Viscossuplementation for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: A protocol for an umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common chronic disease with worldwide prevalence of 10% to 79%, with costs ranging from $560 to $635 billion for year in United States of America. The main guidelines recommend interventions with undesirable adverse events (AE) or highly dependent on the patient's persistence. Thus, intra-articular (IA) therapies appear to be attractive in patients with KOA, as well as a valid therapy by maximizing effects locally in the joint and limiting systemic AE. Presently, the main available IA therapies are corticosteroids and hyaluronic acid.As several meta-analyses about the efficacy of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) for treatment of KOA with discordant results were published, we decided to conduct an umbrella review to summarize this efficacy METHODS:: We will search MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Virtual Health Library (BVS) from inception to February 2020 for systematic reviews with meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials that investigate IAHA for therapy of KOA. Grey literature will be searched in Opengray platform, Research Gate, and Google Scholar. The reference lists of eligible studies will be screened. The search will be performed without language restriction.We will include any type of IAHA as experimental intervention and different types of oral or intra-articular placebo or medications as controls. The primary outcome will be measures of efficacy as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.A synthesis of the evidence will be conducted and data will be presented in tables.Two reviewers will independently appraise the quality of included meta-analyses using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR 2) tool and will classify the included systematic reviews into high, moderate, low, or critically low levels of confidence. RESULTS: The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required since this study data is based on published literature. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42019120269 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/#joinuppage).

Viscosupplementation for Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy on Pain and Disability, and the Occurrence of Adverse Events.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of viscosupplementation (hyaluronic acid [HA]) on the pain and disability caused by hip osteoarthritis, and to determine the occurrence of adverse events. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov database, and specific journals up to March 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HA with any other intra-articular injection. DATA EXTRACTION: Performed according to Cochrane/Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria. Two authors extracted data and assessed the risk of bias and quality of evidence. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eight RCTs were retrieved (n=807): 4 comparing HA to placebo; 3 to platelet-rich plasma (PRP); 3 to methylprednisolone; and 1 to mepivacaine. Some RCTs had 3 arms. There is very low evidence that HA is not superior to placebo for pain at 3 months (standardized mean difference [SMD]=-.06; 95% CI, -.38 to .25; P=.69), and high evidence that it is not superior in adverse events (risk ratio [RR]=1.21; 95% CI, .79-1.86; P=.38). There is low evidence that HA is not superior to PRP for pain at 1 month. There is very low evidence that HA is not superior to PRP for pain at 6 and 12 months (mean difference in visual analog scale [in cm]: -.05 [95% CI, -.81 to .71], 1.0 [95% CI, -1.5 to 3.50], and .81 [95% CI, -1.11 to 2.73], respectively). There is high evidence that HA is no different from methylprednisolone for pain at 1 month (SMD=.02; 95% CI, -.18 to .22; P=.85). There is low evidence that HA is no different from methylprednisolone for Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials-Osteoarthritis Research Society International Responders Index at 1 month (RR=.44; 95% CI, .10-1.95; P=.28). There is high evidence that HA is no different from methylprednisolone for adverse events (RR=1.21; 95% CI, .79-1.87; P=.38). CONCLUSIONS: We do not recommend viscosupplementation for hip osteoarthritis. Compared with placebo, data show scarce evidence of its efficacy up to 3 months, and suggest no difference at 6 months. However, future RCTs could present HA as an alternative to methylprednisolone for short-term symptom relief.

Viscosupplementation for knee osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: To provide an overview of the diagnosis and pathophysiology of osteoarthritis (OA), and to describe appropriate treatments for knee OA, with a focus on the efficacy and safety of viscosupplementation. Because nurse practitioners (NPs) can inject viscosupplements, a section on injection technique is included. DATA SOURCES: Manuscripts were identified using PubMed and EMBASE with a review of the reference lists from retrieved articles. CONCLUSIONS: Viscosupplements are safe and effective at improving function and alleviating knee pain from OA for up to 26 weeks. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: As the number of patients with OA is increasing, NPs need to be prepared to prescribe various treatment options to alleviate osteoarthritic knee pain, including viscosupplementation.