Moxibustion Treatment for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Li A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4998779 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Moxibustion Treatment for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Li Ang A Wei Zhi-Jian ZJ Liu Yi Y Li Bo B Guo Xing X Feng Shi-Qing SQ
Medicine 20160401 14
To determine whether the administration of moxibustion is an effective treatment for knee osteoarthritis (KOA).We conducted a search of relevant articles using Medline, EMBASE, the Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library published before October 2015. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities' Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC scale) and the short form 36 questionnaire (SF-36 scale) were assessed. Evidence grading was evaluated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common disorder in elderly. There is no known cure for KOA, and thus therapeutic strategies of alleviating symptoms are increasingly emphasized. Moxibustion has been widely used to treat KOA; however, results are inconclusive. The aim of our study is to critically reassess the effects of moxibustion on KOA.We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Chinese Biomedical Literature database (CBM) through 25 November 2015. Two independent reviewers selected studies and abstracted information, as well as assessed the risk of bias using Cochrane risk of bias tool. The random-effects meta-analyses were performed based on abstracted data.We initially captured 163 citations and added 4 records through checking review. After critical appraisal, 13 RCTs were included. Meta-analyses indicated that moxibustion is not statistically different from oral drug in improving the response rate (MD = 1.09; 95% CI = 1.00, 1.20; P = 0.05), alleviating pain and improving physical function. Our meta-analysis also found that moxibustion is superior to usual care and sham moxibustion in reducing WOMAC score (MD = 7.56; 95% CI = 4.11, 11.00; P = 0.00), pain and function, as well as increasing QoL. Moreover, most AEs caused by moxibustion can heal without medical care.We concluded that moxibustion treatment is equal to the oral drugs and intra-articular injections and may be an alternative in treating patients with KOA.
| S-EPMC4753935 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Stem cells are considered to be one of the greatest potential treatments to cure degenerative diseases. Stem cells injection for knee osteoarthritis (OA) is still a relatively new treatment and has not yet gained popularity. So, the effectiveness, safety and potential of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for knee OA treatment is worthy to be explored. Explore the effectiveness and safety of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. We collected clinical trials using MSCs as treatment for knee OA (before April 2019), including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), retrospective studies and cohort studies. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and the ClinicalTrials.gov with keywords (Mesenchymal stem cells [MSCs], Knee osteoarthritis, Effectiveness and Safety), and then performed a systematic review and cumulative metaanalysis of all RCTs and retrospective comparative studies. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of MSC in knee OA treatment, we applied visual analog scale score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteo-arthritis Index and adverse events. We included 15 RCTs, two retrospective studies and two cohort studies including a total of 584 knee OA patients in this study. We demonstrated that MSC treatment could significantly decrease visual analog scale in a 12-month follow-up study compared with controls (p < 0.001). MSC therapy also showed significant decreases in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores after the 6-month follow-up (p < 0.001). MSC therapy showed no difference compared with controls (p > 0.05) in adverse events. We suggest that MSC therapy could serve as an effective and safe therapy for clinical application in OA treatment.The translational potential of this articleThis study provided the best available evidence and a wider perspective to MSCs application in the management of knee OA. MSCs therapy will have great translational potential in the clinical treatment of various degenerative diseases once optimum formula and explicit target population are identified.
| S-EPMC7452318 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of viscosupplementation for pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.Data sourcesSearches were conducted of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases from inception to 11 September 2021. Unpublished trials were identified from the grey literature and trial registries.Eligibility criteria for study selectionRandomised trials comparing viscosupplementation with placebo or no intervention for knee osteoarthritis treatment.Main outcome measuresThe prespecified primary outcome was pain intensity. Secondary outcomes were function and serious adverse events. Pain and function were analysed as standardised mean differences (SMDs). The prespecified minimal clinically important between group difference was -0.37 SMD. Serious adverse events were analysed as relative risks.MethodsTwo reviewers independently extracted relevant data and assessed the risk of bias of trials using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The predefined main analysis was based only on large, placebo controlled trials with ≥100 participants per group. Summary results were obtained through a random effects meta-analysis model. Cumulative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis under a random effects model were also performed.Results169 trials provided data on 21 163 randomised participants. Evidence of small study effects and publication biases was observed for pain and function (Egger's tests with P<0.001 and asymmetric funnel plots). Twenty four large, placebo controlled trials (8997 randomised participants) included in the main analysis of pain indicated that viscosupplementation was associated with a small reduction in pain intensity compared with placebo (SMD -0.08, 95% confidence interval -0.15 to -0.02), with the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval excluding the minimal clinically important between group difference. This effect corresponds to a difference in pain scores of -2.0 mm (95% confidence interval -3.8 to -0.5 mm) on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. Trial sequential analysis for pain indicated that since 2009 there has been conclusive evidence of clinical equivalence between viscosupplementation and placebo. Similar conclusions were obtained for function. Based on 15 large, placebo controlled trials on 6462 randomised participants, viscosupplementation was associated with a statistically significant higher risk of serious adverse events than placebo (relative risk 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.98).ConclusionStrong conclusive evidence indicates that viscosupplementation leads to a small reduction in knee osteoarthritis pain compared with placebo, but the difference is less than the minimal clinically important between group difference. Strong conclusive evidence indicates that viscosupplementation is also associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events compared with placebo. The findings do not support broad use of viscosupplementation for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42021236894.
| S-EPMC9258606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveGenicular artery embolization (GAE) is a novel, minimally invasive procedure for treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). This meta-analysis investigated the safety and effectiveness of this procedure.DesignOutcomes of this systematic review with meta-analysis were technical success, knee pain visual analog scale (VAS; 0-100 scale), WOMAC Total Score (0-100 scale), retreatment rate, and adverse events. Continuous outcomes were calculated as the weighted mean difference (WMD) versus baseline. Minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) rates were estimated in Monte Carlo simulations. Rates of total knee replacement and repeat GAE were calculated using life-table methods.ResultsIn 10 groups (9 studies; 270 patients; 339 knees), GAE technical success was 99.7%. Over 12 months, the WMD ranged from -34 to -39 at each follow-up for VAS score and -28 to -34 for WOMAC Total score (all p < 0.001). At 12 months, 78% met the MCID for VAS score; 92% met the MCID for WOMAC Total score, and 78% met the SCB for WOMAC Total score. Higher baseline knee pain severity was associated with greater improvements in knee pain. Over 2 years, 5.2% of patients underwent total knee replacement and 8.3% received repeat GAE. Adverse events were minor, with transient skin discoloration as the most common (11.6%).ConclusionsLimited evidence suggests that GAE is a safe procedure that confers improvement in knee OA symptoms at established MCID thresholds. Patients with greater knee pain severity may be more responsive to GAE.
| S-EPMC9971280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, many systematic reviews (SRs) of moxibustion as a treatment of KOA have been published. However, the evidence of different SRs of moxibustion to treat KOA has not been comprehensively evaluated.AimThis overview aimed to evaluate the existing results and provide scientific evidence of the effectiveness and safety of moxibustion in the treatment of KOA.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, SinoMed, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and other databases until October 31, 2021. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2 (AMSTAR-2) was used to assess the methodological quality of SRs. Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was used to evaluate the reporting quality, and the risk of bias in SRs was evaluated by ROBIS Tool. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool to determine the strength of evidence and conducted a meta-analysis of the total effectiveness rate.ResultsFinally, 10 qualified SRs were included, including 57 randomized controlled trials and 5,149 participants. All SRs evaluated by AMASTAR-2 had more than one critical deficiency, so all SRs were rated as critically low. In the PRISMA checklist, the manuscript structures of the included SRs were relatively complete. Including four SRs with a low risk of bias and six with a high risk of bias using the ROBIS tool. In GRADE, two items (6.25%) were rated as high quality, three (9.37%) as medium quality, 17 (53.12%) as low quality and 10 (31.25%) as very low quality. A re-meta-analysis showed that moxibustion and moxibustion combined treatment improved the total effectiveness rate in knee osteoarthritis (risk ratio = 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.13-1.21, P < 0.001 and risk ratio = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04-1.23, P < 0.001), with low heterogeneity (I 2 = 36.3%, P = 0.020, and I 2 = 0.0%, P = 0.956). A total of eight SRs reported adverse events, and no serious adverse events occurred in the moxibustion group and control group.ConclusionMoxibustion seems to be effective in treating KOA. Four SRs reported 10 common discomfort symptoms caused by moxibustion, and these adverse events can spontaneously subside, even can be avoided, therefore, moxibustion for KOA appears to be safe. However, the reliability of the results is reduced by the high risk of bias of the original studies and the low methodological quality of SRs. Therefore, future studies should pay more attention to the quality of the original study and the evidence quality of the SRs to provide more powerful and scientific evidence of the effectiveness and safety of moxibustion treatment of KOA.
| S-EPMC8850775 | biostudies-literature
Project description:MethodsWe performed a comprehensive search on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and four Chinese databases for articles published prior to June 2020. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used acupotomy therapy as the major intervention in adults with knee OA, were published in either Chinese and English, included more than 20 subjects in each group, and included pain and function in the outcome measures. Knee OA was defined by the American College of Rheumatology or Chinese Orthopedic Association criteria in all studies. We extracted the visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score, the total effectiveness rate, the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) activities of daily living score, and Lysholm's score. We calculated the mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) for all relevant outcomes. Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models when appropriate.ResultsWe identified 1317 potentially relevant studies, thirty-two of which met the eligibility criteria and were conducted in China between 2007 and 2020. A total of 3021 knee OA patients (62.96% female, median age: 57 years, and median disease duration: 33 months) were included. The treatment duration ranged from 1 week to 5 weeks (median: 3 weeks). The typical acupotomy treatment involved releasing soft tissue adhesions and was performed once a week for 1-5 weeks until the pain was relieved. The control group treatments included acupuncture (8 studies), electroacupuncture (10 studies), sodium hyaluronate (8 studies), radiofrequency electrotherapy (1 study), and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs, 5 studies). The results from the meta-analysis showed that acupotomy led to superior improvements in the VAS pain score (MD = -1.11; 95% confidence interval (CI), -1.51 to -0.71; p < 0.00001) and WOMAC pain score (MD = -2.32; 95% CI, -2.94 to -1.69; p < 0.00001), a higher total effectiveness rate (RR = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.21; p < 0.00001), and superior improvements in the JOA score (MD = 6.39; 95% CI, 4.11-9.76; p < 0.00001) and Lysholm's score (MD = 12.75; 95% CI, 2.61-22.89; p = 0.01) for overall pain and function. No serious adverse events were reported.ConclusionChinese acupotomy therapy may relieve pain and improve function in patients with knee OA. Furthermore, rigorously designed and well-controlled RCTs are warranted.
| S-EPMC7648689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Hypertonic dextrose injections (prolotherapy) is an emerging treatment for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) but its efficacy is uncertain. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to synthesize clinical evidence on the effect of prolotherapy for knee OA. Fifteen electronic databases were searched from their inception to September 2015. The primary outcome of interest was score change on the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC). Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of moderate risk of bias and one quasi-randomized trial were included, with data from a total of 258 patients. In the meta-analysis of two eligible studies, prolotherapy is superior to exercise alone by a standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.81 (95% CI: 0.18 to 1.45, p = 0.012), 0.78 (95% CI: 0.25 to 1.30, p = 0.001) and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.04 to 1.20, p = 0.035) on the WOMAC composite scale; and WOMAC function and pain subscale scores respectively. Moderate heterogeneity exists in all cases. Overall, prolotherapy conferred a positive and significant beneficial effect in the treatment of knee OA. Adequately powered, longer-term trials with uniform end points are needed to better elucidate the efficacy of prolotherapy.
| S-EPMC4857084 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis of the knee affects up to 10% of the elderly population. The condition is frequently treated by intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effectiveness of this treatment.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, BIOSIS and the Cochrane Controlled Trial Register from inception until April 2004 using a combination of search terms for knee osteoarthritis and hyaluronic acid and a filter for randomized controlled trials. We extracted data on pain at rest, pain during or immediately after movement, joint function and adverse events.ResultsTwenty-two trials that reported usable quantitative information on any of the predefined end points were identified and included in the systematic review. Even though pain at rest may be improved by hyaluronic acid, the data available from these studies did not allow an appropriate assessment of this end point. Patients who received the intervention experienced a reduction in pain during movement: the mean difference on a 100-mm visual analogue scale was -3.8 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] -9.1 to 1.4 mm) after 2-6 weeks, -4.3 mm (95% CI -7.6 to -0.9 mm) after 10-14 weeks and -7.1 mm (95% CI -11.8 to -2.4 mm) after 22-30 weeks. However, this effect was not compatible with a clinically meaningful difference (expected to be about 15 mm on the visual analogue scale). Furthermore, the effect was exaggerated by trials not reporting an intention-to-treat analysis. No improvement in knee function was observed at any time point. Even so, the effect of hyaluronic acid on knee function was more favourable when allocation was not concealed. Adverse events occurred slightly more often among patients who received the intervention (relative risk 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.15). Only 4 trials explicitly reported allocation concealment, had blinded outcome assessment and presented intention-to-treat data.InterpretationAccording to the currently available evidence, intra-articular hyaluronic acid has not been proven clinically effective and may be associated with a greater risk of adverse events. Large trials with clinically relevant and uniform end points are necessary to clarify the benefit-risk ratio.
| S-EPMC556045 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis study tested the effectiveness of moxibustion on pain and function in chronic knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and evaluated safety.MethodsA multi-centre, non-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial compared moxibustion with usual care (UC) in KOA. 212 South Korean patients aged 40-70 were recruited from 2011-12, stratified by mild (Kellgren/Lawrence scale grades 0/1) and moderate-severe KOA (grades 2/3/4), and randomly allocated to moxibustion or UC for four weeks. Moxibustion involved burning mugwort devices over acupuncture and Ashi points in affected knee(s). UC was allowed. Korean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Questionnaire (K-WOMAC), Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36v2), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), physical performance test, pain numeric rating scale (NRS) and adverse events were evaluated at 5 and 13 weeks. K-WOMAC global score at 5 weeks was the primary outcome.Results102 patients (73 mild, 29 moderate-severe) were allocated to moxibustion, 110 (77 mild, 33 moderate-severe) to UC. K-WOMAC global score (moxibustion 25.42+/-SD 19.26, UC 33.60+/-17.91, p<0.01, effect size = 0.0477), NRS (moxibustion 44.77+/-22.73, UC 56.23+/-17.71, p<0.01, effect size = 0.0073) and timed-stand test (moxibustion 24.79+/-9.76, UC 25.24+/-8.84, p = 0.0486, effect size = 0.0021) were improved by moxibustion at 5 weeks. The primary outcome improved for mild but not moderate-severe KOA. At 13 weeks, moxibustion significantly improved the K-WOMAC global score and NRS. Moxibustion improved SF-36 physical component summary (p = 0.0299), bodily pain (p = 0.0003), physical functioning (p = 0.0025) and social functioning (p = 0.0418) at 5 weeks, with no difference in mental component summary at 5 and 13 weeks. BDI showed no difference (p = 0.34) at 5 weeks. After 1158 moxibustion treatments, 121 adverse events included first (n = 6) and second degree (n = 113) burns, pruritus and fatigue (n = 2).ConclusionsMoxibustion may improve pain, function and quality of life in KOA patients, but adverse events are common. Limitations included no sham control or blinding.Trial registrationClinical Research Information Service (CRIS) KCT0000130.
| S-EPMC4111481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives. To assess the effects of WBV exercise on patients with KOA. Methods. Eight databases including Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Web of Science, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database, CNKI, and Wanfang were searched up to November 2014. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of WBV for KOA were eligible. The outcomes were pain intensity, functional performances, self-reported status, adverse events, and muscle strength. A meta-analysis was conducted. Results. Five trials with 168 participants provided data for the meta-analysis. No significant difference was shown in pain intensity and self-reported status between WBV and other forms of exercise. Improvement in functional performance (evaluated by BBS; WMD, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.29 to 4.62; P = 0.0005) was greater in WBV group, but the other parameters of functional performance (including 6MWT and TGUG) revealed no statistically significant difference. Adverse events were only reported in one trial and no significant difference was discovered in muscle strength. The overall quality of evidence was very low. Conclusion. Currently there is only limited evidence that suggested that WBV is effective in the treatment of KOA. Large, well-designed RCTs with better designs are needed.
| S-EPMC4540999 | biostudies-literature