Intra-articular Knee Injections Research Articles

A Comparative Study of Intra-Articular Knee Injection of Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma Compared to Corticosteroids and Local Anesthetics in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

Background: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common reason for orthopedic secondary care referral. And it is one of the main causes of disability in adults worldwide. It is estimated to affect between 10 to 25% of patients over the age of 60. Intra-articular corticosteroid injection (IA CS) and physical therapy were the two choices in an attempt to provide symptomatic management or deferred surgery. There is a growing trend is intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (IA PRP) injection to reduce pain and improve function in OA patients. PRP is divided into two types: leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) and leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP). It was shown that LR-PRP increases pro-inflammatory factors and also decreases anti-catabolic mediators, and LP-PRP has the opposite aspect.
 Methods: In our research 40 patients were divided into two equal groups, IA corticosteroid and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) 40 cc of blood from the basilic vein of the upper limb is used with two step centrifugation. The final samples were 4 millilitres product injected intra-articular. group two (corticosteroid (CS)) received an intra-articular injection of triamcinolone acetate (Kenalog) 40 mg/ml along with 4 ml of lidocaine 0.02% (Abureyhan Co.) for a total of 5 ml. The needle used is a 22-gauge pencil-point Quincke needle (Dr. Japan Co, Ltd), which is performed with the Sonosite Edge II ultrasound guide and in an anterior-lateral manner in the knee joint. Pain was assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS range 0-10 points) before, one week, one month, two month and 3 months after the operation. The WOMAC questionnaire was also filled before injection and three months following injection and other variables were examined.
 Results: There were no significant differences between the groups across all the baseline parameters including age, sex, body mass index and comorbidities including high blood pressure, diabetes and smoking. Both injection groups were effective in reducing patients' pain from one week to three months after injection. The level of pain in the first week after injection was significantly lower in the corticosteroid group than in the PRP group. In the first month and the third month after the injection, the pain reduction according to mean scores of VAS was the same in both groups.
 Conclusion: In short, one injection of PRP can reduce the pain of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee as much as corticosteroids during a three-month treatment process. Considering the possible side effects of corticosteroids, this alternative treatment can be considered with further investigation.

Efficacy of Intra-Articular Ozone Versus Hyaluronic Acid In Patients of Knee Osteoarthritis

Objective: To determine the analgesic efficacy of ozone gas versus hyaluronic acid solution in knee osteoarthritis patients. Study Design: Quasi-experimental study. Place and duration of study: Department of Pain Medicine, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Jun to Dec 2020. Methodology: Seventy patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included in this study and were randomly assigned to two equal groups to undergo intra-articular knee injection using either Hyaluronic Acid (Group-H) or Ozone (Group-O). Improvement in the numeric rating scale (NRS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scale were recorded 1, 3 and 6 months after the procedure. Results: In both groups, the pain score (Group-H Pre-procedure NRS =7.66±0.87 vs. Post-Procedure 6 month NRS = 4.74±0.70, Group-O Pre-procedure NRS = 7.86±0.88 vs. Post-Procedure 6 month NRS = 4.46±0.92) and WOMAC (Group-H Pre-procedure =77.60±7.93 vs. Post-Procedure 6 month =40.31±6.81, Group-O Pre-procedure=75.54±9.40 vs. Post-Procedure 6 month =38.37±8.98) score improved. However, the NRS pain score (p-value = 0.21) and patient WOMAC score (p-value = 0.31) were not significantly different between groups. Conclusion: Neither Hyaluronic Acid nor Ozone appears superior in decreasing pain scores or physical limitations, particularly for knee osteoarthritis.

No Difference Between One-shot Co-injection of Corticosteroids and Hyaluronic Acid in a Three-injection Regimen for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Double-blind Trial [RETRACTED

Although many guidelines now recommend against hyaluronic acid (HA) injections alone for the nonoperative management of knee osteoarthritis (OA), prior studies have disagreed about whether adding an intra-articular corticosteroid to HA results in sufficient benefit to justify the potential dose-dependent and time-dependent chondrotoxicity of corticosteroids. (1) Do patients with knee OA treated with low-dose intra-articular corticosteroids and HA administered under ultrasound guidance have more favorable patient-reported knee OA-related outcomes from 1 to 26 weeks after treatment than those treated with ultrasound-guided HA injections alone? (2) Do patients treated with a corticosteroid co-injection exhibit more favorable physical functional performance than those treated with injections of HA alone? We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial at a small medical center in urban Taipei, Taiwan. We considered those who fulfilled the clinical and radiographic criteria for knee OA, defined by the American College of Rheumatology as a Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3, as potentially eligible. We excluded those who had a previous knee fracture or surgery and those who had received intra-articular knee injections of HA or corticosteroids within 6 months of the trial. Based on these criteria, 78 patients were eligible, and 76 agreed to be randomized to the co-injection or HA-only groups through block randomization. The groups had 38 patients each; all participants who completed the study follow-up were analyzed in the groups to which they were randomized and treated. There was no crossover. The patients in the co-injection group were treated with a one-shot co-injection of HA with corticosteroids (Hyruan Plus: molecular weight, 3000 kDa, 10 mg/mL HA, 2 mL with triamcinolone acetonide 10 mg/dL, 1 mL) in the first week followed by two injections of HA (10 mg/mL, 2 mL) at a 1-week interval. The patients in the HA-only group received three HA injections (Hyruan Plus: molecular weight, 3000 kDa, 10 mg/mL HA, 2 mL) administered at a 1-week interval. A senior physiatrist performed ultrasound-guided knee injections using the lateral suprapatellar approach. The physiatrist, participants, and outcome assessor were all blinded to the injection contents. No differences were observed between the two groups regarding primary demographic data, baseline WOMAC and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) scores, and physical functional performance. Three participants experienced localized swelling after the injections, and all symptoms improved after a few days of localized ice pack application. A total of 3.9% of patients (three of 76) had adverse events (mainly localized swelling of the knee, with or without accompanying pain), with no between-group differences in the frequency of adverse events. No severe side effects were reported during or after the injections. The patient-reported outcomes were the WOMAC and KOOS scores. The objective outcome was physical function performance (speed for 10-meter regular and fastest walking, and time for stair-climbing and chair-rising). The primary outcome timepoint was 6 months postinjection. A sample size of 34 participants was required in each group, based on a difference in WOMAC scores of 58 points, a significance level of 0.05, and a power of 0.8. We found no difference in improvement from baseline between the two groups regarding patient-reported outcomes at any follow-up timepoint, from 1 week after injection to 6 months. At 6 months post-treatment, compared with baseline, there were no between-group differences in improvement between the co-injection group and the HA-only group in terms of WOMAC pain scores (mean difference 1 [95% CI -2 to 3]; p = 0.62), stiffness (mean difference -11 [95% CI -13 to -9]; p < 0.001), and physical function (mean difference -4 [95% CI -5 to -3]; p < 0.001) and KOOS scores for pain, other symptoms, activities of daily living, sports and recreation, and quality of life. Except for chair-rising time at 6 months, which may have represented spurious significance because of the number of comparisons, compared with baseline, we found no differences in improvement between the two groups regarding the regular and fastest walking speed and stair ascent and descent time. We found that a single co-injection of corticosteroids along with HA did not confer any additional benefit regarding patient-reported outcomes or physical function compared with a three-injection regimen of HA. Therefore, we do not recommend a one-shot co-injection of corticosteroids alongside the three-injection regimen of HA for patients with knee OA, and because prior research found HA to be ineffective, HA should not be used with or without corticosteroids for patients with knee OA. Level I, therapeutic study.

Efficacy of Intraarticular Knee Injection of PRP (Platelet Rich Plasma) vs Steroid (Triamcinolone Acetate) for the Treatment of Primary Knee Osteoarthritis Grade I &amp; II

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of PRP (Platelet Rich Plasma), and to compare with Triamcinolone 40mg (Steroid) on functional activity, stiffness and pain in Grade I &amp; II Knee OA. Method: A comparative cross sectional study was conducted at outdoor departments of Advanced Pain Relief Center, Lifeline Hospital Lahore (Pakistan) from January 2022 to December 2022. The present study included a total of 235 participants, out of whom 190 individuals were deemed eligible for inclusion based on predetermined criteria. The remaining 45 participants were excluded from the study due to non-adherence to eligibility criteria and lack of approval from institutional ethical committee. Out of a total of 190 subjects enrolled in the study, 64 (33%) were characterized as male while 126 (67%) were classified as female. The participants' mean age was 53.5 ± 6.4 years. Alternative patients were treated with intra-articular injection of either triamcinolone 40mg or PRP. Patients randomized in Steroid group (n=95) were gives intraarticular 40mg Triamcinolone acetate (1ml) along with 2ml of Local anaesthetic Lignocaine 1%, whereas patients randomized in PRP group (n=95) were injected 5ml PRP. “The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index” (WOMAC) Scale was used for functional disability and pain before and after the therapy for the targeted knee joint at the baseline 1 week, 5 weeks, 8 weeks and 20 weeks follow-ups. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were also recorded for pain. Data analysis was done by using SPSS version 20. Results: There wasn't any serious adverse effect observed during the study and follow-ups. 25 WOMAC functional activity scale showed statistically significant improvement with Intraarticular knee injection of PRP compared to steroids(40.64±1.87vs.27.17±6.01)(p=0.000). WOMACpainscaleresultsalsodemonstrated that intraarticular knee injection of PRP was more effective in reducing knee pain than steroids (p = 0.000) at 20 weeks follow-up. Conclusion: On the basis of the results of our study, we concluded that platelet rich plasma is more effective than intra-articular steroids in terms of improvement in functional activity and reduction of pain in patients with Grade I &amp; II knee osteoarthritis. Both PRPand steroid intraarticular injections are safe.

Current Trends in Intra-articular Knee Injections Among Family Physicians.

Family physicians use a variety of medications and techniques to perform intra-articular knee injections in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Currently, there is no consensus in the literature among the various specialties that perform joint injections for osteoarthritis of the knee regarding frequency of injections and injectate. The purpose of this study is to examine (1) the types of intra-articular knee injections used by family physicians for arthritis, (2) the most commonly used injectate, (3) the procedural approach, and (4) the maximum number of times the majority of family physicians would inject a single knee. Our study provides a descriptive epidemiology of current knee injection practices in the United States among family physicians. Surveys were emailed to family physicians. We evaluated and analyzed responses. We received 360 responses, of which 317 family physicians indicated using intra-articular knee injections for pain. The majority (99%) used intra-articular injection steroid therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. About half (57.4%) of the family physicians would inject the same knee between one to five times. This study provides an overview of current practices in intra-articular injections among family physicians in the United States and provides important information regarding injection practices. Given the lack of consensus and that current practice contradicts evidence in the literature, consideration should be given among all specialties who perform joint injections to create evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to optimize patient care.

Is the Combination of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid the Best Injective Treatment for Grade II-III Knee Osteoarthritis? A Prospective Study.

Knee osteoarthritis is a common disease with increasing incidence and prevalence in western countries. It can cause severe pain and functional limitations, thereby representing a threat for patients' quality of life and a burden for national health systems. Intra-articular injections with hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have been used for decades in order to reduce the symptoms caused by osteoarthritis. In recent years, a combination of HA and PRP has been introduced in clinical practice with the aim to minimize the clinical presentation of osteoarthritis and potentially delay articular degeneration. Sixty cases with grade II-III knee osteoarthritis according to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification were included in a prospective study, focused on the evaluation of clinical and functional outcomes after intra-articular knee injections. Cases were randomly divided into three groups. Twenty cases (Group A) were injected with HA, 20 (Group B) had PRP, and the remaining 20 (Group C) received a combination of HA and PRP. Basal WOMAC score and VAS score were recorded before the treatment and repeated within 3 and 6 months after the treatment. At 6-month follow-up, Group C (PRP + HA) was the one with the lowest WOMAC and VAS mean values. It was also the only group that reported a reduction in the two values both in the first three months and in the following three months. No major complication was recorded. The combination of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid can be effective in the treatment of grade II-III knee osteoarthritis in a short-to-mid-term scenario. It represents an innovative and valuable alternative to the administration of its two components alone.

MiR-760 targets HBEGF to control cartilage extracellular matrix degradation in osteoarthritis

The present study was developed to explore whether microRNA (miR)-760 targets heparin-binding EGF-like growth factor (HBEGF) to control cartilage extracellular matrix degradation in osteoarthritis. Both miR-760 and HBEGF expression levels were analysed in human degenerative cartilage tissues and in interleukin (IL)-1β/tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-α-treated chondrocytes in vitro. A series of knockdown and overexpression assays were then used to gauge the functional importance of miR-760 and HBEGF in OA, with qPCR and western immunoblotting analyses. Bioinformatics assays were used to identify putative miR-760 target genes, with these predictions then being validated through RNA pulldown and luciferase reporter assays. A murine anterior cruciate ligament transection model of OA was then established to prove the in vivo relevance of these findings. These experiments revealed that human degenerative cartilage tissues exhibited significant increases in miR-760 expression with a concomitant drop in HBEGF levels. IL-1β/TNF-α-treated chondrocytes also exhibited significant increases in miR-760 expression with a concomitant drop in HBEGF expression. When chondrocytes were transfected with either miR-760 inhibitor or HBEGF overexpression constructs, this was sufficient to interfere with degradation of the extracellular matrix (ECM). Moreover, miR-760 was confirmed to control chondrocyte matrix homeostasis by targeting HBEGF, and the overexpression of HBEGF partially reversed the effects of miR-760 mimic treatment on the degradation of the cartilage ECM. When OA model mice were administered an intra-articular knee injection of an adenoviral vector encoding a miR-760 mimic construct, cartilage ECM degradation was aggravated. Conversely, the overexpression of HBEGF in OA model mice partially reversed the effects of miR-760 overexpression, restoring appropriate ECM homeostasis. In summary, these data indicated that the miR-760/HBEGF axis plays a central role in orchestrating the pathogenesis of OA, making it a candidate target for therapeutic efforts in OA.

Creating an Inexpensive PVC Knee Model for the Training of Ultrasound-Guided Medial Intra-Articular Knee Injections

Objectives: Ultrasound (US)-guided injections using corticosteroids or platelet-rich plasma into the knee joint is commonly used for conservative treatment of knee pathology. Practitioner skill acquisition can be challenging due to expensive simulation models and desire to limit practice on live patients. We sought to create an inexpensive, accurate educational prototype for intra-articular knee injections.

Comparison of Intra-articular Knee Injection of Corticosteroid between Hemodialysis and Non-hemodialysis Patients.

Hemodialysis patients have various complications, and orthopedic diseases include carpal tunnel syndrome, spinal canal stenosis, spondylosis destruction, fractures, and osteoarthritis. As a treatment for knee osteoarthritis, intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid and steroids are performed. In general, steroid injections have a strong short-term anti-inflammatory effect, but there is a risk of complications, such as infection. In addition to aging, dialysis patients are prone to weakened immune systems and susceptibility to infection. Therefore, more attention should be paid to the treatment of osteoarthritis in dialysis patients. This study aimed to compare the effects of steroid and complication of infection of dialysis and non-dialysis patients who underwent intra-articular steroid injection. A total of 20 dialysis patients (23 knees) and 20 non-dialysis patients (24 knees) with knee osteoarthritis who underwent steroid injections were investigated. All patients underwent radiographic diagnosis and were evaluated for the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, visual analog scale (VAS), range of motion (ROM), and side effects before, and at 3, and 6 months after injection. The mean body mass index (BMI) was 21.3 (±standard deviation (SD) 2.8) and 24.9 (±SD 2.6) in dialysis and non-dialysis patients, respectively, showing a significant difference. Both dialysis and non-dialysis patients showed statistically significant improvement in VAS and WOMAC scores after steroid injection. There were no significant differences between dialysis and non-dialysis patients in the gender differences and mean age. There were no infection complications in both groups. This study revealed the analgesic effect of steroids on knee osteoarthritis in dialysis and non-dialysis patients. On the other hand, there were no infection complications in either patient. These findings suggest that intra-articular steroid injection is safe for dialysis patients.

Delaying Total Knee Arthroplasty More than 4 Weeks after Intra-Articular Knee Injection Does Not Further Decrease Risk of Septic Revision.

Hyaluronic acid (HA) and corticosteroid (CS) injections are utilized in symptom management for patients with osteoarthritis. However, contamination of the joint may increase the risk of infection following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine 90-day surgical site infection (SSI) and manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) as well as up to 2-year prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in intra-articular knee injection recipients prior to TKA compared with patients who did not have knee injections. We specifically assessed (1) timing of HA and CS prior to TKA; (2) type of intra-articular knee injection; as well as (3) associated risk factors. We queried a national database to identify patients who underwent primary TKA from September 2015 to October 2020 (n = 1.5 million). Patients with prior knee injections were stratified to five cohorts: HA within 4 weeks (n = 140), HA 4 to 6 weeks prior (n = 337), CS within 4 weeks (n = 2,344), CS 4 to 6 weeks (n = 2,422), and a no injection, control, cohort prior to TKA (n = 5,000). Bivariate chi-square analyses of outcomes were conducted, and multivariate regressions were used to adjust for comorbidities and assess associated risk factors. The adjusted analysis showed a significant risk in infection for patients receiving an injection within 4 weeks of TKA (p < 0.023) and showed no difference in type of injection (p > 0.050). Additionally, SSIs were increased 1.58 times in the CS within 4 weeks of TKA cohort (p = 0.023). However, no difference in MUA risk was shown at 90-day postoperative (p > 0.212). Furthermore, tobacco use was identified as a risk factor that further increased likelihood of PJI. Intra-articular knee injection less than 4 weeks before TKA increased the risk for PJI; however, past 4 weeks did not confer infection risk. Tobacco use was identified as an associated risk factor that further increased likelihood for PJI. These results highlight the need for surgeons to wait 4 weeks between knee injection and TKA to decrease risk of septic revision.

Oroxin B alleviates osteoarthritis through anti-inflammation and inhibition of PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway and enhancement of autophagy.

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common aging-related degenerative joint disease with chronic inflammation as its possible pathogenesis. Oroxin B (OB), a flavonoid isolated from traditional Chinese herbal medicine, possesses anti-inflammation properties which may be involved in regulating the pathogenesis of OA, but its mechanism has not been elucidated. Our study was the first to explore the potential chondroprotective effect and elucidate the underlying mechanism of OB in OA. In vitro, primary mice chondrocytes were stimulated with IL-1β along with or without the administration of OB or autophagy inhibitor 3-methyladenine (3-MA). Cell viability assay was measured with a cell counting kit-8 (CCK-8). The phenotypes of anabolic-related (Aggrecan and Collagen II), catabolic-related (MMP3, MMP13, and ADAMTS5), inflammation-related (iNOS, COX-2, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β), and markers of related signaling pathways in chondrocytes with different treatment were detected through western blot, RT-qPCR, and immunofluorescent staining. In vivo, the destabilized medial meniscus (DMM) operation was performed to establish the OA mice model. After knee intra-articular injection with OB for 8 weeks, the mice's knee joints were obtained for subsequent histological staining and analysis. OB reversed the expression level of anabolic-related proteins (Aggrecan and Collagen II) and catabolic-related (MMP3, MMP13, and ADAMTS5) in IL-1β-induced chondrocytes. Mechanistically, OB suppressed the inflammatory response stimulated by IL-1β, as the inflammation-related (iNOS, COX-2, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β) markers were downregulated after the administration of OB in IL-1β-induced chondrocytes. Besides, the activation of PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway induced by IL-1β could be inhibited by OB. Additionally, the autophagy process impaired by IL-1β could be rescued by OB. What's more, the introduction of 3-MA to specifically inhibit the autophagic process impairs the protective effect of OB on cartilage. In vivo, histological staining revealed that intra-articular injection of OB attenuated the cartilage degradation, as well as reversed the expression level of anabolic and catabolic-related proteins such as Aggrecan, Collagen II, and MMP13 induced in DMM-induced OA models. The study verified that OB exhibited the chondroprotective effect by anti-inflammatory, inhibiting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway, and enhancing the autophagy process, indicating that OB might be a promising agent for the treatment of OA.

The Booster Effect of a Single Quarterly Dose of Hyaluronic Acid in Knee Osteoarthritis: Five-Year Results of a Registry-Based Study.

Objective Viscosupplementation by hyaluronic acid (HA) is well established non-surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This registry-basedstudy investigated the booster effect of a quarterly intra-articular single knee injection (30mg/2ml) for five years. Methods Sixty patients, including 29 males and 31 females, with a mean ± SD age 61.07 ± 9.15 with Kellgren-Lawrence grade I-III KOA, have been selected from a registry of interventional treatments for musculoskeletal pain conditions. To be eligible, patients had to be treated with a single quarterly intraarticular injection of HA with a follow-up of at least five yearsand assessed with Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at baseline and after each HA injection in the first 24 months and at 36, 48, and 60 months. Results Sixty of 63 patients enrolled in this study completed the 60 months of follow-up.Patients had a marked improvement in knee function and pain, expressed by the significant reduction in WOMAC (T0 48.62±8.95 vs. T11 10.75±4.36; p<0.0001) and NRS scores (6.38±1.06 vs. T11 0.95±0.89 p<0.0001) from the baseline to the end of the follow-up period. Conclusion A quarterly injection of HA provides a rapid, safe, and stable long-term reduction of pain and improvement of function in elderly people with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis along a five-yearperiod of treatment and follow-up. Further investigations are necessary to confirm these findings.

Comparison of radiological and clinical results of knee intra-articular injections with two ultrasonography-guided approach techniques: A randomized controlled study.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological results of intra-articular injections performed with two different ultrasound-guided approaches in knee osteoarthritis. The randomized controlled study was conducted on 80 knees of 40 patients (9 males, 31 females; mean age: 63.6±8.2 years; range, 46 to 78 years) with Grade 2-3 gonarthrosis that underwent ultrasound-guided intra-articular injections with suprapatellar (SP) or infrapatellar (IP) approaches between March 2020 and January 2021. After the injection, opaque material spread was fluoroscopically observed. Before the procedure and at the one and three months after the procedure, patients' Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores for functional recovery were recorded. In both techniques, one- and three-month VAS and WOMAC scores were found to be significantly lower (p<0.001 and p<0.001, respectively). Of the patients with positive opaque spread, 63.3% were in the IP technique group, and 36.7% were in the SP technique group (p=0.003). In 69.2% of those with radiologically positive opaque spread, the VAS score was significantly higher with >50% regression (p=0.04). In the IP technique, >50% regression rate of the VAS was 86.7% in patients with positive opaque spread, while VAS regression was significantly higher than those without opaque spread (p=0.02). Although the IP approach shows an early-positive opaque transition due to its proximity to the joint, both approach techniques are clinically effective under ultrasound guidance.

A comprehensive review of intraarticular knee injection therapy, geniculate injections, and peripheral nerve stimulation for knee pain in clinical practice.

The knee is the most common joint in adults associated with morbidity. Many pathologies are associated with knee damage, such as gout or rheumathoid arthritis, but the primary condition is osteoarthritis (OA). Not only can osteoarthritis cause significant pain, but it also can result in signficant disability as well. Treatment for this condition varies, starting off with oral analgesics and physical therapy to surgical total knee replacmenet. In the gamut of this various treatments, a conservative approach has included intra articular steroid injections. With time, researchers and clinicians determined that other components injected to the knee may additionally provide relief of this condition. In this investigation, we describe different types of knee injections such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid, stem cells, and prolotherapy. Additionally, we describe the role of geniculate knee injections, radiofrequency, and periopheral nerve stimulation. These treatments should be considered for patients with knee pain refractory to conservative therapies.

Association Between Bio-Fermentation Derived Hyaluronic Acid and Healthcare Costs Following Knee Arthroplasty.

BackgroundLimiting access to intra-articular knee injections, including hyaluronic acid (HA), has been advocated as a cost-containment measure in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. The association between presurgical injections and post-surgical complications such as early periprosthetic joint infection and revision remained to be investigated. This study evaluated pre- and post-surgical costs and rates of post-surgical complications in knee arthroplasty (KA) patients with or without prior HA use.MethodsCommercial and Medicare Supplemental Claims Data (IBM MarketScan Research Databases) from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018 were used to identify unilateral KA patients. Those who completed a course of bio-fermentation derived HA (Bio-HA) as the first-line HA therapy comprised of the test group (n = 4091), while the control group did not use HA prior to KA (n = 118,659). Using multivariable regression with propensity score (PS) weighting, overall healthcare costs, readmission rates, and revision rates were assessed at six months following KA.ResultsHealthcare costs following KA were significantly lower for the Bio-HA group ($10,021 ± $22,796) than No HA group ($12,724 ± $32,966; PS p < 0.001). Bio-HA patients had lower readmission rates (8.9% vs 14.0%; PS p < 0.001) and inpatient costs per readmitted patient ($43,846 ± $50,648 vs $50,533 ± $66,150; PS p = 0.005). There were no differences in revision rate for any reason (Bio-HA: 0.78% vs No HA: 0.67%; PS p = 0.361) and with PJI (Bio-HA: 0.42% vs No HA: 0.33%; PS p = 0.192). Costs in the six months up to and including the KA were similar for both groups (Bio-HA: $49,759 ± $40,363 vs No HA: $50,532 ± $43,183; PS p = 0.293).ConclusionBio-HA use prior to knee arthroplasty did not appear to increase overall healthcare costs in the six months before and after surgery. Allowing access to HA injections provides a non-surgical therapeutic option without increasing cost or risk of post-surgical complications.

Intraarticular Steroid Injection in Hip and Knee with Fluoroscopic Guidance: Reassessing Safety.

Background Intraarticular corticosteroid (IACS) injections are frequently performed for hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA); however, there are conflicting data about the benefits and complications of IACS injections and a lack of large studies with follow-up. Purpose To determine the number of patients with complications after hip and knee IACS injections in a large study sample with long-term follow-up. Materials and Methods This retrospective single-center case series included patients who received a corticosteroid injection in the hip (n = 500) or knee (n = 500) and who underwent clinical and radiologic follow-up (conventional radiography, fluoroscopy, CT, or MRI) between 1 and 12 months after injection (January 2016 to May 2020). General descriptive statistics and the χ2 test were applied. P < .05 was indicative of a significant difference. Results Of the 1000 patients (mean age, 57 years ± 16 [SD]; 545 women), 10 patients (1%) developed severe complications. Four patients developed osteonecrosis; three, insufficiency fractures; and three, rapid progressive OA. All 10 complications occurred between 2 and 9 months after injection: six (60%) in the hip and four (40%) in the knee. Of the included 1000 patients, 545 (54%) were women, but they had nine of the 10 (90%) complications (P = .02). Conclusion Intraarticular steroid injection had a substantially lower complication rate than that reported in previous smaller studies. The rate of severe complications was disproportionally higher in women than in men. © RSNA, 2022 See also the editorial by Jennings in this issue.

P088 Utilising virtual reality for remote joint injection training for the post-pandemic rheumatologist

Abstract Background/Aims The impact of dealing with COVID-19 for rheumatology higher specialist trainees has been profound. Sacrifices were made to their training to support the UK's pandemic response. Virtual Reality (VR) has long been used as a solution for specific surgical skills; providing a hands-on experience to enable specific delivery of outcomes. We utilised existing technology alongside a specialist VR and haptics team to review ways at delivering a valid and reliable training tool to administer joint injections, beginning with the review of this procedure specific to the knee. We aimed to describe this process. Methods A qualitative study using focus groups was undertaken, one medical student, four higher specialty trainees and two consultants were convened in a focus group to review existing mannequin-based training with the purpose of identifying a skill to develop in virtual reality. A story board was developed through collaboration with a graphic designer. The scenario was imbedded into a virtual reality environment in collaboration with a virtual reality partner. Results The focus group identified intra-articular knee injection as the most appropriate rheumatology skill to develop. Storyboarding built a series of scenarios around clinical situations which would require injection or aspiration. Working with the engineering team we successfully mapped knee joint anatomy and rendered an authentic clinical environment for the storyboards to run inside. Conclusion Virtual reality training scenarios are complex to develop but have enormous potential to create immersive training and assessment experiences which are not boundaried by the challenges of social distancing and COVID-19 risks. Disclosure B.D. Clarke: Honoraria; Abbvie. Grants/research support; Innovate UK. S. Balachandran: None. D. Nagra: None. M.D. Russell: Honoraria; Lilly, Pfizer, Janssen, UCB, Menarini. K. Bechman: None. M. Adas: None. A. Hope-Smith: None. M. Yates: Honoraria; Abbvie, UCB. A. Barrow: Grants/research support; Innovate UK. T. Smith: Grants/research support; Innovate UK. J. Galloway: Honoraria; Abbvie, Biovitrum, BMS, Celgene, Chugai, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Sobi and UCB.

Effects of Intra-articular Coinjections of Hyaluronic Acid and Hypertonic Dextrose on Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

ObjectiveTo determine whether intra-articular coinjection with hypertonic dextrose improves the outcome of hyaluronic acid (HA) prolotherapy for knee osteoarthritis (OA). DesignProspective, randomized, double-blind trial. SettingMedical center in Taiwan. ParticipantsIn total, 104 participants who fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology clinical and radiographic criteria for knee OA with a Kellgren-Lawrence score of 2 or 3 were recruited (N=104). InterventionsThe participants were blocked randomized to the treatment (HA and hypertonic dextrose) or control (HA and normal saline) group. Ultrasound-guided knee intra-articular injections were administered once a week for 3 weeks. Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcomes were performance-based physical function measures (regular and fastest walking speed, stair climbing time, and chair rising time), and the secondary outcomes were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). The outcome measures were assessed before the injections and at 1 week and 1, 3, and 6 months after the injections. The data were analyzed through repeated-measures analysis of covariance. ResultsSignificant intergroup difference-in-differences favoring the treatment group were observed for improvements in stair climbing time (−1.6; 95% confidence interval, −8.56 to 4.16; P=.38) and WOMAC physical function (−21.2; 95% confidence interval, −126.05 to 103.83; P = .045) at 6 months. The group×time interaction effects favored the treatment group for regular (P=.001) and fastest walking speed (P=.001) and chair rising time (P=.038); WOMAC stiffness (P < .001) and physical function (P = .003); and KOOS for pain (P = .035), other symptoms (P=.022), and quality of life (P=.012). ConclusionsCompared with HA plus normal saline coinjections, HA plus dextrose coinjections resulted in more significant improvements in stair climbing time and physical function at 6 months, effectively decreased pain, and improved physical function and physical functional performance from 1 week to 6 months. HA plus dextrose coinjections could be a suitable adjuvant therapy for patients with knee OA.

Clinical Response After Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis With a Standardized, Closed-System, Low-Cost Platelet-Rich Plasma Product: 1-Year Outcomes.

Background:Intra-articular infiltration of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an alternative therapeutic option to classic hyaluronic acid for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (KOA). However, variation in preparation methods and quality assessment of PRP makes the study of its real clinical efficacy difficult.Purpose:To (1) evaluate the clinical efficacy of a characterized PRP product prepared in a standardized manner and in a closed-system for the treatment of KOA and to (2) evaluate the association of the clinical response to PRP-related variables.Study Design:Case series; Level of evidence, 4.Methods:We recruited 130 patients with nonoperative KOA and evaluated them for 1 year. PRP was prepared from a donation of autologous blood, obtaining 3 aliquots of approximately 10mL of product, which were frozen, allowing platelet disruption, platelet factor release, and long-term storage, until administration. Patients were treated 3 consecutive times every 4 weeks with an intra-articular PRP knee injection under sterile conditions. Complete blood count was performed on the whole-blood sample and the processed PRP before freezing it, for product quality assessment. Patients were assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and basic satisfaction scale at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after intervention.Results:Quality assessment confirmed a leukocyte-poor PRP product (white blood cell count, 0.09 ± 0.09 × 109/L) with a high platelet purity (platelet count, 630.86 ± 191.75 × 109/L). WOMAC scores improved, and basic satisfaction was achieved in 70% of patients. No adverse events were reported. No correlations were observed between PRP quality parameters and clinical results. PRP complete treatment production costs were €108/US$125 (€36/US$41.6 per injection).Conclusion:This standardized PRP production method resulted in improved WOMAC scores at 1 year postoperatively in 70% of patients with KOA. This technique was safe and affordable and ensured consecutive infiltrations with the same product to each patient.

Analysis of the Cost and Efficacy of Intra-Articular Knee Injections.

Intra-articular joint injections have been used with the goal of providing patients with symptomatic relief. Recently, however, the efficacy of corticosteroid (CS) and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections in the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA) is questionable. In this analysis, we investigated the costs associated with injections by assessing overall use, conversion and average time to total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and reimbursement. Patients aged 50 to 70 years with a knee-related diagnosis of pain, effusion, or OA were identified in the Humana insurance national data set. Patients who received intra-articular injections were stratified by the type and number of injection(s) received. The subsequent rates of TKA were compared with Kaplan-Meier curves for patients who underwent CS injections, HA injections, and a benchmarking cohort of patients with OA and no history of knee injections in the medical record. Average time to TKA was determined from index diagnosis, and total cost was compared using Wilcoxon rank sum analyses. A total of 778,686 patients were identified. Of these, 637,112 had no knee injection history, while 124,129 received CS and 17,445 received HA injections. The 10-year conversion to TKA was highest in HA cohort (31.6%), followed by the CS cohort (24.0%) and the noninjection cohort (7.3%) (P < 0.001). Time to TKA increased with number of injections for both injection types. For patients who underwent TKA, median cost was greater in HA ($16,687) and CS ($15,563) cohorts relative to noninjection cohort ($14,733) (P < 0.001). Compared with the noninjection cohort, both HA and CS cohorts experienced increased costs and increased time to TKA. However, while the cost incurred in HA cohort was greater than that in CS cohort, no appreciable benefit was demonstrated for conversion or time to TKA. Therefore, if intra-articular knee injections are indicated for the nonsurgical management of knee OA, the results of this study support CS over HA.