Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31454342›Full record

SynthesisMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2019

Intra-Articular Viscosupplementation for Patients with Hip Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Ying-Yang Liao, Tiao Lin, Han-Xiao Zhu, Ming-Min Shi, Shi-Gui Yan

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ying-Yang LiaoDepartment of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Tiao LinDepartment of Musculoskeletal Oncology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Orthopedics and Traumatology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China (mainland).
Han-Xiao ZhuDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China (mainland).
Ming-Min ShiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China (mainland).
Shi-Gui YanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China (mainland).
Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNThe First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to review the efficacy and safety of intra-articular (IA) viscosupplementation (VS) for hip osteoarthritis (OA). MATERIAL AND METHODS We searched Medline, Clinical Trial Register Center, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing VS with placebo injection for hip OA. We included suitable studies, assessed the quality of studies, and extracted data on pain reduction, function improvement at different time points, and safety profiles. The comparisons of pain and function outcome were performed by meta-analysis. RESULTS Five high-quality randomized controlled studies trials (RCTs) with 591 patients with hip OA were identified. Although several trials demonstrated a significant decline in pain in VS groups during follow-up compared to baseline, without severe adverse events, the pooled analysis did not show VS was superior to placebo at any time windows [7-14 days: standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.18; 95% CI, -0.47 to 0.10, p=0.21; 28-30 days: 0.02 (-0.15, 0.19), p=0.82; or at final visit: -0.14 (-0.46, 0.18), p=0.38]. Similar results were also observed in the combined data of functional results. CONCLUSIONS IA VS does not reduce pain or improve function significantly better than placebo in a short-term follow-up. The benefits and safety of VS should be further assessed by sufficiently-sized, methodologically sound studies with validated assessment of more clinically relevant end-points.

Indexed as

ViscosupplementationClinical Trials as TopicHumansInjections, Intra-ArticularOsteoarthritis, HipPainQuality Assurance, Health CareTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID31454342
PMCPMC6724564
OpenAlexW2971321128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.