NSAIDs vs acetaminophen in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a systematic review regarding heterogeneity influencing the outcomes

Significance of Necroptosis in Cartilage Degeneration

Cartilage, a critical tissue for joint function, often degenerates due to osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and trauma. Recent research underscores necroptosis, a regulated form of necrosis, as a key player in cartilage degradation. Unlike apoptosis, necroptosis triggers robust inflammatory responses, exacerbating tissue damage. Key mediators such as receptor-interacting serine/threonine-protein kinase-1 (RIPK1), receptor-interacting serine/threonine-protein kinase-3(RIPK3), and mixed lineage kinase domain-like (MLKL) are pivotal in this process. Studies reveal necroptosis contributes significantly to OA and RA pathophysiology, where elevated RIPK3 and associated proteins drive cartilage degradation. Targeting necroptotic pathways shows promise; inhibitors like Necrostatin-1 (Nec-1), GSK'872, and Necrosulfonamide (NSA) reduce necroptotic cell death, offering potential therapeutic avenues. Additionally, autophagy's role in mitigating necroptosis-induced damage highlights the need for comprehensive strategies addressing multiple pathways. Despite these insights, further research is essential to fully understand necroptosis' mechanisms and develop effective treatments. This review synthesizes current knowledge on necroptosis in cartilage degeneration, aiming to inform novel therapeutic approaches for OA, RA, and trauma.

Comparative effectiveness of early initiation of oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug and oral acetaminophen therapies on the time to knee replacement in patients with knee osteoarthritis in Japan

BACKGROUND

Although disease-modifying properties of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for osteoarthritis (OA) have been reported, the effects of NSAIDs on OA progression remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of early initiation of oral NSAID therapy on the progression of knee OA.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we extracted data of patients newly diagnosed with knee OA between November 2007 and October 2018 from a Japanese claims database. The primary outcome was the time to knee replacement (KR), and the secondary outcome was the time to composite event including joint lavage and debridement, osteotomy, or arthrodesis in addition to KR. Weighted Cox regression analysis with standardized mortality/morbidity ratio (SMR) weight was performed to compare the outcomes between patients prescribed oral NSAID (NSAID group) and those prescribed oral acetaminophen (APAP) (APAP group) early after a diagnosis of knee OA. Propensity scores were calculated using logistic regression conditioned on potential confounding factors, and SMR weights were calculated using the propensity scores.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 14,261 patients, who were divided into two groups as follows: 13,994 in the NSAID group and 267 in the APAP group. The mean ages of patients in the NSAID and APAP groups were 56.9 and 56.1 years, respectively. Furthermore, 62.01% and 68.16% patients in the NSAID and APAP groups, respectively, were female. The NSAID group had a reduced risk of KR compared with the APAP group in the analysis using SMR weighting (SMR-weighted hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-0.78). While no statistically significant difference was found for the risk of composite event between the two groups (SMR-weighted hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-1.91).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of KR in the NSAID group was significantly lower than that in the APAP group after accounting for residual confounding using SMR weighting. This finding suggests that oral NSAID therapy early after the initial diagnosis is associated with a reduced risk of KR in patients with symptomatic knee OA.

Paracetamol: A Review of Guideline Recommendations

Musculoskeletal pain conditions are age-related, leading contributors to chronic pain and pain-related disability, which are expected to rise with the rapid global population aging. Current medical treatments provide only partial relief. Furthermore, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids are effective in young and otherwise healthy individuals but are often contraindicated in elderly and frail patients. As a result of its favorable safety and tolerability record, paracetamol has long been the most common drug for treating pain. Strikingly, recent reports questioned its therapeutic value and safety. This review aims to present guideline recommendations. Paracetamol has been assessed in different conditions and demonstrated therapeutic efficacy on both acute and chronic pain. It is active as a single agent and is additive or synergistic with NSAIDs and opioids, improving their efficacy and safety. However, a lack of significant efficacy and hepatic toxicity have also been reported. Fast dissolving formulations of paracetamol provide superior and more extended pain relief that is similar to intravenous paracetamol. A dose reduction is recommended in patients with liver disease or malnourished. Genotyping may improve efficacy and safety. Within the current trend toward the minimization of opioid analgesia, it is consistently included in multimodal, non-opioid, or opioid-sparing therapies. Paracetamol is being recommended by guidelines as a first or second-line drug for acute pain and chronic pain, especially for patients with limited therapeutic options and for the elderly.

Efficacy and Safety of Sahastara Remedy Extract Capsule in Primary Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Double-Blinded Active-Controlled Trial

Sahastara (SHT) remedy is a Thai traditional medicine described in the Thai National List of Essential Medicine (NLEM) for the relief of muscle pain. The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of SHT remedy extract capsule for treating primary OA. A phase 2, double-blind, randomized, and controlled trial study was used to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of SHT in comparison with diclofenac for the treatment of knee OA. The outcome of reduce pain was measured from VAS, 100 meter time walk, and the WOMAC score of day 14 and day 28 which should reduce significantly when compared with day 0 and should be equal with or better than diclofenac. Blood pressure and blood chemistry values at day 14 and day 28 did not change when compared with day 0. The results found that SHT remedy ethanolic extract capsule can reduce all OA knee scores at day 14 and day 28 significantly when compared with day 0 and also no significant difference with diclofenac (P > 0.05). The SHT also showed safety values on blood pressure and blood chemistry. The SHT was observed that it had no serious side effect. The results of this study are the first report of using the SHT ethanolic extract capsule in the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the knee. It can be recommended as an anti-inflammatory herbal drug for reducing pain in knee osteoarthritis patients.

Outpatient Evaluation of Knee Pain

Knee pain is present in up to 20% of the adult general population and can be significantly debilitating to patients. A thorough history and physical examination can help localize the source of inflammation or injury to further determine if imaging, physical therapy, specialty referral, or surgery is necessary. By following a systematic approach to evaluating knee pain, primary care physicians can make the correct diagnosis and formulate an appropriate therapeutic strategy for patients.

The effects of platelet-rich plasma injection in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

We conducted this updated meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of PRP in patients with knee or hip OA.

METHOD

PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of PRP with other intra-articular injections. The outcomes of interest included Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC).

RESULTS

Twenty-four RCTs with 21 at knee OA and three at hip OA were included in this meta-analysis. The PRP injections significantly improved the WOMAC score, VAS score, IKDC score, and HHS score as compared with comparators. The WOMAC pain, stiffness, and physical function scores were also significantly better in the PRP group than in the control group. Most of the evaluated parameters that favored PRP were observed in knee OA but not in hip OA, at short-term (at 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 months) but not long-term follow-up (at 18 months), in RCTs with low risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-articular PRP injection provided better effects than other injections for OA patients, especially in knee OA patients, in terms of pain reduction and function improvement at short-term follow-up. Key Points • This updated meta-analysis, based on great sample size and high-quality studies, evaluates the effects of PRP in patients with knee or hip OA. • Intra-articular PRP injection provided better effects than other injections for OA patients. • Most of the evaluated parameters that favored PRP were observed in knee OA at short term (at 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 months).

The Efficacy of a Lateral Wedge Insole for Painful Medial Knee Osteoarthritis After Prescreening: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

Lateral wedge shoe insoles decrease medial knee loading, but trials have shown no effect on pain in medial knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, loading effects of insoles are inconsistent, and they can increase patellofemoral loading. We undertook this study to investigate the hypothesis that insoles would reduce pain in preselected patients.

METHODS

Among patients with painful medial knee OA, we excluded those with patellofemoral OA and those with a pain rating of <4 of a possible 10. We further excluded participants who, in a gait analysis using lateral wedges, did not show at least a 2% reduction in knee adduction moment (KAM), compared to wearing their shoes and a neutral insole. We then randomized subjects to lateral wedge versus neutral insole for 8-week periods, separated by an 8-week washout. The primary outcome measure was knee pain (0-10 scale) during the past week, and secondary outcome measures included activity pain and pain rated in the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score questionnaire. We carried out mixed model analyses adjusted for baseline pain.

RESULTS

Of 83 participants, 21 (25.3%) were excluded from analysis because of insufficient reduction in KAM. In the 62 patients included in analysis, the mean ± SD age was 64.2 ± 9.1 years, and 37.1% were women. Lateral wedge insoles produced a greater reduction in knee pain than neutral insoles (mean difference of 0.7 on 0-10 scale [95% confidence interval 0.1, 1.2]) (P = 0.02). Findings for secondary outcome measures were mixed.

CONCLUSION

In participants prescreened to eliminate those with patellofemoral OA and biomechanical nonresponders, lateral wedge insoles reduced knee pain, but the effect of treatment was small and is likely of clinical significance in only a minority of patients. Targeting patients may identify those who respond to this treatment.

Emerging Treatment Models in Rheumatology: Challenges for Osteoarthritis Trials

At a time when advancing understanding of osteoarthritis (OA) has created opportunities for new treatments, development of treatments has remained considerably behind advances in other rheumatic diseases. We describe elements of trial design and measurements that have inhibited success and offer suggestions that may help break the log jam. Among the problems with trials that include pain as an outcome measure are reliance on a single, non-optimal pain outcome, overestimation of likely effects of treatments on pain, and failure to identify patient subgroups most likely to respond to specific treatments. With regard to the use of structure modification as an outcome measure, demonstrating structure modification is often highly challenging, even with the use of magnetic resonance imaging. Many OA patients have advanced disease that is unlikely to respond to treatments that prevent cartilage loss. Further, prevention of cartilage loss and reduction of pain correlate weakly at best, and in at least some patients, reduction in pain may actually increase joint damage, making it impossible to demonstrate dual treatment effects on structure and pain in such scenarios. For structure outcomes, treatment effects on pain-sensitive structures such as bone and synovium may be more achievable than preventing cartilage loss. We suggest that changes in trial design related to some of these issues may increase the chances that new exciting and effective OA treatments will become available.

Developing, Conducting, and Publishing Appropriate Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Articles

The volume of medical literature is growing at a rate that renders decision-making difficult without specialized summary tools. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are important research instruments used to condense and clarify a broad scope of information into manageable summaries. When used effectively, these reports can pool cumulative data across primary studies, formulate clinical guidelines, and guide future research endeavors. However, errors in study design can result in ineffective or misleading analyses. This article presents the appropriate uses for systematic review and meta-analysis by introducing a framework for creating summary studies, and supplying specific examples of pitfalls in study design and execution.

Mefenamic acid decreases inflammation but not joint lesions in experimental osteoarthritis

Mefenamic acid is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug able to control the symptoms of osteoarthritis (OA), but its effects on protection of cartilage and bone are still unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether the control of inflammation by mefenamic acid translates into decreased joint lesions in experimental OA in rats. OA was induced by injecting 1 mg of monosodium iodoacetate (MIA) into the joints of rats. The animals were treated with mefenamic acid (50 mg/kg, daily, oral gavage) either pre-MIA injection (preventive) or post-MIA injection (therapeutic). Joint swelling and hyperalgesia were evaluated at baseline and 1, 3, 14 and 28 days after induction of OA. Intra-articular lavage and kinetics of cell migration into the synovium were measured 3 and 28 days after OA induction. Histopathological analysis, Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) score, total synovium cells count, cartilage area and levels of proteoglycans in joints were also evaluated. Mefenamic acid prevented joint oedema and hyperalgesia induced by MIA in the acute phase (3 days) of the disease. In the chronic phase (28 days), preventive and therapeutic regimens decreased the number of mononuclear cells in the joint cavity. In contrast, thickening of the synovium, bone resorption, loss of cartilage and levels of proteoglycans were unaffected by mefenamic acid when it was administered either preventively or therapeutically. Thus, mefenamic acid had anti-inflammatory effects but did not reduce the progression of OA lesions, thereby indicating that it is only effective for symptomatic control of OA.

PANLAR Consensus Recommendations for the Management in Osteoarthritis of Hand, Hip, and Knee

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this consensus is to update the recommendations for the treatment of hand, hip, and knee osteoarthritis (OA) by agreeing on key propositions relating to the management of hand, hip, and knee OA, by identifying and critically appraising research evidence for the effectiveness of the treatments and by generating recommendations based on a combination of the available evidence and expert opinion of 18 countries of America.

METHODS

Recommendations were developed by a group of 48 specialists of rheumatologists, members of other medical disciplines (orthopedics and physiatrists), and three patients, one for each location of OA. A systematic review of existing articles, meta-analyses, and guidelines for the management of hand, hip, and knee OA published between 2008 and January 2014 was undertaken. The scores for Level of Evidence and Grade of Recommendation were proposed and fully consented within the committee based on The American Heart Association Evidence-Based Scoring System. The level of agreement was established through a variation of Delphi technique.

RESULTS

Both "strong" and "conditional" recommendations are given for management of hand, hip, and knee OA and nonpharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical modalities of treatment are presented according to the different levels of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations are based on the consensus of clinical experts from a wide range of disciplines taking available evidence into account while balancing the benefits and risks of nonpharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical treatment modalities, and incorporating their preferences and values. Different backgrounds in terms of patient education or drug availability in different countries were not evaluated but will be important.

Clinical update on benefit versus risks of oral paracetamol alone or with codeine: still a good option?

BACKGROUND

After decades of worldwide use of paracetamol/acetaminophen as a popular and apparently safe prescription and over-the-counter medicine, the future role of this poorly understood analgesic has been seriously questioned by recent concerns about prenatal, cardiovascular (CV) and hepatic safety, and also about its analgesic efficacy. At the same time the usefulness of codeine in combination products has come under debate.

METHODS

Based on a PubMed database literature search on the terms efficacy, safety, paracetamol, acetaminophen, codeine and their combinations up to and including June 2016, this clinical update reviews the current evidence of the benefit and risks of oral paracetamol alone and with codeine for mild-to-moderate pain in adults, and compares the respective efficacy and safety profiles with those of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

RESULTS

Whereas there is a clear strong association of NSAID use and gastrointestinal (GI) and CV morbidity and mortality, evidence for paracetamol with and without codeine supports the recommended use even in most vulnerable individuals, such as the elderly, pregnant women, alcoholics, and compromised GI and CV patients. The controversies and widespread misconceptions about the complex hepatic metabolism and potential hepatotoxicity have been corrected by recent reviews, and paracetamol remains the first-line nonopioid analgesic in patients with liver diseases if notes of caution are applied.

CONCLUSION

Due to its safety and tolerability profile paracetamol remained a first-line treatment in many international guidelines. Alone and with codeine it is a safe and effective option in adults, whilst NSAIDs are obviously less safe as alternatives, given the risk of potentially fatal GI and CV adverse effects.

Knee osteoarthritis pain following medial meniscectomy in the nonhuman primate

OBJECTIVE

A number of promising compounds developed for osteoarthritic pain have failed to demonstrate clinical efficacy. To enhance preclinical translational research for osteoarthritis, a model of knee osteoarthritis pain was developed in Macaca fascicularis and the effects of two distinct pharmacological classes of drugs were tested on pain-related behavior.

DESIGN

Behavioral assessments were developed specifically for the macaque. Baseline knee pressure threshold and weight bearing were assessed prior to a unilateral medial meniscectomy (MMx). Fifteen days following MMx, macaques underwent a once daily exercise regimen for 36 days. Sixty-seven days following MMx, macaques were assigned to one of three treatment groups (n = 3/group), either non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac, NK1 receptor antagonist aprepitant or vehicle, and treated for 5 days. Animals were tested 3-4 h after p.o. dosing and testing was performed blinded. Treatment utilized a crossover design-each animal received all treatments-and a 9-day washout period was utilized between treatments.

RESULTS

Vehicle-treated macaques consistently demonstrated decreased ipsilateral pressure threshold ("hyperalgesia") and decreased weight bearing. While diclofenac increased weight bearing and pressure threshold, full attenuation of pain was not obtained. No significant improvement of either knee pressure or weight bearing was observed with aprepitant.

CONCLUSIONS

Unilateral MMx in the macaque evoked pain-related behaviors and knee joint pathology reminiscent of osteoarthritis. The behavioral endpoints were sensitive to NSAID treatment but not sensitive to NK1 receptor block, which parallel clinical findings. The current macaque osteoarthritis model could be used to test potential treatments for osteoarthritis pain.

Comparative pain reduction of oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids for knee osteoarthritis: systematic analytic review

OBJECTIVE

Summarize the comparative effectiveness of oral non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and opioids in reducing knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain.

METHODS

Two reviewers independently screened reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published in English between 1982 and 2015, evaluating oral NSAIDs or opioids for knee OA. Included studies were at least 8 weeks duration, conducted in Western Europe, the Americas, New Zealand, or Australia, and reported baseline and follow-up pain using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) Pain subscale (0-100, 100-worst). Effectiveness was evaluated as reduction in pain, accounting for study dropout and heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven treatment arms (nine celecoxib, four non-selective NSAIDs [diclofenac, naproxen, piroxicam], eleven less potent opioids [tramadol], and three potent opioids [hydromorphone, oxycodone]) from 17 studies were included. NSAID and opioid studies reported similar baseline demographics and efficacy withdrawal rates; NSAID studies reported lower baseline pain and toxicity withdrawal rates. Accounting for efficacy-related withdrawals, all drug classes were associated with similar pain reductions (NSAIDs: -18; less potent opioids: -18; potent opioids: -19). Meta-regression did not reveal differential effectiveness by drug class but found that study cohorts with a higher proportion of male subjects and worse mean baseline pain had greater pain reduction. Similarly, results of the network meta-analysis did not find a significant difference in WOMAC Pain reduction for the three analgesic classes.

CONCLUSION

NSAIDs and opioids offer similar pain relief in OA patients. These data could help clinicians and patients discuss likely benefits of alternative analgesics.

Safe prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in patients with osteoarthritis--an expert consensus addressing benefits as well as gastrointestinal and cardiovascular risks

BACKGROUND

There are several guidelines addressing the issues around the use of NSAIDs. However, none has specifically addressed the upper versus lower gastrointestinal (GI) risk of COX-2 selective and non-selective compounds nor the interaction at both the GI and cardiovascular (CV) level of either class of drugs with low-dose aspirin. This Consensus paper aims to develop statements and guidance devoted to these specific issues through a review of current evidence by a multidisciplinary group of experts.

METHODS

A modified Delphi consensus process was adopted to determine the level of agreement with each statement and to determine the level of agreement with the strength of evidence to be assigned to the statement.

RESULTS

For patients with both low GI and CV risks, any non-selective NSAID (ns-NSAID) alone may be acceptable. For those with low GI and high CV risk, naproxen may be preferred because of its potential lower CV risk compared with other ns-NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors, but celecoxib at the lowest approved dose (200 mg once daily) may be acceptable. In patients with high GI risk, if CV risk is low, a COX-2 selective inhibitor alone or ns-NSAID with a proton pump inhibitor appears to offer similar protection from upper GI events. However, only celecoxib will reduce mucosal harm throughout the entire GI tract. When both GI and CV risks are high, the optimal strategy is to avoid NSAID therapy, if at all possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Time is now ripe for offering patients with osteoarthritis the safest and most cost-effective therapeutic option, thus preventing serious adverse events which could have important quality of life and resource use implications. Please see related article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0291-x.

The Clinical Efficacy and Safety of the Sahastara Remedy versus Diclofenac in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Double-Blind, Randomized, and Controlled Trial

Introduction. The Sahastara (SHT) remedy is a Thai traditional medicine that has been acknowledged in the Thai National List of Essential Medicine and has been used as an alternative medicine to treat knee osteoarthritis. Although SHT remedies have been used in Thai traditional medical practices for a long period of time, there are few reports on their clinical trials. Aim of the Study. To investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of the SHT remedy in treating OA of the knee when compared to diclofenac. Methods. A phase 2, double-blind, randomized, and controlled trial study with a purpose to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of SHT in comparison with diclofenac for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Sixty-six patients, ages between 45 and 80 years of age, were randomly allocated into 2 groups. The SHT group received 1,000 mg of SHT powdered capsules 3 times per day, orally before meals, while another group received 25 mg of diclofenac sodium capsules 3 times a day, orally after meals for 28 days. All patients were followed up at 14 and 28 days for the evaluation of the efficacy and safety by using clinical examinations, blood tests, a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and the 100-meter walktime test. Improvement on the quality of life was also assessed by the WOMAC index. Results. There were 31 and 30 patients in SHT and diclofenac groups, respectively, who had completed the study. Both medications have shown to significantly reduce the VAS for pain, and significantly improve the 100-meter walktime test and the WOMAC index score. However, there were no differences in the efficacy between the two groups. The blood chemistry showed no toxicity on renal and/or liver functions after taking SHT for 28 days but the patients who took diclofenac showed significant increases in their AST, ALT, and ALP. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure slightly increased in the diclofenac group but the SHT group did not effect on blood pressure. Conclusions. The SHT remedy is similar to diclofenac in all evaluating symptoms of OA knee. However, the SHT remedy has shown to be a good alternative treatment for OA knee with less systemic side effects when it was compared with diclofenac.

Quality of care for hip and knee osteoarthritis at family medicine clinics: lessons from Mexico

OBJECTIVE

(i) To develop quality-of-care indicators suitable for evaluation of care for knee and hip osteoarthritis (KHOA) at the primary care level using data from the electronic health records (EHRs) and (ii) to evaluate the quality of care that patients with KHOA receive at family medicine clinics (FMCs).

DESIGN

(i) Development of indicators following the RAND-UCLA method. (ii) A cross-sectional analysis of quality-of-care provided for patients with osteoarthritis.

SETTING

Four FMCs in Mexico City.

PARTICIPANTS

Knee and hip osteoarthritis patients, older than 19 years.

SOURCE OF THE INFORMATION

2009 EHR data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality of care was evaluated using six indicators developed in the first stage of this study.

RESULTS

The quality of care evaluation identified that 26.1% of patients were advised in regard to physical exercise, and weight loss was encouraged in 19.7%. Only 5% of patients received acetaminophen as an initial oral analgesic; 54% of patients at risk for gastrointestinal complications received gastroprotective medicines. On average, the percentage of recommended care received was lower for patients who attended only one visit with family physician (17.6%) and higher for those with >3 visits (41.9%).

CONCLUSION

The quality of osteoarthritis care at FMCs in Mexico is suboptimal relative to the standards of care and requires continuous evaluation and implementation of improvement strategies.