RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: As the global population ages, the World Health Organization has found a yearly increase in the incidence of rheumatoid arthritis and osteoporosis. This trend poses a challenge to public health and healthcare and calls for the implementation of more preventive and treatment measures to address these health issues. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the causal relationship between rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and osteoporosis (OP) using the Mendelian randomization (MR) method. METHOD: OP diagnosis was based on the gold standard of bone mineral density (BMD). Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were identified from the genome-wide association research database formed by RA and BMD, with a parameter setting of P < 5×10-8, chain imbalance r2<0.01, and kb = 10,000. Five complementary MR methods, including inverse variance weighted (IVW), MR-Egger regression, weighted median, simple mode estimation based on mode, and weighted estimation based on mode, were used to evaluate the causal relationship between RA and OP/BMD using odds ratio (OR) values and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sensitivity analyses were performed using heterogeneity tests, horizontal pleiotropy, and individual rejection tests. RESULTS: A total of 78 instrumental variables were identified that were closely related to both RA and BMD in mixed populations, while 14 instrumental variables were identified in the European population and 38 instrumental variables were identified in the Asian population. Using IVW as the main analysis method, the MR analysis results of RA and BMD showed the following: mixed population OR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.93-1.00; European population OR = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.27-1.12; and Asian population OR = 0.95, 95%CI: 0.90-1.01. Sensitivity analyses showed that the MR results were robust. CONCLUSION: The study found insufficient evidence of a causal relationship between RA and OP/BMD, suggesting that RA may not have a direct effect on OP/BMD.
RESUMEN
Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Methods:The relevant literatures including the randomized control study of intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis published from January 2010 to December 2021 were searched. The bias risk of the included literatures was evaluated by Revman 5.3 software, and the data were processed and analyzed by Stata 16.0 software. The weighted mean difference ( WMD) was calculated for the difference ofefficacy indexes, and the difference was compared by t-test. The odds ratio ( OR) was calculated for the difference of safety index, and the difference was compared by t-test. Results:① A total of 10 literatures were included, all of which were in English. ② A total of 921 patients were included in the study, of which 479 patients were treated with intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and 442 patients were treated with intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid. ③ Comparing the VAS scores of platelet rich plasma injection and hyaluronic acid injection, the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of platelet rich plasma injection patients were significantly lower than those of hyaluronic acid injection patients after 6 and 12 months of injection treatment, and the difference was statistically significant [ WMD(95% CI)=-0.66(-1.25, -0.77), P=0.029; WMD(95% CI)= -0.90(-1.51, -0.29), P=0.004]. ④ The specific performance was that the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score of patients injected with platelet rich plasma after 6 and 12 months of injection treatment was significantly lower than that of patients injected with hyaluronic acid [ WMD(95% CI)=-0.76(-1.06, 0.45), P<0.001; WMD(95% CI)=-1.35(-2.05, -0.65), P<0.01]; After 3, 6 and 12 months of injection treatment, the WOMAC stiffness score of patients injected with platelet rich plasma was significantly lower than that of patients injected with hyaluronic acid [( WMD(95% CI)=-0.37(-0.66, -0.08), P=0.011; WMD(95% CI)=-0.30(-0.57, -0.04), P=0.023; WMD(95% CI)=-0.62(-0.92, -0.33), P<0.001]; After 3, 6 and 12 months of injection treatment, the WOMAC function score of patients injected with platelet rich plasma was significantly lower than that of patients injected with hyaluronic acid [ WMD(95% CI)=-1.90 (-2.53, -1.27), P<0.001; WMD(95% CI)=-5.77(-9.20, -2.34), P=0.001; WMD(95% CI)=-5.72(-8.62, -2.82), P<0.001]. ⑤There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two intra-articular injection methods [ OR(95% CI)=1.28(0.68, 2.42), P=0.440]. Conclusion:Compared with intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid, the short-term clinical efficacy of injection of platelet rich plasma is equivalent to that of injection of hyaluronic acid, but the long-term clinical efficacy is better, and the safety of the two methods is similiar.
RESUMEN
Objective:To analyze the efficacy and safety of curcumin in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Methods:The randomized controlled trials of curcumin in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis published from January 2011 to August 2021 were retrieved. The bias risk of the included literatures was evaluated by Revman 5.3 software, and the efficacy related indexes and the incidence of adverse events were analyzed by Stata 16.0 software. The weighted mean difference ( WMD) was calculated for the difference of efficacy indexes, the odds ratio ( OR) was calculated for the difference of safety indexes, the difference was compared by t test. Results:① A total of 9 relevant literatures were included, all of which were in English. ② A total of 724 patients were included in the study, of which 383 were treated with curcumin capsules and 341 were treated with placebo. ③ The visual analogue scale/score (VAS) of patients treated with oral curcumin at 3-4, 6 and 8 weeks were significantly lower than those of patients treated with oral placebo, the differences were statistically significant [weighted mean difference ( WMD)=-1.09, 95% CI (-1.44, -0.73), P<0.001; WMD=-1.52, 95% CI (-2.35, -0.69), P<0.001; WMD=-1.20, 95% CI(-1.71, -0.69), P<0.001]. ④ The western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) scores of patients treated with oral curcumin for 3-4 and 6-8 weeks were significantly lower than those of patients treated with oral placebo, and the differences were statistically significant [ WMD=-7.96, 95% CI(-14.89, -1.04), P=0.020; WMD=-15.34, 95% CI(-20.51, -10.18), P<0.001]. Specifically, the WOMAC pain and stiffness scores of patients treated with oral curcumin for 6-8 weeks were significantly lower than those of patients treated with oral placebo, and the differences were statistically significant [ WMD=-2.16, 95% CI(-3.69, -0.63), P=0.010; WMD=-1.00, 95% CI (-1.54, -0.46), P<0.001]. The WOMAC joint function scores of patients treated with oral curcumin for 3-4 and 6-8 weeks were significantly lower than those of patients treated with oral placebo, the difference was statistically significant [ WMD=-3.21, 95% CI(-4.51, -1.92), P<0.001; WMD=-7.07, 95% CI(-11.19, -2.94), P<0.001]. ⑤ There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between oral curcumin and placebo [ OR=1.19, 95% P(0.74, 1.90), P=0.478]. Conclusion:Compared with placebo, oral curcumin can significantly alleviate the pain, stiffness and joint function of patients with knee osteoarthritis, and its safety is similar to placebo.
