Comparable results of superior vs antero-inferior plating for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. A comparative study.

BACKGROUND: Clavicle fractures represent up to 10 % of all fractures, affecting mainly a young population. Open reduction and internal plate fixation provide good results, but evidence on the best plate positioning is still unclear. Aim of this retrospective study was to compare superior and antero-inferior plating positioning in the surgical treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 104 patients aged > 18 years, treated surgically with plate fixation (51 superior, 53 antero-inferior) for a midshaft clavicle fracture from January 2010 to April 2021 were included. At the time of the visit, mean follow-up time was 6.6 ± 2.6 years. Shoulder function was evaluated with the use of Constant-Murley Score (CMS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score. Return to sport, aesthetic satisfaction, operative time, radiological outcomes, rate of implant removal, and overall patient satisfaction were documented as well. RESULTS: Mean CMS was 94.1 ± 10.0 points in the superior plating group and 93.4 ± 11.6 points in the antero-inferior plating group. DASH score: 4.6 ± 11.0 superior, 5.1 ± 10.5 antero-inferior. Return to sport: 8.2 ± 2.9 superior, 8.2 ± 3.0 antero-inferior. Aesthetic satisfaction: 8.9 ± 1.6 superior, 8.8 ± 2.1 antero-inferior. Overall satisfaction: 9.1 ± 1.5 superior, 8.9 ± 1.7 antero-inferior. The comparison between groups showed no statistically significant differences (p = n.s.) for all outcome measures. Operative time: 101.6 ± 27.3 min superior, 113.0 ± 31.6 min antero-inferior (p = 0.05). Radiological follow-up documented one non-union and one mal-union in the antero-inferior plating group. Overall, 63 patients underwent plate removal: 58.8 % in the superior plating group and 62.3 % in the antero-inferior plating group (p = n.s.). Main reason for plate removal was pain/discomfort. CONCLUSIONS: Both superior and antero-inferior plating provided excellent clinical, functional, and radiological results for the treatment of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures, without significant differences between groups. The superior plating group showed a statistically shorter operative time. High rate of re-interventions with implant removal was documented in both groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Intra-articular corticosteroid injections provide a clinically relevant benefit compared to placebo only at short-term follow-up in patients with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To quantify the clinical relevance of intra-articular corticosteroid effects compared to placebo for the injective treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: The PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched on May 3, 2023. This study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published in English, with no time limitation regarding publication date, comparing intra-articular corticosteroids and placebo injections for knee OA. The effects were quantified at short- (≤6 weeks), mid- (>6 weeks and ≤3 months), and long-term (≥6 months) follow-ups. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the outcomes (visual analogue scale for pain - VAS: 1.4, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index - WOMAC: 9) was used to interpret the clinical improvement provided by intra-articular corticosteroid injections compared to placebo. The quality of each article was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and the GRADE guidelines. RESULTS: Among the 1030 articles retrieved, 11 RCTs (842 patients) were included. A comparison of the two groups revealed statistically significant differences in the improvement of VAS and WOMAC scores in terms of the mean difference (MD); this difference was in favour of corticosteroids at short-term (p < 0.001, MD = -1.6 and p < 0.001, MD = -9.9, respectively) and mid-term follow-ups (p = 0.001, mean MD = -1.3 and p = 0.005, MD = -4.9, respectively). No difference was observed at the long-term follow-up. The MDs between the improvements in the two groups reached the MCID values for the VAS and WOMAC only at the short-term follow-up. The RoB 2 tool and the GRADE evaluations showed the presence of risk of bias and limited quality of evidence. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that intra-articular corticosteroid injections offer clinically perceivable pain relief and functional improvement higher than the placebo effect only at short-term follow-up in patients affected by knee OA, with benefits losing clinical relevance already after 6 weeks. These results, together with the low number and the limited quality of the RCTs comparing this treatment with placebo, question the indication for the use of corticosteroid injections in clinical practice for the treatment of knee OA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

The 'placebo effect' in the conservative treatment of plantar fasciitis: a systematic review and meta-analyses.

Purpose: The study of the placebo effect is key to elucidate the 'real effect' of conservative interventions for plantar fasciitis. The aim of this meta-analysis was to quantify the impact of placebo in the different conservative treatments of plantar fasciitis. Methods: A systematic literature review was performed on double-blind placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) according to PRISMA guidelines on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. The meta-analysis primary outcome was the 0-10 pain variation after placebo treatments analyzed at 1 week, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool, while the overall quality of evidence was graded according to the GRADE guidelines. Results: The placebo effect for conservative treatments was studied in 42 double-blind RCTs on 1724 patients. The meta-analysis of VAS pain showed a statistically significant improvement after placebo administration of 2.13/10 points (P < 0.001), being highest at 12 months with 2.79/10 points (P < 0.001). The improvement of the placebo groups was higher in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy studies compared to the injection studies (2.59 vs 1.78; P = 0.05). Eight studies had a low risk of bias, 23 studies had 'some concerns,' and 4 studies had a high risk of bias. The GRADE evaluation showed an overall high quality of evidence. Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that the placebo effect represents an important component of all conservative approaches to treat plantar fasciitis. This effect is statistically and clinically significant, increases over time, and depends on the type of conservative treatment applied to address plantar fasciitis.

Impact of tuberosity treatment in reverse shoulder arthroplasty after proximal humeral fractures: A multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: To assess how tuberosity treatment affects the short-term clinical outcome of patients with complex proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). METHODS: This is a multicentre study on 90 patients affected by acute PHFs (Neer type-4/11C3.2 in 80% of patients, and a Neer type 3/11B3.2 in 20%) treated with RSA and followed at an average of 34 months. Patients were divided into two groups (reconstructed and non-reconstructed tuberosity) according to the surgical fixation of the tuberosities. Then, the "reconstructed tuberosity" was divided into "healed" and "non-healed" groups. All patients were clinically evaluated in terms of ROM and strength in elevation, as well as with 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS), Constant and Murley Score (CMS), DASH Score, and EQ-VAS. X-rays in anteroposterior and Neer views were performed. RESULTS: Based on the status of the tuberosities, 18.9% were non-reconstructed (17 patients) and 81.1% were reconstructed (73 patients): out of these, 11 were correctly healed, 42 healed with malposition, and 20 were reabsorbed. Instability was found in 2/73 patients in the reconstructed group, and in 4/17 patients in the non-reconstructed group. NRS (1.4 vs 0.5), DASH (23.1 vs 13.9), and EQ-VAS (78.1 vs 83.7) scores had better final values in the non-reconstructed group (p < 0.05). However, the non-correctly healed tuberosity group (excision + resorption + malposition/migration) showed worse strength, as well as clinical scores when compared to the correctly healed tuberosity group. CONCLUSION: RSA ensures satisfactory functional results for PHFs. Patients with a successfully reconstructed tuberosity have an overall better outcome. However, in this series most of the reconstructed cases presented tuberosity reabsorption, malposition, or migration, which led to lower results. Thus, tuberosity reconstruction must be carefully considered and tuberosity reabsorption or migration factors should be investigated, to optimize tuberosity reconstruction and provide to a higher number of patients a better outcome of RSA for the treatment of PHFs.

Recall Bias Affects Pain Assessment in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the recall bias of symptoms evaluation in knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: In this multicentric pilot study, 50 patients with knee OA used a mobile App (Ecological Momentary Assessment [EMA]) to collect pain and function on two 0 to 10 numerical rating scales (NRS) 2 times a day for 2 months. At the 1-month and at the 2-month follow-up visits, patients retrospectively evaluated the mean level of pain/function of the last month. Recall bias was computed as the difference between the mean level of pain/function reported using the App and the level reported with the retrospective assessment. The correlation between the recall bias and patients' characteristics, as well as pain/function trajectories, was analyzed. RESULTS: A statistically significant recall bias was documented with higher pain reported at 1-month with the retrospective assessment (P < 0.001). These results were confirmed also at the 2-month follow-up (P = 0.002). For function, no significant recall bias was documented. During the first and second months, 47 and 31 patients showed pain peaks, respectively. The number of pain peaks during the first month was correlated with the magnitude of the recall bias (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The recall bias influences the retrospective self-assessment of pain at the follow-up visits and the presence of pain peaks, a common event in the patients with OA, increases the magnitude of recall bias. The EMA performed with a mobile App is a useful tool to limit the influence of recall bias in the clinical and research setting evaluation of knee OA.

Tendinopathies and Pain Sensitisation: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regression.

The presence of pain sensitisation has been documented and reported as being a possible cause of treatment failure and pain chronicity in several musculoskeletal conditions, such as tendinopathies. The aim of the present study is to analyse existing evidence on pain sensitisation in tendinopathies comparing the local and distant pain thresholds of healthy and affected subjects with distinct analysis for different tendinopathies. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register, Scopus, and Web Of Science were systematically searched after registration on PROSPERO (CRD42020164124). Level I to level IV studies evaluating the presence of pain sensitisation in patients with symptomatic tendinopathies, documented through a validated method, were included. A meta-analysis was performed to compare local, contralateral, and distant pain thresholds between patients and healthy controls with sub-analyses for different tendinopathies. Meta-regressions were conducted to evaluate the influence of age, activity level, and duration of symptoms on results. Thirty-four studies out of 2868 were included. The overall meta-analysis of local pressure pain thresholds (PPT) documented an increased sensitivity in affected subjects (p < 0.001). The analyses on contralateral PPTs (p < 0.001) and distant PPTs (p = 0.009) documented increased sensitivity in the affected group. The results of the sub-analyses on different tendinopathies were conflicting, except for those on lateral epicondylalgia. Patients' activity level (p = 0.02) and age (p = 0.05) significantly influenced local PPT results. Tendinopathies are characterized by pain sensitisation, but, while features of both central and peripheral sensitisation can be constantly detected in lateral epicondylalgia, results on other tendinopathies were more conflicting. Patients' characteristics are possible confounders that should be taken into account when addressing pain sensitisation.

High Prevalence of Pain Sensitization in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis with Meta-Regression.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this meta-analysis was to study the evidence on pain sensitization in knee osteoarthritis (OA), providing a quantitative synthesis of its prevalence and impact. Factors associated with pain sensitization were also investigated. METHODS: Meta-analysis; PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Central Register (CENTRAL), and Web of Science were searched on February 2021. Level I to level IV studies evaluating the presence of pain sensitization in patients with symptomatic knee OA, documented through a validated method (questionnaires or quantitative sensory testing), were included. The primary outcome was the prevalence of pain sensitization. Factors influencing the prevalence were also evaluated, as well as differences in terms of pain thresholds between knee OA patients and healthy controls. RESULTS: Fifty-three articles including 7,117 patients were included. The meta-analysis of proportion documented a prevalence of pain sensitization of 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 16%-26%) with a significant heterogeneity of results (I2 = 89%, P < 0.001). The diagnostic tool used was the main factor influencing the documented prevalence of pain sensitization (P = 0.01). Knee OA patients presented higher pain sensitivity compared with healthy controls, both in terms of local pressure pain threshold (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.00, 95% CI = -1.67 to -0.32, P = 0.007) and distant pressure pain threshold (SMD = -0.54, 95% CI = -0.76 to -0.31, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Knee OA pain presents features that are consistent with a significant degree of pain sensitization. There is a high heterogeneity in the reported results, mainly based on the diagnostic tool used. The identification of the best methods to detect pain sensitization is warranted to correctly evaluate and manage symptoms of patients affected by knee OA. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019123347.

Outpatient total hip arthroplasty does not increase complications and readmissions: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus about the safety of outpatient total hip arthroplasty (THA). Therefore, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to quantitatively evaluate and compare outpatient and inpatient THA studies in terms of complication and readmission rates. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed on 26 July 2019 on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and on the grey literature databases. The papers thus collected were used for a meta-analysis comparing outpatient and inpatient THA in terms of complication and readmission rates. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were defined according to Cochrane guidelines. The PRISMA guidelines were used to determine which papers to include in this study. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 2317 articles; of these, 8 articles were used for the meta-analysis. A total of 66,971 patients were included, of which 1428 were THA outpatients. The overall complication rate for outpatient THAs was 3.0%, while inpatient THAs had an overall complication rate of 4.7%. The readmission rate was 1.4% in outpatient THAs and 3.0% in inpatient THAs. Only 6 studies reported the number of deaths, which ranged from 0% to 0.01%. The included studies present a moderate risk of bias and, according to GRADE guidelines, the level of evidence for complications and readmissions is very low. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis documented that outpatient THA is a feasible approach since it does not increase complications or readmissions with respect to inpatient THA, but the available studies present a moderate risk of bias and the quality of evidence of these findings is very low. Future high-level studies are needed to confirm results and indications for outpatient THA.

No differences in clinical outcome between CMI and Actifit meniscal scaffolds: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the results of two meniscal scaffolds, CMI and Actifit, for the treatment of partial meniscal lesions. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on the PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane databases in January 2021, including randomized controlled trails (RCTs) and prospective and retrospective observational studies on the clinical results of meniscal scaffolds. A meta-analysis of the clinical results was performed; the rate of failures was recorded, as well as radiological results. The quality of the included studies was assessed with a modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS). RESULTS: The search identified 37 studies (31 in the last 10 years): 2 RCTs, 5 comparative studies, 26 prospective and 4 retrospective series on a total of 1276 patients (472 CMI, 804 Actifit). The quality of evidence was generally low. An overall significant improvement in all clinical scores was documented for both scaffolds. The meta-analysis showed no differences between the two scaffolds in terms of patient reported outcome measures and activity level. The meta-analysis on the risk of failures documented a risk of failures of 7% in the CMI and of 9% in the Actifit group. CONCLUSIONS: There is a growing interest on the results of meniscal scaffolds, with most studies published recently. However, long-term data on the Actifit scaffold and high-level comparative studies are missing. Both CMI and Actifit offered good clinical results with a significant and comparable improvement in symptoms and function, and with a low number of failures over time. Accordingly, with the proper indication, their use may be encouraged in the clinical practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction versus Nonoperative Treatment: Better Function and Less Secondary Meniscectomies But No Difference in Knee Osteoarthritis-A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction on knee osteoarthritis (OA) is still unclear. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare surgical treatment versus nonoperative management of ACL tears to assess the impact of these approaches on knee OA development at a 5 and 10 years of follow-up. DESIGN: A meta-analysis was performed after a systematic literature search (May 2021) was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Both randomized and nonrandomized comparative studies with more than 5 years of follow-up were selected. Influence of the treatment was assessed in terms of knee OA development, subjective and objective clinical results, activity level, and risk of further surgeries. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: Twelve studies matched the inclusion criteria, for a total of 1,004 patients. Level of evidence was rated low to very low. No difference was documented in terms of knee OA development, Tegner score, subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and Lysholm scores. A significant difference favoring the surgical treatment in comparison with a nonsurgical approach was observed in terms of objective IKDC score (P = 0.03) and risk of secondary meniscectomy (P < 0.0001). The level of evidence was considered very low for subjective IKDC, low for knee OA development, objective IKDC, number of secondary meniscectomies, and Lysholm score, and moderate for post-op Tegner score. CONCLUSIONS: The meta-analysis did not support an advantage of ACL reconstruction in terms of OA prevention in comparison with a nonoperative treatment. Moreover, no differences were reported for subjective results and activity level at 5 and 10 years of follow-up. On the contrary, patients who underwent surgical treatment of their ACL tear presented important clinical findings in terms of better objective knee function and a lower rate of secondary meniscectomies when compared with conservatively managed patents.Protocol Registration: CRD420191156483 (PROSPERO).

Independent Versus Transtibial Drilling in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis With Meta-regression.

BACKGROUND: Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction can be performed with different techniques for independent and transtibial (TT) drilling of femoral tunnels, but there is still no consensus on which approach leads to the best outcome. PURPOSE: To assess whether the independent or TT drilling approach for ACL reconstruction leads to the best functional outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on July 1, 2020, using the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases. The influence of different femoral drilling techniques was analyzed through a meta-analysis in terms of patient-reported outcome measure scores, risk of complications, range of motion limitations, graft failure, and differential laxity. Subanalyses were performed to compare the different independent drilling techniques considered. Linear metaregression was performed to evaluate if the year of study publication influenced the results. The risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed following the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 22 randomized controlled trials including 1658 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Both International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score and Lysholm score were higher with the independent drilling approach (mean difference [MD], 1.24 [P = .02] and 0.55 [P = .005], respectively). No difference was documented in terms of the risk of reinjury, but independent drilling led to reduced KT-1000 arthrometer-assessed anterior tibial translation (MD, 0.23; P = .01) and a higher probability of a negative postoperative pivot-shift test finding (risk ratio, 1.13; P = .04). There were no significant differences in IKDC objective or Tegner scores. A P value of .07 was found for the association between the year of the study and IKDC objective scores. CONCLUSION: Independent femoral tunnel drilling provided better results than the TT approach, although the difference was not clinically significant. No difference was observed in the risk of reinjury. Increasingly better results were seen among surgical procedures performed in more recent years. Among the independent drilling options, the anteromedial portal technique seemed to provide the most favorable outcomes. The lack of clinically significant differences and the promising outcomes reported with new modified TT techniques suggest the importance of correct placement, rather than the tunnel drilling approach, to optimize the results of ACL reconstruction.

High Rate of Pain Sensitization in Musculoskeletal Shoulder Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pain sensitization, defined as an increased responsiveness of nociceptive neurons to normal input, is detected in several musculoskeletal diseases, but there are no systematic reviews or meta-analyses about pain sensitization in shoulder pain. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to document pain sensitization rate and its impact in patients with shoulder pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched on January 8, 2020. Level I-IV studies, evaluating pain sensitization in musculoskeletal shoulder disorders through validated methods (questionnaires/algometry) were included. The primary outcome was pain sensitization rate. Secondary outcomes were the pain sensitivity level measured as pressure pain threshold, temporal summation, conditioned pain modulation, and suprathreshold heat pain response. Associated demographic and psychosocial factors were evaluated. RESULTS: The rate of abnormal pressure pain threshold in patients with shoulder pain varied from 29% to 77%. Questionnaires detected pain sensitization in 11% to 24% of patients. This meta-analysis showed no difference in pressure pain threshold and central pain modulation but documented a significant difference in terms of suprathreshold heat pain response, indicating a hypersensitivity state in patients with shoulder pain versus asymptomatic controls. The only factor that was constantly found to correlate with higher sensitivity was a lower postoperative outcome. DISCUSSION: Pain sensitization has a high rate among patients with musculoskeletal shoulder pain, regardless of the specific etiology, and this may lead to worse clinical outcome after treatment of the primary disease. The best way to assess pain sensitization still needs to be identified as the assessment methods results in used high variability in the documented pain sensitization rate.

Comparison of the survivorship between arthroplasty and ORIF for basi-cervical femoral neck fractures in the overall population and in polymorbid patients.

BACKGROUND: Femoral neck fractures (FNFs) are associated with high mortality and can be treated with arthroplasty or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). For basi-cervical FNFs, there is no agreement on which procedure is better. Do arthroplasty and open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) have different rates of survival? Do age and comorbidities influence survivorship? HYPOTHESIS: Patients who underwent arthroplasty and patients who underwent ORIF have different rates of survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Survivorship curves, complications, and hospitalisation length were analysed in 154 patients who received hip arthroplasty, and in 72 patients who received ORIF. Age and ASA score were used to divide the patients into sub-groups and perform secondary analyses. RESULTS: At 4.9±2.4 years after surgery, 74 patients in the arthroplasty group (48%) and 33 in the ORIF group (45%) had died. The survivorship curves of the two groups showed a non-significant difference. The hospitalisation length was 13.5±8.9 days, with a non-significant difference between groups. There were 130 complications in total: 97 in the arthroplasty patients (19 patients had multiple complications, 52 had only one), 33 in the ORIF patients (4 patients had multiple complications, 29 had only one); the odds ratio was therefore 2.1 (p=0.02). Age, ASA score, Sernbo score, Charlson comorbidity index, and sex (male) were the best predictors of mortality. In the ASA 3-4 sub-group, the survivorship curves showed a lower mortality in the arthroplasty group (p=0.02). DISCUSSION: Arthroplasty and ORIF are both valid procedures for the treatment of basi-cervical FNFs, but a high mortality rate is associated with either procedures. There is no difference in terms of survivorship between arthroplasty and ORIF in the overall population, but the presence of comorbidities may favour arthroplasty, which should be considered when managing patients with basi-cervical FNFs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; retrospective, observational study.

PRP Injections for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effectiveness, in terms of patient-reported outcome measures, of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for knee osteoarthritis compared to placebo and other intraarticular treatments. DESIGN: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, as well as the gray literature were searched on January 17, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PRP injections with placebo or other injectable treatments, in any language, on humans, were included. Risk of bias was assessed following the Cochrane guidelines; quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE guidelines. RESULTS: Thirty-four RCTs, including 1403 knees in PRP groups and 1426 in control groups, were selected. WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) score favored PRP, with a statistically and clinically significant difference versus placebo at 12-month follow-up (P = 0.02) and versus HA (hyaluronic acid) at 6-month (P < 0.001) and 12-month (P < 0.001) follow-ups. A clinically significant difference favoring PRP versus steroids was documented for VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) pain (P < 0.001), KOOS (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) pain (P < 0.001), function in daily activities (P = 0.001), and quality of life (P < 0.001) at 6-month follow-up. However, superiority of PRP did not reach the minimal clinically important difference for all outcomes, and quality of evidence was low. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of platelet concentrates goes beyond its mere placebo effect, and PRP injections provide better results than other injectable options. This benefit increases over time, being not significant at earlier follow-ups but becoming clinically significant after 6 to 12 months. However, although substantial, the improvement remains partial and supported by low level of evidence. This finding urges further research to confirm benefits and identify the best formulation and indications for PRP injections in knee OA.

The Long-Lasting Effects of "Placebo Injections" in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To quantify the placebo effect of intraarticular injections for knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain, function, and objective outcomes. Factors influencing placebo effect were investigated. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Level of evidence, 2. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and grey literature databases were searched on January 8, 2020, using the string: (knee) AND (osteoarthritis OR OA) AND (injections OR intra-articular) AND (saline OR placebo). The following inclusion criteria were used: double-blind, randomized controlled trials on knee osteoarthritis, including a placebo arm on saline injections. The primary outcome was pain variation. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool, and quality of evidence was graded following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) guidelines. RESULTS: Out of 2,363 records, 50 articles on 4,076 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed significant improvements up to the 6-month follow-up: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)-pain -13.4 mean difference (MD) (95% confidence interval [CI]: -21.7/-5.1; P < 0.001), Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)-pain -3.3 MD (95% CI: -3.9/-2.7; P < 0.001). Other significant improvements were WOMAC-stiffness -1.1 MD (95% CI: -1.6/-0.6; P < 0.001), WOMAC-function -10.1 MD (95% CI: -12.2/-8.0; P < 0.001), and Evaluator Global Assessment -21.4 MD (95% CI: -29.2/-13.6; P < 0.001). The responder rate was 52% (95% CI: 40% to 63%). Improvements were greater than the "minimal clinically important difference" for all outcomes (except 6-month VAS-pain). The level of evidence was moderate for almost all outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The placebo effect of knee injections is significant, with functional improvements lasting even longer than those reported for pain perception. The high, long-lasting, and heterogeneous effects on the scales commonly used in clinical trials further highlight that the impact of placebo should not be overlooked in the research on and management of knee osteoarthritis.

Peri-operative steroids reduce pain, inflammatory response and hospitalisation length following knee arthroplasty without increased risk of acute complications: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: There is no consensus regarding the risks and benefits of peri-operative steroid supplementation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare TKA protocols implemented with or without steroids in terms of pain, inflammatory response, hospitalisation length, and complications. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on July 2019 in PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and the grey literature for a meta-analysis of RCTs comparing peri-operative analgesia protocols implemented with or without steroids. Sub-analyses considering the administration route, steroid type, and dosage were performed. The inverse variance method and the Mantel-Haenszel test were used for pooling continuous variables and for dichotomous variables, respectively. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were defined according to the Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty articles were included. Steroid supplementation provides significantly lower post-operative pain from day 1 to day 4 (p < 0.05), with less opioid consumption (p = 0.05), less nausea and vomiting (p < 0.05), and greater knee range of motion (p < 0.001), thus resulting in a shorter hospitalisation length (p = 0.01). Moreover, lower C-reactive protein (p < 0.05), and IL-6 (p < 0.05) levels, but a higher blood glucose level at day 1 (p = 0.004), were documented. No significant differences were documented in all the outcomes after 4 days of follow-up. These results were achieved without an increased incidence of complications. According to the results of the sub-analyses, the intravenous administration of 200 steroid equivalents of a long-acting steroid was associated with better results. CONCLUSION: Steroid supplementation of peri-operative drug protocols is effective in decreasing post-operative pain, opioid consumption, nausea and vomiting, range of motion limitation, and inflammatory markers without increasing short- and mid-term complications. Although these benefits last only the peri-operative period, steroid supplementation can reduce the length of hospitalisation after TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis, level II.

Evidence on ankle injections for osteochondral lesions and osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the evidence supporting safety and effectiveness of intra-articular injective treatments for ankle lesions ranging from osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT) to osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in March 2020. Safety was evaluated through the reported side effects and effectiveness through the scores used. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and the Downs and Black checklist. For each outcome, the quality of evidence was graded according to GRADE guidelines. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies (21 for OA, 3 for OLT) were included on hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), saline, methylprednisolone, botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A), mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and prolotherapy. No severe adverse events were reported. For OLT, a comparison was possible between HA and PRP showing no significant difference. For ankle OA, a significant difference favouring HA versus saline was documented at six months (p < 0.001). The GRADE level of evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis supports the safety of intra-articular treatment for ankle OA and OLT, while only a very low evidence supports the efficacy of HA in terms of better results versus placebo for the treatment of ankle OA, and other conclusions are hindered by the scarcity of the available literature. This urges further and stronger trials to specifically investigate potential and limitations of these different injective approaches for the treatment of OLT and ankle OA.

Outpatient total knee arthroplasty leads to a higher number of complications: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Careful pre- and post-operative management can allow surgeons to perform outpatient TKA, making this a more affordable procedure. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to compare outpatient and inpatient TKA. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was performed in July 2020 on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane library, and on the grey literature databases. The papers collected were used for a meta-analysis comparing outpatient and inpatient TKA in terms of complication and readmission rates. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were defined according to Cochrane guidelines. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 4107 articles; of these, 8 articles were used for the meta-analysis. A total of 212,632 patients were included, 6607 of whom were TKA outpatients. The overall complication rate for outpatient TKAs was 16.1%, while inpatient TKAs had an overall lower complication rate of 10.5% (p = 0.003). The readmission rate was 4.9% in outpatient TKAs and 5.9% in inpatient TKAs. Only 3 studies reported the number of deaths, which accounted for 0%. The included studies presented a moderate risk of bias, and according to GRADE guidelines, the level of evidence for complications and readmissions was very low. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis documented that outpatient TKA led to an increased number of complications although there were no differences in the number of readmissions. However, future high-level studies are needed to confirm results and indications for the outpatient approach, since the studies currently available have a moderate risk of bias and a very low quality of evidence.

Pain Trajectories in Knee Osteoarthritis-A Systematic Review and Best Evidence Synthesis on Pain Predictors.

Different profiles of pain progression have been reported in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA), but the determinants of this heterogeneity are still to be sought. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze all studies providing information about knee OA pain trajectories to delineate, according to patients' characteristics, an evidence-based evolution pattern of this disabling disease, which is key for a more personalized and effective management of knee OA. A literature search was performed on PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and grey literature databases. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used, and a best-evidence synthesis was performed to define the predictors of pain evolution. Seven articles on 7747 patients affected by knee OA (mainly early/moderate) were included. Daily knee OA pain trajectories were unstable in almost half of the patients. In the mid-term, knee OA had a steady pain trajectory in 85% of the patients, 8% experienced pain reduction, while 7% experienced pain worsening. Low education, comorbidities, and depression were patient-related predictors of severe/worsening knee OA pain. Conversely, age, alcohol, smoking, pain coping strategies, and medications were unrelated to pain evolution. Conflicting/no evidence was found for all joint-related factors, such as baseline radiographic severity.