Medial or Lateral, That Is the Question: A Retrospective Study to Compare Two Injection Techniques in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Pain with Hyaluronic Acid

Author:

Farì Giacomo12ORCID,Mancini Rachele1,Dell’Anna Laura1,Ricci Vincenzo3,Della Tommasa Simone4ORCID,Bianchi Francesco Paolo5ORCID,Ladisa Ilaria1,De Serio Carlo1,Fiore Silvia6,Donati Danilo7,Ranieri Maurizio1ORCID,Bernetti Andrea2ORCID,Megna Marisa1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Translational Biomedicine and Neuroscience, Aldo Moro University, 70121 Bari, Italy

2. Department of Biological and Environmental Science and Technologies, University of Salento, 73100 Lecce, Italy

3. Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Luigi Sacco University Hospital, 20121 Milano, Italy

4. Department for Horses, University of Leipzig, 04103 Leipzig, Germany

5. Interdisciplinary Department of Medicine, University of Bari, 70124 Bari, Italy

6. School of Specialization in Rheumatology, Fondazione Polclinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, 00168 Roma, Italy

7. Clinical and Experimental Medicine PhD Program, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, 41121 Modena, Italy

Abstract

Background: Mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis (KOA) can be successfully treated using intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA). The medial infrapatellar (MIP) approach and lateral infrapatellar (LIP) approach are two of the most used techniques for performing IA-HA, but it is still not clear which one is preferable. Objectives: The study aims to find the best knee injection technique between MIP and LIP approaches. Methods: In total, 161 patients were enrolled, divided into two groups (MIP or LIP). Each technique was performed once a week for three weeks. Patients were evaluated using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Roles and Maudsley Score (RMS) at T0 (before the first injection), T1 (one week after the third injection) and T2 (six months after). Results: NRS, KOOS and RMS showed a statistically significant improvement in both groups at all the detection times, without significant differences. No differences were detected between the groups in terms of systemic effect effusions, while the MIP group presented a mildly higher number of bruises in comparison with the LIP group (p = 0.034). Conclusions: Both the IA-HA techniques are equally effective in measured outcomes. The MIP approach seems to produce some local and transient side effects. So, the choice of the LIP or MIP approach depends on the operator’s skill and experience.

Funder

University of Bari

Publisher

MDPI AG

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3