Dataset Information

Genicular Artery Embolization for the Treatment of Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis.

ABSTRACT: Genicular artery embolization (GAE) is a novel therapy to treat patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) by reducing synovial arterial hypervascularity. This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of GAE for the treatment of symptomatic knee OA.

Methods

A prospective, single-center, open-label U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved investigational device exemption study was conducted. Patients enrolled in the study were 40 to 80 years old, with moderate or severe knee OA (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2, 3, or 4), who previously had failure of conservative therapy. Baseline pain (visual analog scale [VAS]) and symptom scores (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC]) were assessed. After femoral arterial access was achieved, GAE of 1, 2, or 3 genicular arteries supplying the location of the subject's pain, as determined by digital subtraction angiography and cone-beam computed tomography, was performed using 100-μm particles. Adverse events and symptoms scores were assessed at 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after GAE.

Results

Over a 10-month period, 40 subjects were enrolled. The median age was 69 years (range, 49 to 80 years). The median body mass index was 29 kg/m² (range, 19 to 44 kg/m²). Knee OA severity was grade 2 in 18% of the patients, grade 3 in 43%, and grade 4 in 40%. Technical success was achieved in 100% of the subjects. Transient skin discoloration and transient mild knee pain after the procedure were common and expected. Treatment-related adverse events included a groin hematoma requiring overnight observation in 1 subject, self-resolving focal skin ulceration in 7 subjects, and an asymptomatic small bone infarct on magnetic resonance imaging at 3 months in 2 subjects. The WOMAC total and VAS pain scores decreased by 61% and 67% at 12 months from a median baseline of 52 (of 96) and 8 (of 10), respectively. Twenty-seven patients (68%) had a reduction of ≥50% in both WOMAC total and VAS pain scores.

Conclusions

This prospective trial demonstrates that GAE is effective and durable in reducing pain symptoms from moderate or severe knee OA that is refractory to other conservative therapy, with an acceptable safety profile.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

SUBMITTER: Padia SA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8542160 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundGenicular artery embolization (GAE) is an innovative technique that has been investigated as a supplementary treatment method for chronic pain secondary to knee osteoarthritis (OA).PurposeTo evaluate the current evidence on the effectiveness and safety of GAE for OA-related knee pain.Study designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 4.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in the PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Scopus databases to identify studies related to knee OA treated with GAE. Treatment agents were categorized as Embozene, imipenem/cilastatin, resorbable microspheres, and polyvinyl alcohol. The main outcomes were the mean difference (MD) in pre- and postembolization pain based on the visual analog scale (VAS) or the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores as well as changes in the need for pain medication. Random- and fixed-effects models were applied for data analysis.ResultsOf 379 initially inspected publications, 11 (N = 225 patients; 268 knees) were included in the final review. The quality of the studies was fair in 8 and poor in 3-categorized according to the National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool. Overall, 119, 72, 13, and 21 patients were treated with imipenem/cilastatin, Embozene, resorbable microspheres, and polyvinyl alcohol, respectively. Symptomatic improvement was reported in all studies. The pooled effect size, characterized by MD, showed a significant improvement in the VAS and WOMAC pain scores, with better functional status after GAE. Pre- versus postembolization MDs in VAS scores ranged from 32 within the first week to 58 after a 2-year follow-up (equivalent to 54% and 80% improvement, respectively). There was a similar trend in the overall WOMAC scores, with MDs ranging from 28.4 to 36.8 (about 58% and 85% improvement, respectively). GAE resulted in a decreased need for pain medication for knee OA, with a 27%, 65%, and 73% decline in the number of patients who used opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and intra-articular hyaluronic acid injection, respectively (P < .00001 for all). No significant difference between embolic agents was seen with regard to post-GAE pain reduction. No severe or life-threatening complications were reported.ConclusionOA treated by GAE using different embolic particles can be considered generally safe, with good efficacy and no reported serious complications.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Adenomyosis is a benign uterine disease characterized by invasion of endometrium into the myometrium resulting in heavy menstrual bleeding and pain (dysmenorrhea). Hysterectomy is established as the final treatment option when conservative treatment fails. Uterine artery embolization (UAE) in patients with symptomatic adenomyosis has demonstrated to reduce symptoms and improve quality of life. However, randomized controlled trials are lacking. OBJECTIVE:With this study, we aim to evaluate the impact of UAE on Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) in a randomized comparison to hysterectomy in patients with symptomatic adenomyosis. METHODS:This is a multicenter non-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing UAE and hysterectomy. Eligible patients are symptomatic premenopausal women without the desire to conceive and who have symptomatic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-confirmed pure adenomyosis or dominant adenomyosis accompanied by fibroids. After obtaining informed consent, patients will be randomly allocated to treatment in a 2:1 UAE versus hysterectomy ratio. The primary objective is HRQOL at 6 months following the assigned intervention. Secondary outcomes are technical results, pain management, clinical outcomes, HRQOL, and cost effectiveness during 2 years of follow-up. In addition, transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS) and MRI will be performed at regular intervals after UAE. RESULTS:Patient enrollment started November 2015. The follow-up period will be completed two years after inclusion of the last patient. At the time of submission of this article, data cleaning and analyses have not yet started. CONCLUSIONS:This trial will provide insight for caretakers and future patients about the effect of UAE compared to the gold standard hysterectomy in the treatment of symptomatic adenomyosis and is therefore expected to improve patients' wellbeing and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register NTR5615; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=5615 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6xZRyXeIF).

Project description:BackgroundExperimental and clinical evidence support a link between body representations and pain. This proof-of-concept study in people with painful knee osteoarthritis (OA) aimed to determine if: (i) visuotactile illusions that manipulate perceived knee size are analgesic; (ii) cumulative analgesic effects occur with sustained or repeated illusions.MethodsParticipants with knee OA underwent eight conditions (order randomised): stretch and shrink visuotactile (congruent) illusions and corresponding visual, tactile and incongruent control conditions. Knee pain intensity (0-100 numerical rating scale; 0 = no pain at all and 100 = worst pain imaginable) was assessed pre- and post-condition. Condition (visuotactile illusion vs control) × Time (pre-/post-condition) repeated measure ANOVAs evaluated the effect on pain. In each participant, the most beneficial illusion was sustained for 3 min and was repeated 10 times (each during two sessions); paired t-tests compared pain at time 0 and 180s (sustained) and between illusion 1 and illusion 10 (repeated).ResultsVisuotactile illusions decreased pain by an average of 7.8 points (95% CI [2.0-13.5]) which corresponds to a 25% reduction in pain, but the tactile only and visual only control conditions did not (Condition × Time interaction: p = 0.028). Visuotactile illusions did not differ from incongruent control conditions where the same visual manipulation occurred, but did differ when only the same tactile input was applied. Sustained illusions prolonged analgesia, but did not increase it. Repeated illusions increased the analgesic effect with an average pain decrease of 20 points (95% CI [6.9-33.1])-corresponding to a 40% pain reduction.DiscussionVisuotactile illusions are analgesic in people with knee OA. Our results suggest that visual input plays a critical role in pain relief, but that analgesia requires multisensory input. That visual and tactile input is needed for analgesia, supports multisensory modulation processes as a possible explanatory mechanism. Further research exploring the neural underpinnings of these visuotactile illusions is needed. For potential clinical applications, future research using a greater dosage in larger samples is warranted.