Evolution of hydrogels for cartilage tissue engineering of the knee: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies - 11/02/21
, Fatemeh Oroojalian g, ⁎ , Amirhossein Sahebkar h, i, j, k, ⁎ Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
| pages | 11 |
| Iconographies | 5 |
| Vidéos | 0 |
| Autres | 0 |
Graphical abstract |
Highlights |
• | Hydrogel-based scaffolds have advanced to improve cartilage repair. |
• | We analyzed the efficacy of hydrogel-based therapy (HBT) in correcting knee cartilage defects. |
• | The meta-analysis included 50 clinical trials with HBT involving 2846 patients. |
• | HBT improved the pain scores based on the VAS and WOMAC scales. |
• | HBT also improved the functional scores based on the IKDC and Lysholm knee scales. |
Abstract |
Introduction |
In recent years, studies have boosted our knowledge about the biology and disorders of articular cartilage. In this regard, the design of hydrogel-based scaffolds has advanced to improve cartilage repair. However, the efficacy of knee cartilage repair using hydrogels remains unclear. The aim of systematic review and meta-analysis was to scrutinize the efficiency of hydrogel-based therapy in correcting cartilage defects of knee (femoral condyle, patella, tibia plateau and trochlea).
Methods |
The search was conducted in PubMed to gather articles published from 2004/1/1 to 2019/10/01, addressing the effects of implant of hydrogel on knee joint cartilage regeneration. The Cochrane Collaboration‘s tool for estimating the risk of bias was applied to check the quality of articles. The clinical data for meta-analysis was recorded using the visual analog scale (VAS), Lysholm score, WOMAC, and IKDC. The guidelines of Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions were utilized to conduct the review and meta-analysis in the RevMan 5.3 software.
Results |
The search resulted in 50 clinical trials that included 2846 patients, 986 of whom received cell-based hydrogel implants while 1860 patients used hydrogel without cell. There were significant differences comparing the pain scores based on the VAS (MD: −2.97; 95% CI: −3.15 to −2.79, P<0.00001) and WOMAC (MD: −25.22; 95% CI: −31.22 to −19.22, P<0.00001) between pre- and post-treatment with hydrogels. Furthermore, there were significant improvements in the functional scores based on the IKDC total score (MD: 30.67; P<0.00001) and the Lysholm knee scale (MD: 29.26; 95% CI: 26.74 to 31.78, P<0.00001). According to the Lysholm and IKDC score and after cumulative functional analysis, there was a significant improvement in this parameter (MD: 29.25; 95% CI: 27.26 to 31.25, P<0.00001).
Conclusions |
This meta-analysis indicated clinically and statistically significant improvements in the pain score (VAS and WOMAC) and the functional score (IKDC and Lysholm) after the administration of hydrogel compared to pretreatment status. So, the current evidence shows the efficiency of hydrogel-based therapy in correcting and repairing knee cartilage defects.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Keywords : Hydrogels, Clinical outcome, Cartilage repair of knee, Systematic review, Meta-analysis
Plan
Vol 88 - N° 1
Article 105096- janvier 2021 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- New insights into macrophage heterogeneity in rheumatoid arthritis
- Nicole Hannemann, Florence Apparailly, Gabriel Courties
- Inadequacies of the Lasègue test, and how the Slump and Bowstring tests are useful for the diagnosis of sciatica
- Jean-Marie Berthelot, Christelle Darrieutort-Laffite, Paul Arnolfo, Joëlle Glémarec, Benoît Le Goff, Yves Maugars
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’achat d’article à l’unité est indisponible à l’heure actuelle.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?