[Efficacy of Ozone Infiltrations in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Vs Other Interventional Treatments: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials]. / Eficacia de las infiltraciones con ozono en el tratamiento de la osteoartritis de rodilla vs. otros tratamientos intervencionistas: revisión sistemática de ensayos clínicos.

INTRODUCTION: Intra-articular ozone infiltrations have been used as a therapeutic intervention in osteoarthritis of the knee with reports of favourable effects. However, this therapeutic procedure is still controversial due to the lack of scientific evidence to justify its use. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of intra-articular ozone infiltrations in patients with knee osteoarthritis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic search was performed in electronic databases such as Pubmed, Dialnet, Scielo, Medigraphic and other electronic sources from January 1990 to January 2018. We included controlled clinical trials that used intra-articular ozone infiltrations as a therapeutic intervention in patients with knee osteoarthritis. The variables analysed were the study design, risk of bias, clinical configuration, characteristics of the participants, characteristics of the interventions, results, length of follow-up and adverse events. RESULTS: Ten studies with a total of 400 patients treated with ozone vs 381 controls were included in the systematic review. Most studies had a high risk of bias. Intra-articular ozone infiltrations were more effective than placebo and were as effective as other interventional treatments in short-term follow-up. No adverse effects or serious adverse reactions were reported in the treated patients. CONCLUSION: Intra-articular ozone infiltration appears to be an effective therapeutic intervention in the short term. However studies with better methodological quality are needed to confirm its efficacy and to analyze long-term safety.

Detection and differentiation of Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar in clinical samples through PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis.

Amebiasis is one of the twenty major causes of disease in Mexico; however, the diagnosis is difficult due to limitations of conventional microscopy-based techniques. In this study, we analyzed stool samples using polymerase chain reaction-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (PCR-DGGE) to differentiate between Entamoeba histolytica (pathogenic) and E. dispar (non-pathogenic). The target for the PCR amplification was a small region (228 bp) of the adh112 gene selected to increase the sensitivity of the test. The study involved 62 stool samples that were collected from individuals with complaints of gastrointestinal discomfort. Of the 62 samples, 10 (16.1%) were positive for E. histolytica while 52 (83.9%) were negative. No sample was positive for E. dispar. These results were validated by nested PCR-RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphism) and suggest that PCR-DGGE is a promising tool to differentiate among Entamoeba infections, contributing to determine the specific treatment for patients infected with E. histolytica, and therefore, avoiding unnecessary treatment of patients infected with the non-pathogenic E. dispar.