Il semble que les effets de l’AH apparaissent au bout de 4 à 12 semaines et
durent jusqu’à 1 an. En comparaison, les injections intra-articulaires de stéroïdes
agissent plus vite, mais ne sont plus efficaces après 3 mois.
• Les effets indésirables ont été relativement mineur, le principal, étant une
irritation locale, a disparu sans traitement. On croit qu’il serait avantageux
d’associer les stéroïdes aux injections d’AH. |
|