Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42009866›Full record

Trial reportEuropean radiology2026

Long-term outcomes of genicular artery embolization for knee osteoarthritis: 12-month efficacy and secondary outcomes from a randomized sham-controlled clinical trial.

Tijmen A van Zadelhoff, Rianne A van der Heijden, Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra, Pieter Koen Bos, Edwin H G Oei

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

Trial report in European radiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Tijmen A van ZadelhoffDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. t.vanzadelhoff@erasmusmc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0243-6532
Rianne A van der HeijdenDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Sita M A Bierma-ZeinstraDepartment of General Practice, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Pieter Koen BosDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Edwin H G OeiDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Cook Medical EUFRB-22-04-2016-IR-NLCSP VA 562Erasmus Medisch Centrum 2017-17202
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo determine if genicular artery embolization (GAE) is more effective in relieving pain symptoms after 12 months compared to a sham procedure in patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. A secondary aim was to investigate changes in synovitis observed at 4 months and the correlation with other clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND

methodsA randomized controlled trial included patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis unresponsive to conservative treatment, who were randomly assigned to receive either GAE or sham treatment. Follow-up was at 1, 4, 8, and 12 months. Pain was assessed using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and synovitis was imaged with contrast-enhanced MRI at baseline, 1, and 4 months. Outcomes were compared using generalized estimating equations.

resultsFifty-eight patients were included (GAE group: 29, sham group: 29). Pain scores improved from 44.44 (95% CI: 38.87-50.02) at baseline to 65.61 (95% CI: 57.16-74.06) after 12 months in the GAE group and from 42.34 (95% CI: 36.45-48.22) to 58.15 (95% CI: 48.7-67.6) in the sham group. The between-group difference after 12 months was not significant (7.46; 95% CI: -13.63 to -28.56; p = 0.25). There were no significant within-group or between-group changes for synovitis.

conclusionPatients undergoing GAE and sham GAE both demonstrate an equal sustained pain reduction at 12 months follow-up, with no differences in synovitis reduction or other clinical outcomes. These results suggest a sustained placebo effect in the long term and do not support the clinical implementation of GAE as a treatment for KOA patients. KEY POINTS: Question Is GAE more effective than a sham procedure for mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis in the long term, and how does it affect synovitis? Findings There was no significant difference in pain reduction or synovitis between the two groups. Clinical relevance Pain reduction after GAE appears mainly placebo-driven. The placebo effect is sustained up to 12 months. Furthermore, synovitis was unaffected by the procedure. Therefore, our findings do not support clinical implementation.

Indexed as

Embolization, TherapeuticOsteoarthritis, KneeAgedFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementSynovitisTreatment OutcomeEmbolizationGenicular artery embolizationKnee osteoarthritisRandomized controlled trialSynovitis

Identifiers

PMID42009866
PMCPMC13341897

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.