ReviewCurrent rheumatology reviews2024
Predictors of Clinical Benefit with Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis - A Narrative Review.
Review in Current rheumatology reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Osteoarthritis: Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Treatment.MedComm · 2026Review
- Article
- Long-term functional and clinical outcomes of intraarticular double-cross-linked high molecular weight hyaluronic acid (Crespine Gel Plus) injection in knee osteoarthritis: a one year prospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- The Efficacy and Safety of Single Injections of Hybrid HA in the Treatment of Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis: A Case Series.Rheumatology and therapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of viscosupplementation with intra-articular hyaluronic acid injections in knee osteoarthritis. One possible explanation for the inconsistent findings on its efficacy is that only certain subpopulations of patients benefit from this therapy.
objectiveThe purpose of this narrative review is to succinctly summarize the existing data on the predictive factors of clinical response to intra-articular hyaluronic acid to identify the patient profile most likely to benefit from this therapy.
methodsFor this narrative review, a PubMed search was conducted in January 2023, with no date limits, to identify publications reporting predictive factors of response to viscosupplementation using the following terms: hyaluronic acid OR viscosupplem* AND osteoarthritis AND knee AND predict*. Searches were limited to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta- analyses, or observational studies written in English. Other relevant references were identified by searching the references of retrieved articles.
resultsThe disease severity was found to reliably predict response to intra-articular hyaluronic acid injections; patients with less severe disease consistently had a more robust therapeutic response than those with more severe disease. Other clinical variables such as level of baseline pain did not reliably predict response. Body mass index, and possibly age, may also be independent predictors of the response.
conclusionA review of the existing literature suggests that patients with less severe clinical symptoms and radiological findings, who are younger, and with a lower or normal body mass index are the best candidates for intra-articular hyaluronic acid therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.