Therapeutic Review of Methylprednisolone Acetate Intra-Articular Injection in the Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee - Part 2: Clinical and Procedural Considerations

Peri-procedural management and incidence of bleeding events following musculoskeletal injections or aspirations in people on oral anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroid injections and aspirations are common interventions for managing musculoskeletal and inflammatory conditions. However, there remains limited safety evidence to support injection decisions and peri-procedural management in people on anti-thrombotics, particularly for direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs).

OBJECTIVES

To investigate peri-procedural management and bleeding complications following musculoskeletal injections or aspirations with anti-thrombotic medication use.

DESIGN

A prospective observational study was undertaken (October 2018-December 2020) in Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Radiology specialities in two large UK healthcare providers. Data collection involved weekly identification of musculoskeletal procedures, emergency attendance or admission within 30 days and follow-up questionnaires sent within 2 weeks post-procedure. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse anticoagulant/anti-platelet use, peri-procedural management and bleeding complications.

RESULTS

Of 5080 procedures, 237 of 1338 responses reported antithrombotic use: warfarin (n = 36), DOACs (n = 75) and antiplatelets (n = 126). There were no self-report or electronic identification of clinically significant bleeding events/complications. Only local bruising was reported (8.6% vs. 0.2% with non-use), and only with medication continuation or international normalised ratio (INR) levels ≥3.8 or unknown. Only 3/72 DOAC use was interrupted.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, no clinically significant bleeding events or complications were reported or identified following musculoskeletal injections or aspirations, with only localised bruising reported. It was not universal practice to check INR levels and DOAC interruption was uncommon. Findings add evidence that musculoskeletal procedures appear to be low risk procedures for bleeding complications with antithrombotic continuation and when INR levels within lower target range. Research on intra-articular or soft tissue iatrogenic consequences would add to risk/benefit evaluations.

The Safety of Continued Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Joint Injections and Aspirations: A Qualitative Review of the Current Evidence

ABSTRACT

Performing joint aspirations and injections on patients taking long-term oral anticoagulants poses a clinical conundrum. This review aimed to quantify the safety of performing joint procedures in these patients in terms of bleeding risk. In addition, it aimed to identify, in those receiving vitamin K antagonists, what level of international normalized ratio (INR) is the safest.A review of the medical literature was performed (electronic searches in Ovid [MEDLINE], EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library). English language original reports of patients undergoing joint injections or aspirations performed on anticoagulant therapy, published within the last 10 years, were included.Seven studies met the inclusion criteria. Patients were taking a variety of anticoagulants: warfarin, acenocoumarol, and direct oral anticoagulants. Four cases of hemorrhage were reported after 5427 procedures, over a pooled 32-year period, across 9 centers. The INR values were available for 3 cases with bleeding complications: values were 1.9, 2.3, and 3.4.Authors of all studies concluded that joint injection is safe in patients on anticoagulants. A variety of joints and approaches, reversal, or withholding of anticoagulation and bridging with low molecular weight heparin did not seem to alter bleeding risk. Bleeding complications remained low even in those with renal or hepatic impairment or those taking concomitant antiplatelets.In conclusion, joint aspiration and injection are safe in patients taking anticoagulants. Anticoagulation should not be routinely discontinued in these patients; decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis. Because of low event numbers, a recommended safe maximum INR value for joint procedures cannot be determined.

Clinical Effect of Bushen Huoxue Method Combined with Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis and Its Effect on IL-1, IL-6, VEGF, and PGE-2

Objective

To observe the clinical efficacy of the Bushen Huoxue method combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and its effect on serum and joint fluid interleukin-1 (IL-1), interleukin-6 (IL-6), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), and prostaglandin E2 (PGE-2).

Methods

A total of 64 cases of KOA diagnosed and treated from January 2020 to January 2021 were randomly divided into research group and control group, with 32 cases in each group. The control group was treated with PRP, and the research group took the prescription of the Bushen Huoxue method on the basis of the control group. The clinical efficacy was assessed according to the criteria in "the diagnosis and Treatment of osteoarthritis," osteoarthritis index score and pain visual analogue score (VAS). Serum and articular fluid VAS, IL-1, IL-6, VEGF, and PGE-2 levels were detected by the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).

Results

The clinical effective rate of the research group was 93.8%, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (90.6%). There was no significant difference in the scores of osteoarthritis index between the two groups before treatment, but the scores of both groups decreased after treatment and was lower in the research group than those in the control group. VAS was significantly decreased in two groups after treatment and it was lower in the research group than that in the control group. After treatment, the levels of IL-1, IL-6, and PGE-2 in serum and articular fluid all indexes were decreased, and the levels in the research group were lower than those in the control group.

Conclusions

PRP joint cavity injection combined with oral administration of Bushen Huoxue prescription, and PRP joint cavity injection alone can improve the efficacy of KOA, relieve knee pain, and promote the recovery of knee function. The mechanism may be related to the reduction of IL-1, IL-6, VEGF levels, and PGE-2 levels in the serum and joint fluid. However, the efficacy of combination therapy was superior to PRP alone.

Role of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The clinical efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of osteoarthritis remains controversial. In this paper, we evaluated the clinical efficacy of PRP in the treatment of osteoarthritis using meta-analysis, providing evidence for the selection of clinical treatment options.

METHODS

We performed a computer-based search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to retrieve articles using the search terms "platelet-rich plasma", "osteoarthrosis", and "knee joint". Quality evaluation and data extraction were performed. The combined effect was assessed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials, involving 320 patients, were included in this study. No significant differences were observed in the International Knee Documentation Committee score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, or the absolute value of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score between the experimental and control groups. The absolute value of the VAS score and change in the WOMAC score were significantly decreased and patient satisfaction was increased in the experimental group, as compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that intra-articular injection of PRP is an effective treatment for osteoarthritis that can reduce post-operative pain, improve locomotor function, and increase patient satisfaction.

Injection-Based Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Systematic Review of Guidelines

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of disability among older adults. Numerous pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical interventions have been described. Intra-articular injections are commonly the first line treatment. There are several articles, reporting the outcome of corticosteroids (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet rich plasma (PRP). The aim of the study is to highlight the usefulness, indication and efficacy of the intra-articular injection of principal drugs. CSs have been shown to reduce the severity of pain, but care should be taken with repeated injections because of potential harm. HA reported good outcomes both for pain reduction and functional improvement. Different national societies guidelines do not recommend the PRP intra-articular injection in the management of knee OA for lack of evidence. In conclusion, the authors affirm that there is some evidence that intra-articular steroids are efficacious, but their benefit may be relatively short lived (<4 weeks). Most of the positive outcome were limited to the studies or part of the studies that considered the injection of high molecular weight as visco-supplementation, with a course of two to four injections a year.

Therapeutic Review of Methylprednisolone Acetate Intra-Articular Injection in the Management of Osteoarthritis of the Knee - Part 2: Clinical and Procedural Considerations

The use of an intra-articular methylprednisolone acetate (MPA) injection has been shown to have benefits for symptoms of knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, considerations beyond drug efficacy can influence the appropriateness, clinical effectiveness and potential harm of an injection. A review of research evidence and published literature on clinical and procedural factors influencing the effectiveness and safety of a knee injection has been undertaken. Factors include dose, frequency, contraindications, precautions, drug interactions, side-effects, and procedural and patient-related considerations. An evaluation of evidence indicated that a 40 mg dose provides clinical benefit. No strong predictors of response were evident, with the exception of pain severity. Additional benefit for outcomes from higher doses, local anaesthetic, ultrasound guidance or particular anatomical approaches is yet to be demonstrated. Evidence for dose- and duration-related detrimental effects suggests judicious use and frequency. The evaluation showed that there are a number of contraindications and precautions arising from the drug pharmacology, concurrent medications, comorbidities and adverse events which need consideration and monitoring. There was limited safety evidence concerning anticoagulation. The review found that specialist guidance and limited evidence suggests that injection safety concerning warfarin may be enhanced by ensuring that the international normalized ratio level is within therapeutic range. However, the risk-benefit evaluation concerning non vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants remains challenging. Although there is published guidance, a lack of clinical studies, safety evidence and reversibility advocates caution. Overall, the review indicates that injection decisions and procedures need an individualized approach and supporting evidence is limited in many areas. Evaluation and discussion of benefits and risks, peri-procedural and post-injection management, and tailoring to the context and individuals' preferences are important in optimizing the benefits and safety of a knee injection.