Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32799851›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2020

Efficacy of single high-molecular-weight versus triple low-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid intra-articular injection among knee osteoarthritis patients.

Mohammad Hasan Bahrami, Seyed Ahmad Raeissadat, Mohsen Cheraghi, Shahram Rahimi-Dehgolan, Adel Ebrahimpour

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Non-Biologic Injections in Sports Medicine.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Mohammad Hasan BahramiPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department and Research Center, Shohada-e-Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Tehran, Iran.
Seyed Ahmad RaeissadatClinical Development Research Center of Shahid Modarres Hospital, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department and Research Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Tehran, Iran.
Mohsen CheraghiPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department and Research Center, Shohada-e-Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Tehran, Iran.
Shahram Rahimi-DehgolanPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), School of Medicine, Tehran, Iran.
Adel EbrahimpourOrthopedic surgery Department, Taleghani Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, No. 1998734383, Velenjak, Tehran, Iran. a.ebrahimpour@sbmu.ac.ir.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare intra-articular (IA) knee injections of a cross-linked high-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid (HMW-HA) with a linear low-molecular weight HA (LMW-HA) in terms of pain and functional improvement among knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

methodsIn this single-blinded RCT, the patients were randomly divided into two groups for HA injections. The first group received an HMW-HA (Arthromac) injection, while the other received three weekly LMW-HA (Hyalgan) injections. Pain and function were assessed using the outcome measures including WOMAC, Lequesne and VAS indices, once prior to injection, as well as 2 and 6 months after injections.

resultsA total of 90 patients were included. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics including age and sex between the two groups. Our analysis showed that total WOMAC, Lequesne and VAS mean scores remarkably improved at both follow-up time-points compared to the baseline measurements (p < 0.001). There was no significant superiority between the two therapeutic protocols according to our outcome measures at any time-point of follow-up. The only except was about the improvement in WOMAC stiffness subscale that was significantly higher in LMW-HA group compared to HMW-HA (p = 0.021). Moreover, no significant difference was observed in minor complications and injection-induced pain scores between the two groups.

conclusionThis study proved that a single HMW-HA injection is as effective as multiple injections of LMW-HA counterparts in periods of 2 and 6 months follow-up. This study protocol was registered in Iranian database of RCTs (IRCT; www.irct.ir ) with the trial registration number IRCT20130523013442N24 and registration date 2018-07-13.

Indexed as

Hyaluronic AcidOsteoarthritis, KneeHumansInjections, Intra-ArticularIranMolecular WeightPain MeasurementTreatment OutcomeHyaluronic AcidCross-linkedHyaluronic acidIntra-articular injectionsKnee osteoarthritis

Identifiers

PMID32799851
PMCPMC7429877

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.