New Hyaluron Injection works better than older ones according to study

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

DrCommonSense

Full Member
5+ Year Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
1,802
Reaction score
502
http://www.clinicalpainadvisor.com/...pJobID=1021614898&spReportId=MTAyMTYxNDg5OAS2

"
The primary outcome measure was pain scores (assessed using the visual analog scale [VAS)]) changes from baseline at 6 months. Although both injections led to improvements in VAS pain scores, the improvements were more significant in patients receiving Hya-Joint Plus vs Synvisc-One: 34.2 mm, 34.6 mm, and 33.3 mm vs 19.9 mm, 22.8 mm, and 23.4 mm at 1, 3, and 6 months, respectively, with adjusted mean differences of -12.0 (P =.001), -8.5 (P =.033), and -6.6 (P =.045), respectively.

The secondary outcome measures, including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lequesne index for knee osteoarthritis severity, timed up and go test (TUG), single-limb stance (SLS), use of rescue analgesics, and patient satisfaction, were comparable between injection groups. However, those receiving Hya-Joint Plus demonstrated a small but statistically significant improvement in WOMAC stiffness subscale scores at 6 months (1.7 ± 1.2 vs 2.3 ± 1.7 for Synvisc-One; P =.043).

Although TUG time did not change significantly in either group, and both showed significant improvements in SLS time, there was some indication that patients with poor physical activity might derive greater benefit from Hya-Joint Plus. “We found that patients with an initial poor performance on the TUG test (>18.8 s) could benefit more, with regard to their performance at 3 months post-injection, if they were treated with Hya-Joint Plus. Similarly, patients with an initial poor performance on the SLS test could benefit more, with regard to their performance at 1 and 3 months, if they were treated with Hya-Joint Plus,” the researchers wrote. They were unsure of the mechanism behind this finding, but suspected a volume effect of Synvisc-One might cause excessive capsular distension, affecting patients' physical activity."

Any thoughts on this?

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Finally, Hya-Joint Plus requires intra-articular injection, but no imaging was undertaken to confirm adequate administration.

The study was funded by SciVision Biotech, manufacturer of Hya-Joint Plus, but it was reported not to be involved in patient enrollment, data collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation.
 
Finally, Hya-Joint Plus requires intra-articular injection, but no imaging was undertaken to confirm adequate administration.

The study was funded by SciVision Biotech, manufacturer of Hya-Joint Plus, but it was reported not to be involved in patient enrollment, data collection, data analysis, or manuscript preparation.

I know but so is EVERY study for big pharma. We still use their data as "evidence" as well.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Capsular distension with 6ml. Puh -lease.

No image guidance for a knee IA study? 1990 called, wants its IRB back.

lol I agree but the study does show benefit. That's all I know.


If we want to argue that industry research is bad, we need to do that across the board
 
I for one have already stated the obvious - that industry research is biased, across the board.




this study was basically a data mining expedition. only 1 clinically significant result.

in addition, while apparently blinded, different volumes of injectate are hard to blind completely. also, generally speaking, VAS is hardly a good representation of clinical benefit. and agree with steve's fluoro point.
 
I know but so is EVERY study for big pharma. We still use their data as "evidence" as well.
Problem isn't the published data. Industry-sponsored research is owned by industry, not the investigator. So if the data were to show that the product didn't work, the manufacturer would simply bury the results, and you would never be the wiser
 
Top