2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2005.09.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing alternate forms of high molecular weight hyaluronan for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee

Abstract: The effectiveness of Bio-HA was not inferior to that of CL-HA. The significantly higher incidence of post-injection effusion in the CL-HA group provides a safety advantage for Bio-HA. These data suggest that Bio-HA has an improved benefit-risk profile compared with CL-HA.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

5
94
0
2

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(101 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
(23 reference statements)
5
94
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite its widespread use, the magnitude of the clinical effect of VS remains controversial and appears different according to the VS formulations, which differ widely in molecular weight, origin (animal or bacterial), and residence time in the joint [4,20,25,27,29]. The advantage of cross-linkage seems mainly to increase the stability and residence time of the VS in the joint.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Despite its widespread use, the magnitude of the clinical effect of VS remains controversial and appears different according to the VS formulations, which differ widely in molecular weight, origin (animal or bacterial), and residence time in the joint [4,20,25,27,29]. The advantage of cross-linkage seems mainly to increase the stability and residence time of the VS in the joint.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The advantage of cross-linkage seems mainly to increase the stability and residence time of the VS in the joint. However, other studies suggest the noncross-linked VS effect is comparable with that of the cross-linked system [27,43], and to date, no definitive conclusion has been reached regarding any advantage of cross-linkage on the clinical benefit [2,27,29,33,52,59]. Therefore, techniques aimed at investigating variations of HA (concentration and molecular weight) and rheologic changes attributable to VS are needed to better understand its mechanisms of action and to determine possible differences between different HA commercial formulations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although evidence on its effectiveness is still accruing from randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) (Aggarwal and Sempowski, 2004;Atamaz et al, 2006;Kirchner and Marshall, 2006;Kotevoglu et al, 2006;Lee et al, 2006;Lo et al, 2003;Paker et al, 2006;Petrella and Petrella, 2006), the updated Cochrane systematic review of 76 RCTs published up to January 2006 found benefi cial effects on pain, function and patient global assessment, most notably fi ve to 13 weeks after the period of injections (Bellamy et al, 2006). These provide cautious support for the use of intra-articular HA, although several areas of uncertainty remain.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The majority of adverse events were transient pain, stiffness, swelling, or joint effusion in the treated knee that resolved within a few days without sequelae. The study performed by Kirchner and Marshall 26 showed a higher incidence of postinjection effusion in the cross-linking hyaluronic acid group, which provides a safety advantage for biological hyaluronic acid. These data suggest that biological hyaluronic acid has an improved benefit-risk profile compared with cross-linking hyaluronic acid.…”
Section: Safetymentioning
confidence: 93%