射频消融与关节内间充质干细胞注射治疗膝骨关节炎:系统综述与网络荟萃分析。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Sukhee Park, Soyoon Park, Jae Ni Jang, Young-Soon Choi, Dong Seong Kim, Jeong Eun Sohn, Ji-Hoon Park
{"title":"射频消融与关节内间充质干细胞注射治疗膝骨关节炎:系统综述与网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Sukhee Park, Soyoon Park, Jae Ni Jang, Young-Soon Choi, Dong Seong Kim, Jeong Eun Sohn, Ji-Hoon Park","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-105526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent degenerative disease and causes disability, pain and imposes a substantial burden on patients. Conventional treatments for knee OA show limited effectiveness. Consequently, innovative treatments, such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and intra-articular mesenchymal stem cells (IA MSC), have gained attention for addressing these limitations.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We compared the efficacy of RFA and IA MSC for knee OA through a network meta-analysis (NMA).</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and handsearching. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RFA or IA MSC to conventional treatments for knee OA were included. The primary outcomes comprised the pain score and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach, and the treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 34 RCTs (n=2371). Our NMA revealed that RFA and IA MSC were significantly more effective than conventional treatments in managing pain at both 3 and 6 months with moderate certainty. Specifically, RFA demonstrated the highest SUCRA values, indicating its superior efficacy. For WOMAC scores, both RFA and MSC showed significant improvements at 3 months, with RFA maintaining its lead at 6 months, although MSC did not display significant superiority at this stage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This analysis suggests that RFA and MSC are resilient treatment options in knee OA. Despite some study heterogeneity, these treatments consistently outperformed conventional treatments, particularly in the short to mid-term, although with varying levels of certainty in their efficacy.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42023492299.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"747-758"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Radiofrequency ablation versus intra-articular mesenchymal stem cell injection for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sukhee Park, Soyoon Park, Jae Ni Jang, Young-Soon Choi, Dong Seong Kim, Jeong Eun Sohn, Ji-Hoon Park\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/rapm-2024-105526\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent degenerative disease and causes disability, pain and imposes a substantial burden on patients. Conventional treatments for knee OA show limited effectiveness. Consequently, innovative treatments, such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and intra-articular mesenchymal stem cells (IA MSC), have gained attention for addressing these limitations.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We compared the efficacy of RFA and IA MSC for knee OA through a network meta-analysis (NMA).</p><p><strong>Evidence review: </strong>A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and handsearching. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RFA or IA MSC to conventional treatments for knee OA were included. The primary outcomes comprised the pain score and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach, and the treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 34 RCTs (n=2371). Our NMA revealed that RFA and IA MSC were significantly more effective than conventional treatments in managing pain at both 3 and 6 months with moderate certainty. Specifically, RFA demonstrated the highest SUCRA values, indicating its superior efficacy. For WOMAC scores, both RFA and MSC showed significant improvements at 3 months, with RFA maintaining its lead at 6 months, although MSC did not display significant superiority at this stage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This analysis suggests that RFA and MSC are resilient treatment options in knee OA. Despite some study heterogeneity, these treatments consistently outperformed conventional treatments, particularly in the short to mid-term, although with varying levels of certainty in their efficacy.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD42023492299.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"747-758\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105526\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105526","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:膝关节骨性关节炎(OA)是一种常见的退行性疾病,会导致残疾和疼痛,给患者带来沉重负担。膝关节 OA 的传统治疗方法效果有限。因此,射频消融(RFA)和关节腔内间充质干细胞(IA MSC)等创新疗法因解决这些局限性而备受关注:我们通过网络荟萃分析(NMA)比较了RFA和IA间充质干细胞治疗膝关节OA的疗效:证据综述:使用PubMed、MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、Web of Science和手工检索进行文献检索。纳入的随机对照试验(RCT)比较了RFA或IA MSC与膝关节OA的传统治疗方法。主要结果包括疼痛评分和西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数(WOMAC)。临床结果的比较采用频数主义方法,治疗方法的排名采用累积排名曲线下表面值(SUCRA):我们纳入了 34 项 RCT(n=2371)。我们的NMA显示,在3个月和6个月的疼痛控制方面,RFA和IA MSC的疗效明显优于传统疗法,且具有中等确定性。具体而言,RFA 的 SUCRA 值最高,表明其疗效更优。在WOMAC评分方面,RFA和间充质干细胞疗法在3个月后均有显著改善,RFA在6个月后仍保持领先地位,但间充质干细胞疗法在此阶段并未显示出明显的优越性:这项分析表明,RFA 和间充质干细胞是治疗膝关节 OA 的有效方法。结论:这项分析表明,RFA和间充质干细胞是治疗膝关节OA的有效方法,尽管存在一些研究异质性,但这些疗法的疗效始终优于传统疗法,尤其是在中短期,只是疗效的确定性不同:CRD42023492299。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Radiofrequency ablation versus intra-articular mesenchymal stem cell injection for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent degenerative disease and causes disability, pain and imposes a substantial burden on patients. Conventional treatments for knee OA show limited effectiveness. Consequently, innovative treatments, such as radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and intra-articular mesenchymal stem cells (IA MSC), have gained attention for addressing these limitations.

Objective: We compared the efficacy of RFA and IA MSC for knee OA through a network meta-analysis (NMA).

Evidence review: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and handsearching. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing RFA or IA MSC to conventional treatments for knee OA were included. The primary outcomes comprised the pain score and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist approach, and the treatments were ranked using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values.

Findings: We included 34 RCTs (n=2371). Our NMA revealed that RFA and IA MSC were significantly more effective than conventional treatments in managing pain at both 3 and 6 months with moderate certainty. Specifically, RFA demonstrated the highest SUCRA values, indicating its superior efficacy. For WOMAC scores, both RFA and MSC showed significant improvements at 3 months, with RFA maintaining its lead at 6 months, although MSC did not display significant superiority at this stage.

Conclusions: This analysis suggests that RFA and MSC are resilient treatment options in knee OA. Despite some study heterogeneity, these treatments consistently outperformed conventional treatments, particularly in the short to mid-term, although with varying levels of certainty in their efficacy.

Prospero registration number: CRD42023492299.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信