Comparison of functional performance outcomes between oral patented crystalline glucosamine sulfate and platelet-rich plasma among knee osteoarthritis patients: a propensity score matching analysis

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Chavarin Amarase, Aree Tanavalee, Srihatach Ngarmukos, Chotetawan Tanavalee, Nonn Jaruthien, Pakpoom Somrak, Saran Tantavisut
{"title":"Comparison of functional performance outcomes between oral patented crystalline glucosamine sulfate and platelet-rich plasma among knee osteoarthritis patients: a propensity score matching analysis","authors":"Chavarin Amarase,&nbsp;Aree Tanavalee,&nbsp;Srihatach Ngarmukos,&nbsp;Chotetawan Tanavalee,&nbsp;Nonn Jaruthien,&nbsp;Pakpoom Somrak,&nbsp;Saran Tantavisut","doi":"10.1007/s40520-024-02814-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Among the medications used to treat knee osteoarthritis (OA), oral patented crystalline glucosamine sulfate (pCGS) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have become popular alternatives to painkillers or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Although studies have shown that pCGS and PRP improve clinical outcomes, no study has compared outcomes between these optional treatments. We compared functional performance outcomes from baseline to the 1-year follow-up (FU) between oral pCGS and PRP in patients with knee OA.</p><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Three hundred eighty-two patients receiving oral pCGS and 122 patients receiving PRP injections were enrolled for a review of functional performance outcomes, including a five-time sit-to-stand test (5xSST), time up-and-go test (TUGT), and 3-minute walk distance test (3MWDT). The patients were followed up for one year. The pCGS group received 1500 mg daily, whereas the PRP group received 2 cycles of intra-articular injections at week 0 and week 6. Using propensity score matching based on age, sex, height, weight, BMI, and Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) classification, all three functional performance outcomes were compared between the baseline (pretreatment), 6-week, 12-week, 24-week, and 1-year FUs.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>With a ratio of 2:1 (pCGS: PRP), 204 patients in the pCGS group were matched with 102 patients in the PRP group. Compared with the baseline levels, the PRP group showed significant improvements in 5xSST and TUGT outcomes from 6 weeks and significant improvements in 3MWDT outcomes from 12 weeks, whereas the pCGS group showed significant improvements in TUGT outcomes from 6 weeks and significant improvements in 5xSST and 3MWDT outcomes from 12 weeks. At the 24-week and 1-year FU, both groups showed significant improvements in all three functional performance tests without adverse events.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although the PRP group showed faster improvements in 5xSST outcomes at six weeks, from the 12-week to 1-year FU, both the pCGS and PRP groups showed significant improvements in 5xSST, TUGT, and 3MWDT outcomes. As the use of PRP is more complicated and invasive than the use of oral pCGS, the benefits and drawbacks of selecting PRP over pCGS in knee OA treatment should be examined.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7720,"journal":{"name":"Aging Clinical and Experimental Research","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11316698/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging Clinical and Experimental Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40520-024-02814-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Among the medications used to treat knee osteoarthritis (OA), oral patented crystalline glucosamine sulfate (pCGS) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have become popular alternatives to painkillers or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Although studies have shown that pCGS and PRP improve clinical outcomes, no study has compared outcomes between these optional treatments. We compared functional performance outcomes from baseline to the 1-year follow-up (FU) between oral pCGS and PRP in patients with knee OA.

Materials and methods

Three hundred eighty-two patients receiving oral pCGS and 122 patients receiving PRP injections were enrolled for a review of functional performance outcomes, including a five-time sit-to-stand test (5xSST), time up-and-go test (TUGT), and 3-minute walk distance test (3MWDT). The patients were followed up for one year. The pCGS group received 1500 mg daily, whereas the PRP group received 2 cycles of intra-articular injections at week 0 and week 6. Using propensity score matching based on age, sex, height, weight, BMI, and Kellgren and Lawrence (KL) classification, all three functional performance outcomes were compared between the baseline (pretreatment), 6-week, 12-week, 24-week, and 1-year FUs.

Results

With a ratio of 2:1 (pCGS: PRP), 204 patients in the pCGS group were matched with 102 patients in the PRP group. Compared with the baseline levels, the PRP group showed significant improvements in 5xSST and TUGT outcomes from 6 weeks and significant improvements in 3MWDT outcomes from 12 weeks, whereas the pCGS group showed significant improvements in TUGT outcomes from 6 weeks and significant improvements in 5xSST and 3MWDT outcomes from 12 weeks. At the 24-week and 1-year FU, both groups showed significant improvements in all three functional performance tests without adverse events.

Conclusions

Although the PRP group showed faster improvements in 5xSST outcomes at six weeks, from the 12-week to 1-year FU, both the pCGS and PRP groups showed significant improvements in 5xSST, TUGT, and 3MWDT outcomes. As the use of PRP is more complicated and invasive than the use of oral pCGS, the benefits and drawbacks of selecting PRP over pCGS in knee OA treatment should be examined.

Abstract Image

膝关节骨关节炎患者口服专利结晶氨基葡萄糖硫酸盐和富血小板血浆的功能表现结果比较:倾向得分匹配分析。
背景:在用于治疗膝关节骨关节炎(OA)的药物中,口服专利结晶氨基葡萄糖硫酸盐(pCGS)和富血小板血浆(PRP)已成为止痛药或非类固醇抗炎药(NSAIDs)的流行替代品。虽然研究表明 pCGS 和 PRP 可改善临床疗效,但还没有研究对这些可选治疗方法的疗效进行比较。我们比较了膝关节 OA 患者口服 pCGS 和 PRP 从基线到 1 年随访(FU)期间的功能表现结果:我们招募了 382 名接受口服 pCGS 的患者和 122 名接受 PRP 注射的患者,对他们的功能表现结果进行了评估,包括五次坐立测试 (5xSST)、起立行走时间测试 (TUGT) 和 3 分钟步行距离测试 (3MWDT)。对患者进行了为期一年的随访。pCGS 组每天注射 1500 毫克,而 PRP 组在第 0 周和第 6 周进行两个周期的关节内注射。通过基于年龄、性别、身高、体重、BMI 和 Kellgren 与 Lawrence(KL)分类的倾向得分匹配,比较了基线(治疗前)、6 周、12 周、24 周和 1 年 FU 的所有三种功能表现结果:按照 2:1 的比例(pCGS:PRP),pCGS 组的 204 名患者与 PRP 组的 102 名患者进行了配对。与基线水平相比,PRP 组的 5xSST 和 TUGT 结果在 6 周后显著改善,3MWDT 结果在 12 周后显著改善,而 pCGS 组的 TUGT 结果在 6 周后显著改善,5xSST 和 3MWDT 结果在 12 周后显著改善。在24周和1年的FU中,两组在所有三项功能表现测试中均有显著改善,且无不良事件发生:结论:尽管 PRP 组在 6 周时的 5xSST 结果改善较快,但从 12 周到 1 年的后续治疗中,pCGS 组和 PRP 组的 5xSST、TUGT 和 3MWDT 结果均有显著改善。由于 PRP 的使用比口服 pCGS 更为复杂和侵入性,因此在膝关节 OA 治疗中选择 PRP 而非 pCGS 的利弊值得研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
5.00%
发文量
283
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Aging clinical and experimental research offers a multidisciplinary forum on the progressing field of gerontology and geriatrics. The areas covered by the journal include: biogerontology, neurosciences, epidemiology, clinical gerontology and geriatric assessment, social, economical and behavioral gerontology. “Aging clinical and experimental research” appears bimonthly and publishes review articles, original papers and case reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信