Intra-articular dexmedetomidine in knee arthroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Peng K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5840390 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Intra-articular dexmedetomidine in knee arthroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Peng Ke K Chen Wei-Rong WR Meng Xiao-Wen XW Zhang Juan J Ji Fu-Hai FH
Scientific reports 20180306 1
The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the analgesic effects of intra-articular dexmedetomidine (DEX) in arthroscopic knee surgery. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intra-articular DEX versus control for postoperative analgesia in knee arthroscopy. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was applied to determine the reliability of the evidence. Twelve RCTs including 594 patients met the eligibility criteria. DEX treatment sig ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a single-dose intra-articular morphine plus bupivacaine versus morphine alone in patients undergoing arthroscopic knee surgery.MethodsRandomized controlled trials comparing a combination of morphine and bupivacaine with morphine alone injected intra-articularly in the management of pain after knee arthrocopic surgery were retrieved (up to August 10, 2014) from MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library and Embase databases. The weighted mean difference (WMD), relative risk (RR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using RevMan statistical software.ResultsThirteen randomized controlled trials were included. Statistically significant differences were observed with regard to the VAS values during the immediate period (0-2h) (WMD -1.16; 95% CI -2.01 to -0.31; p = 0.007) and the time to first request for rescue analgesia (WMD = 2.05; 95% CI 0.19 to 3.92; p = 0.03). However, there was no significant difference in the VAS pain score during the early period (2-6h) (WMD -0.36; 95% CI -1.13 to 0.41; p = 0.35), the late period (6-48h) (WMD 0.11; 95% CI -0.40 to 0.63; p = 0.67), and the number of patients requiring supplementary analgesia (RR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.57 to 1.05; p = 0.10). In addition, systematic review showed that intra-articular morphine plus bupivacaine would not increase the incidence of adverse effects compared with morphine alone.ConclusionThe present study suggested that the administration of single-dose intra-articular morphine plus bupivacaine provided better pain relief during the immediate period (0-2h), and lengthened the time interval before the first request for analgesic rescue without increasing the short-term side effects when compared with morphine alone.Level of evidenceLevel I, meta-analysis of Level I studies.
| S-EPMC4608597 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIntra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic management in knee osteoarthritis (OA), particularly in the UK. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are a promising alternative, but no systematic reviews to date have compared them to the current standard of care, IA CS injections. We aim to investigate the effect of IA PRP injections versus IA corticosteroid injections for the symptomatic management of knee OA.MethodsAll published trials comparing IA PRP and CS injections for knee OA were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval in WOMAC/VAS score (or subscores), comparing IA PRP to CS injections across studies.ResultsIncluded were eight studies and 648 patients, 443 (68%) were female, mean age 59 years, with a mean BMI of 28.4. Overall, the studies were considered at low risk of bias. Compared with CS injections, PRP was significantly better in reducing OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, functionality) at 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention (P < 0.01). The greatest effect was observed at 6 and 9 months (- 0.78 (- 1.34 to - 0.23) standard mean deviations (SMD) and - 1.63 (- 2.14 to - 1.12) SMD respectively). At 6 months, this equates to an additional reduction of 9.51 in WOMAC or 0.97 on the VAS pain scales. At 6 months PRP allowed greater return to sporting activities than CS, measured by the KOOS subscale for sporting activity, of magnitude 9.7 (- 0.45 to 19.85) (P = 0.06). Triple injections of PRP, generally separated by a week, were superior to single injections over 12 months follow-up (P < 0.01).ConclusionsIA-PRP injections produce superior outcomes when compared with CS injections for symptomatic management of knee OA, including improved pain management, less joint stiffness and better participation in exercise/sporting activity at 12 months follow-up. Giving three IA-PRP, with injections separated by a week, appears more effective than 1 IA-PRP injection.Prospero trial registration numberCRD42020181928 .
| S-EPMC8208610 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionMost of the patients who received arthroscopic knee surgery will suffer moderate to severe pain, which can delay the rehabilitation process and increase the risk of postoperative complications. Therefore, seeking a safe and effective postoperative analgesia is necessary for promoting the application of arthroscopic surgery. This protocol aims to detail a planned systematic review and meta-analysis on the comparative efficacy and safety of single-dose intra-articular injection of analgesics for pain relief after knee arthroscopy.Method and analysisPubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library will be searched from inception to 1 June 2020 to retrieve randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the commonly used single-dose intra-articular analgesics (ie, morphine; bupivacaine (including levobupivacaine); ropivacaine and magnesium alone or in combination) with placebo or between each other for postoperative pain relief among patients who had received knee arthroscopy. The primary outcome is pain intensity at 2-hour and 24-hour postoperatively; the secondary outcomes include side effects (eg, knee effusion, nausea, vomiting and flushing), the number of patients requiring supplementary analgesia and the time to first analgesic request. The methodological quality of the included RCTs will be assessed based on the Cochrane risk of bias table. The Bayesian network meta-analysis will be conducted using WinBUGS V.1.4.3.Ethics and disseminationSince no private or confidential patient data will be contained in the reporting, approval from an ethics committee is not required. Our study raises no ethical issue, and the results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42019130876.
| S-EPMC7500288 | 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:BackgroundKnee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common disease in aged adults. Intra-articular (IA) injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy is an effective minimally invasive treatment for KOA. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with placebo or other conservative treatments.MethodsWe conducted a meta-analysis to identify relevant articles from online register databases such as PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score. The secondary outcome was the adverse event rate.ResultsA total of 895 articles were identified, of which 23 randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria were determined as eligible. Compared with placebo, PRP had a lower VAS score and higher IKDC subjective score at the 6th month after treatment and significantly less WOMAC score during the follow-up period. Compared with oral NSAIDs, PRP gained a lower WOMAC score at the 6th month after treatment. The VAS score decreased after treatment when reaching PRP and CS. As compared to the HA, the VAS score, WOMAC score, and IKDC subjective score all revealed better PRP results. There were no significant differences in adverse event rates comparing PRP versus placebo or HA. Different PRP applications did not show significant differences in VAS score in the 1st month and WOMAC score in the 3rd month after treatment.ConclusionTo compare with the conservative treatments mentioned above, PRP is more effective in relieving symptoms. There were no significant differences between triple PRP application and single PRP application in short-term curative effect.
| S-EPMC8294028 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPostoperative pain is a common, distressing symptom following arthroscopic knee surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the potential analgesic effect of dexmedetomidine after intrathecal versus intra-articular administration following arthroscopic knee surgery.MethodsNinety patients undergoing unilateral elective arthroscopic knee surgery were randomly assigned into three groups in a double-blind placebo controlled study. The intrathecal dexmedetomidine group (IT) received an intrathecal block with intrathecal dexmedetomidine, the intra-articular group (IA) received an intrathecal block and intra-articular dexmedetomidine, and the control group received an intrathecal block and intra-articular saline. The primary outcome of our study was postoperative pain as assessed by the visual analogue scale of pain (VAS). Secondary outcomes included the effect of dexmedetomidine on total postoperative analgesic use and time to the first analgesic request, hemodynamics, sedation, postoperative nausea and vomiting, patient satisfaction, and postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP) levels.ResultsDexmedetomidine administration decreased pain scores for 4 h in both the intrathecal and intra-articular groups, compared to only 2 h in the control patient group. Furthermore, there was a significant reduction in pain scores for 6 h in the intra-articular group. The time to the first postoperative analgesia request was longer in the intra-articular group compared to the intrathecal and control groups. The total meperidine requirement was significantly lower in the intra-articular and intrathecal groups than in the control group.ConclusionsBoth intrathecal and intra-articular dexmedetomidine enhanced postoperative analgesia after arthroscopic knee surgery. Less total meperidine was required with intra-articular administration to extend postoperative analgesia to 6 h with hemodynamic stability.
| S-EPMC5392657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade is the most commonly used measure of radiographic disease severity in knee osteoarthritis (OA). Studies suggest that intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) should only be considered in cases of early stage knee OA. The purpose of this review was to determine if trials administering IA-HA in early-moderate knee OA patients demonstrated greater pain relief than studies that also included patients with end-stage disease.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search of the literature to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing IA-HA with saline injections and that diagnosed disease severity using the K-L grade criteria. The primary outcome was mean change in pain from baseline at 4-13 weeks and 22-27 weeks. Safety was evaluated on the total number of participants experiencing a treatment-related adverse event (AE).ResultsTwenty RCTs were included. In the early-moderate OA subgroup, the mean change in pain scores was statistically significant favoring IA-HA from baseline to 4-13 weeks [SMD?=?- 0.30, 95% CI - 0.44 to - 0.15, p?<?0.0001] and within 22-27 weeks [SMD?=?- 0.27, 95% CI - 0.39 to - 0.16, p?<?0.00001]. No significant differences were observed in the late OA subgroup. IA-HA was associated with a significantly greater risk of treatment-related AEs relative to saline in the late OA subgroup [RR?=?1.76, 95% CI 1.16-2.67, p?=?0.008].ConclusionIA-HA provides significant pain relief compared to saline for patients with early-moderate knee OA, compared to cohorts including patients with end-stage OA (KL grade 4), with no increase in the risk of treatment-related AEs, up to 6 months. Patients with end-stage disease had lower levels of pain relief and may be diluting study results if included in the treatment cohort.FundingFerring Pharmaceuticals.
| S-EPMC6318255 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intra-articular (IA) hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are increasingly being prescribed for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, failure of the medical treatment may result in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We wondered if IA HA or PRP injections (intervention) may delay the time to TKA (outcome) among KOA patients (population), compared to KOA patients not receiving these injections (comparator). For this systematic literature review (SLR) and meta-analysis, we selected observational studies with at least one group of patients receiving IA HA or PRP and with TKA data available. The main outcome was time from the diagnosis of KOA to TKA. We included 25 articles in the SLR (2,824,401 patients) and four in the meta-analysis. The mean strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) score was 63%. For patients receiving versus not receiving HA injections, the delay between a declared diagnosis of KOA to TKA was increased by 9.8 months (95% CI (8.2–11.4)). As compared with standard of care, the effect size of HA injections for this outcome was 0.57 (95% CI (0.36–0.76)). Only one study described a median time from PRP injections to TKA of 4.1 years (range 0.3–14.7). IA HA injections were associated with increased time to TKA. Causality cannot be concluded because of missing confounder factors as comorbidities. Data were insufficient to conclude any effect of PRP injections on TKA delay.
| S-EPMC9322631 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effects and safety of intra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells on patients with knee osteoarthritis by a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were retrieved. An assessment of the risk of bias was done through the Cochrane Collaborative Bias Risk Tool, publication bias was assessed by plotting funnel plots and Egger tests. Pain and functional improvements in patients with knee osteoarthritis were determined by changes in VAS scores and WOMAC scores at baseline and follow-up endpoints. For the evaluation of MRI, the WORMS score and changes in cartilage volume were used. In addition, the number of adverse events in the intervention group and the control group were counted to explore the safety.ResultsA total of 10 randomized controlled trials involving 335 patients were included. In the pooled analysis, compared with the control groups, the VAS scores of MSC groups decreased significantly (MD,-19.24; 95% CI: -26.31 to -12.18, P < .00001. All of the WOMAC scores also improved significantly: the total scores (SMD, - 0.66; 95% CI: - 1.09 to -0.23, P = .003), pain scores (SMD, - 0.46; 95% CI: - 0.75 to -0.17, P = .002), stiffness scores (SMD, -0.32; 95% CI: -0.64 to 0.00 P = 0.05), and functional scores (SMD, -0.36; 95% CI: -0.69 to -0.04, P = .03). Two studies with non-double-blind designs were the main source of heterogeneity. In terms of cartilage repair, there was no significant difference in the WORMS score, but there was a significant increase in cartilage volume in the MSC group (SMD, 0.69; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.13, P = .002). The proportion of patients with adverse events in the MSCs treatment group was significantly higher than that in the control group (OR, 3.20; 95% CI: 1.50 to 6.83, P = .003).ConclusionsIntra-articular injection of mesenchymal stem cells is effective and safety to relieve pain and improve motor function of patients with knee osteoarthritis in a short term which is different to conclusions of previous study.
| S-EPMC7717742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:The aim of this current review was to confirm the efficacy of intra-articular steroid therapy (IAST) for patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA) and discuss the duration and influential factors of IAST. Methods:Online databases (Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science) were searched from inception to May 2019. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and noncontrolled trials assessing the efficacy of hip IAST on pain were included. Common demographics data were extracted using a standardized form. Quality was assessed on the basis of Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence. Results:12 trials met the inclusion criteria. According to data from individual trials, IAST had significant efficacy on hip OA in both immediate and delay pain reduction, which persisted up to 12 weeks after IAST. The influences of the baseline severity of hip OA or synovitis and injection dose or volume on the clinical outcome of IAST were still controversial. The IAST appeared to be well tolerant by most of the participants. Conclusion:IAST was proved to be an efficacious therapy in both immediate and delay pain reduction for hip OA patients within 12 weeks. The longer follow-up data of efficacy and safety and potentially influential factors are still unclear and needed further confirmation.
| S-EPMC7060863 | biostudies-literature