Shi Yin, Xiyan Zhao, Tian Li, Xingxuan Li, Zongjun Xie, Hao Tang, Yi Wang, Zhiwei Jia, Tianlin Wen, Yaohong Wu
{"title":"关节内富血小板血浆与透明质酸治疗髋关节骨关节炎:重叠系统评价的横断面分析。","authors":"Shi Yin, Xiyan Zhao, Tian Li, Xingxuan Li, Zongjun Xie, Hao Tang, Yi Wang, Zhiwei Jia, Tianlin Wen, Yaohong Wu","doi":"10.2147/TCRM.S487948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The debate over the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus hyaluronic acid (HA) in treating hip osteoarthritis (HOA) continues. This cross-sectional analysis of overlapping systematic reviews aims to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular PRP compared to HA for HOA treatment. The goal is to guide decision-makers in selecting the most reliable systematic reviews and to provide treatment recommendations based on the best available evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify systematic reviews comparing intra-articular PRP and HA for HOA treatment. The methodological quality of these reviews was assessed, and relevant data were extracted. The Jadad algorithm was applied to determine which reviews provided the most robust evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five systematic reviews were included, all categorized as Level-II evidence. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews scores ranged from 4 to 9, with a median score of 8. A high-quality systematic review was chosen according to the Jadad algorithm. It is suggested that there were no significant differences observed in the improvement of any short-term outcome scores (mean follow-up of 12.2 months for PRP, 11.9 months for HA), including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Visual Analog Scale for pain, and the Harris Hip Score, from pre-injection to post-injection between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is inconsistency among the conclusions of the overlapping systematic reviews comparing intra-articular PRP and HA for HOA treatment. The best evidence indicates that PRP and HA injections yield similar short-term clinical benefits for patients with HOA. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to provide more definitive conclusions.</p>","PeriodicalId":22977,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","volume":"20 ","pages":"919-927"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687311/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Hip Osteoarthritis: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Overlapping Systematic Reviews.\",\"authors\":\"Shi Yin, Xiyan Zhao, Tian Li, Xingxuan Li, Zongjun Xie, Hao Tang, Yi Wang, Zhiwei Jia, Tianlin Wen, Yaohong Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/TCRM.S487948\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The debate over the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus hyaluronic acid (HA) in treating hip osteoarthritis (HOA) continues. This cross-sectional analysis of overlapping systematic reviews aims to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular PRP compared to HA for HOA treatment. The goal is to guide decision-makers in selecting the most reliable systematic reviews and to provide treatment recommendations based on the best available evidence.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify systematic reviews comparing intra-articular PRP and HA for HOA treatment. The methodological quality of these reviews was assessed, and relevant data were extracted. The Jadad algorithm was applied to determine which reviews provided the most robust evidence.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five systematic reviews were included, all categorized as Level-II evidence. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews scores ranged from 4 to 9, with a median score of 8. A high-quality systematic review was chosen according to the Jadad algorithm. It is suggested that there were no significant differences observed in the improvement of any short-term outcome scores (mean follow-up of 12.2 months for PRP, 11.9 months for HA), including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Visual Analog Scale for pain, and the Harris Hip Score, from pre-injection to post-injection between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is inconsistency among the conclusions of the overlapping systematic reviews comparing intra-articular PRP and HA for HOA treatment. The best evidence indicates that PRP and HA injections yield similar short-term clinical benefits for patients with HOA. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to provide more definitive conclusions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management\",\"volume\":\"20 \",\"pages\":\"919-927\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687311/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S487948\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S487948","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:关于富血小板血浆(PRP)与透明质酸(HA)治疗髋关节骨关节炎(HOA)有效性的争论仍在继续。本交叉系统综述的横断面分析旨在评估关节内PRP与HA治疗HOA的疗效。目标是指导决策者选择最可靠的系统评价,并根据现有的最佳证据提供治疗建议。方法:我们对PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库进行了全面检索,以确定比较关节内PRP和HA治疗HOA的系统综述。对这些综述的方法学质量进行评估,并提取相关数据。应用Jadad算法来确定哪些评论提供了最有力的证据。结果:纳入5项系统评价,均为二级证据。多重系统评价评估得分范围从4到9,中位数为8。根据Jadad算法选择高质量的系统评价。提示两组在任何短期结局评分(PRP平均随访时间为12.2个月,HA平均随访时间为11.9个月),包括Western Ontario and McMaster university Osteoarthritis Index,疼痛视觉模拟量表和Harris髋关节评分,从注射前到注射后,均无显著差异。结论:重叠的系统评价比较关节内PRP和HA治疗HOA的结论不一致。最好的证据表明,PRP和HA注射对HOA患者产生相似的短期临床益处。进一步的研究需要更大的样本量和更长的随访期,以提供更明确的结论。
Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Hip Osteoarthritis: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of the Overlapping Systematic Reviews.
Purpose: The debate over the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus hyaluronic acid (HA) in treating hip osteoarthritis (HOA) continues. This cross-sectional analysis of overlapping systematic reviews aims to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular PRP compared to HA for HOA treatment. The goal is to guide decision-makers in selecting the most reliable systematic reviews and to provide treatment recommendations based on the best available evidence.
Methods: We conducted comprehensive searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify systematic reviews comparing intra-articular PRP and HA for HOA treatment. The methodological quality of these reviews was assessed, and relevant data were extracted. The Jadad algorithm was applied to determine which reviews provided the most robust evidence.
Results: Five systematic reviews were included, all categorized as Level-II evidence. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews scores ranged from 4 to 9, with a median score of 8. A high-quality systematic review was chosen according to the Jadad algorithm. It is suggested that there were no significant differences observed in the improvement of any short-term outcome scores (mean follow-up of 12.2 months for PRP, 11.9 months for HA), including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Visual Analog Scale for pain, and the Harris Hip Score, from pre-injection to post-injection between the groups.
Conclusion: There is inconsistency among the conclusions of the overlapping systematic reviews comparing intra-articular PRP and HA for HOA treatment. The best evidence indicates that PRP and HA injections yield similar short-term clinical benefits for patients with HOA. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to provide more definitive conclusions.
期刊介绍:
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management is an international, peer-reviewed journal of clinical therapeutics and risk management, focusing on concise rapid reporting of clinical studies in all therapeutic areas, outcomes, safety, and programs for the effective, safe, and sustained use of medicines, therapeutic and surgical interventions in all clinical areas.
The journal welcomes submissions covering original research, clinical and epidemiological studies, reviews, guidelines, expert opinion and commentary. The journal will consider case reports but only if they make a valuable and original contribution to the literature.
As of 18th March 2019, Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management will no longer consider meta-analyses for publication.
The journal does not accept study protocols, animal-based or cell line-based studies.