Intra-articular injections of oxygen-ozone versus hyaluronic acid for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial.

IF 1.4 4区医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS

Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-07-15 DOI:10.1177/10538127251358732

Cristiano Sconza, Andrea Parente, Nicola Marotta, Giacomo Farì, Dalila Scaturro, Michele Vecchio, Giulia Letizia Mauro, Antonio Ammendolia, Alessio Baricich, Alessandro de Sire

{"title":"Intra-articular injections of oxygen-ozone versus hyaluronic acid for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Cristiano Sconza, Andrea Parente, Nicola Marotta, Giacomo Farì, Dalila Scaturro, Michele Vecchio, Giulia Letizia Mauro, Antonio Ammendolia, Alessio Baricich, Alessandro de Sire","doi":"10.1177/10538127251358732","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveThe purpose of this paper was to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular (AI) injections of Hyaluronic Acid (HA) versus Oxygen-Ozone (O2O3) in relieving pain and reducing disability in patients affected by knee osteoarthritis (KOA).MethodsPeople with painful KOA for at least three months were randomly allocated to receive three IA injections, once a week, of HA (Group A) vs O2O3 (Group B). They were evaluated at baseline (T0), at 1 (T1), 3 (T2), 6 (T3), and 12 months (T4) after the treatment, using as outcomes: WOMAC pain score, WOMAC LK 3.1, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and KOOS.ResultsOf the 122 patients assessed for eligibility, 112 participants were enrolled. Both groups A and B showed significant improvements in all outcomes measures from 1 month after the treatment (HA Group: 6.77 ± 2.53 vs 3.66 ± 2.57; O2O3 Group: 6.50 ± 2.24 vs 3.45 ± 2.30). In contrast, at T2 and T3, the HA-treated group showed significant pain and functional improvement compared to O2O3 group.ConclusionBoth HA and O2O3 might be considered safe and potential effective treatments for KOA, due to their anti-inflammatory effects. O2O3 seems to have a faster effect; rather, HA showed superior efficacy at 3 months onwards from the end of the treatment.","PeriodicalId":15129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"10538127251358732"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10538127251358732","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveThe purpose of this paper was to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular (AI) injections of Hyaluronic Acid (HA) versus Oxygen-Ozone (O₂O₃) in relieving pain and reducing disability in patients affected by knee osteoarthritis (KOA).MethodsPeople with painful KOA for at least three months were randomly allocated to receive three IA injections, once a week, of HA (Group A) vs O₂O₃ (Group B). They were evaluated at baseline (T0), at 1 (T1), 3 (T2), 6 (T3), and 12 months (T4) after the treatment, using as outcomes: WOMAC pain score, WOMAC LK 3.1, Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), and KOOS.ResultsOf the 122 patients assessed for eligibility, 112 participants were enrolled. Both groups A and B showed significant improvements in all outcomes measures from 1 month after the treatment (HA Group: 6.77 ± 2.53 vs 3.66 ± 2.57; O2O3 Group: 6.50 ± 2.24 vs 3.45 ± 2.30). In contrast, at T2 and T3, the HA-treated group showed significant pain and functional improvement compared to O₂O₃ group.ConclusionBoth HA and O₂O₃ might be considered safe and potential effective treatments for KOA, due to their anti-inflammatory effects. O₂O₃ seems to have a faster effect; rather, HA showed superior efficacy at 3 months onwards from the end of the treatment.

查看原文本刊更多论文

关节内注射氧臭氧与透明质酸治疗膝骨关节炎：一项随机对照试验。

目的评价关节内注射透明质酸（HA）与氧臭氧（O2O3）在缓解膝关节骨关节炎（KOA）患者疼痛和减少残疾方面的疗效。方法将疼痛性KOA患者随机分为HA组（a组）和O2O3组（B组），每周1次，注射3次IA。在治疗后的基线（T0）、1 （T1）、3 （T2）、6 （T3）和12个月（T4）对患者进行评估，以WOMAC疼痛评分、WOMAC LK 3.1、数字评定量表（NRS）和kos作为结局。结果在122例入选患者中，有112人入选。A组和B组在治疗后1个月的所有结局指标均有显著改善(HA组：6.77±2.53 vs 3.66±2.57；O2O3组：6.50±2.24 vs 3.45±2.30)。相比之下，在T2和T3时，与O2O3组相比，ha治疗组表现出明显的疼痛和功能改善。结论HA和O2O3均具有抗炎作用，是治疗KOA的安全有效的方法。O2O3似乎有更快的效果；相反，HA在治疗结束后3个月表现出优越的疗效。

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

Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

0.00%

发文量

194

审稿时长

6 months

期刊介绍： The Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation is a journal whose main focus is to present relevant information about the interdisciplinary approach to musculoskeletal rehabilitation for clinicians who treat patients with back and musculoskeletal pain complaints. It will provide readers with both 1) a general fund of knowledge on the assessment and management of specific problems and 2) new information considered to be state-of-the-art in the field. The intended audience is multidisciplinary as well as multi-specialty. In each issue clinicians can find information which they can use in their patient setting the very next day.