Duloxetine in OsteoArthritis (DOA) study: effects of duloxetine on pain and function in end-stage hip and knee OA – a pragmatic enriched randomized controlled trial

Background

Some osteoarthritis (OA) patients experience inadequate pain relief from analgesics like acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This could be the result of experienced non-nociceptive centralized pain. Placebo-controlled randomized trials (RCT) have proven the effectiveness of duloxetine for OA and several chronic pain conditions where central sensitization (CS) is one of the key underlying pain mechanisms.

Objectives

Assess the efficacy of an 8-week duloxetine treatment compared to usual care in end-stage knee and hip OA patients with a level of centralized pain.

Design

Pragmatic, enriched, open-label RCT.

Methods

Patients were randomized to duloxetine or to care-as-usual. Primary outcome was pain in the index joint, measured with the pain domain of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) or the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). The intention-to-treat principle was used, with mixed-model repeated measures to analyze the effect.

Results

One hundred eleven patients were randomized. Nearly 44% felt much to very much better after duloxetine usage compared to 0% in the care-as-usual group (p < 0.001). The duloxetine group scored 11.3 points (95%CI: 5.8, 16.8) better on the pain domain of the KOOS/HOOS (p < 0.001). Knee patients improved significantly more than hip patients (18.7 [95%CI: 11.3, 26.1] versus 6.0 [95%CI: − 2.6, 14.5] points better).

Conclusions

Adding duloxetine treatment seems to be beneficial for end-stage knee OA patients with neuropathic-like symptoms (at risk of CS). End stage Hip OA patients seem to be nonresponsive to duloxetine.

Trial registration

Dutch Trial Registry with number NTR 4744 (15/08/2014) and in the EudraCT database with number 2013–004313-41.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05034-0.

Duloxetine in OsteoArthritis (DOA) study: study protocol of a pragmatic open-label randomised controlled trial assessing the effect of preoperative pain treatment on postoperative outcome after total hip or knee arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Residual pain is a major factor in patient dissatisfaction following total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA). The proportion of patients with unfavourable long-term residual pain is high, ranging from 7% to 34%. There are studies indicating that a preoperative degree of central sensitisation (CS) is associated with poorer postoperative outcomes and residual pain. It is thus hypothesised that preoperative treatment of CS could enhance postoperative outcomes. Duloxetine has been shown to be effective for several chronic pain syndromes, including knee osteoarthritis (OA), in which CS is most likely one of the underlying pain mechanisms. This study aims to evaluate the postoperative effects of preoperative screening and targeted duloxetine treatment of CS on residual pain compared with care-as-usual.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multicentre, pragmatic, prospective, open-label, randomised controlled trial includes patients with idiopathic hip/knee OA who are on a waiting list for primary THA/TKA. Patients at risk for CS will be randomly allocated to the preoperative duloxetine treatment programme group or the care-as-usual control group. The primary end point is the degree of postoperative pain 6 months after THA/TKA. Secondary end points at multiple time points up to 12 months postoperatively are: pain, neuropathic pain-like symptoms, (pain) sensitisation, pain catastrophising, joint-associated problems, physical activity, health-related quality of life, depressive and anxiety symptoms, and perceived improvement. Data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study is approved by the local Medical Ethics Committee (METc 2014/087) and will be conducted according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki (64th, 2013) and the Good Clinical Practice standard (GCP), and in compliance with the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

2013-004313-41; Pre-results.

Pseudotumour incidence, cobalt levels and clinical outcome after large head metal-on-metal and conventional metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty: mid-term results of a randomised controlled trial

We compared the incidence of pseudotumours after large head metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) with that after conventional metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA and assessed the predisposing factors to pseudotumour formation. From a previous randomised controlled trial which compared large head (38 mm to 60 mm) cementless MoM THA with conventional head (28 mm) cementless MoP THA, 93 patients (96 THAs: 41 MoM (21 males, 20 females, mean age of 64 years, standard deviation (sd) 4) and 55 MoP (25 males, 30 females, mean age of 65 years, sd 5) were recruited after a mean follow-up of 50 months (36 to 64). The incidence of pseudotumours, measured using a standardised CT protocol was 22 (53.7%) after MoM THA and 12 (21.8%) after MoP THA. Women with a MoM THA were more likely to develop a pseudotumour than those with a MoP THA (15 vs 7, odds ratio (OR) = 13.4, p < 0.001). There was a similar incidence of pseudotumours in men with MoM THAs and those with MoP THAs (7 vs 5, OR = 2.1, p = 0.30). Elevated cobalt levels (≥ 5 microgram/L) were only associated with pseudotumours in women with a MoM THA. There was no difference in mean Oxford and Harris hip scores between patients with a pseudotumour and those without. Contrary to popular belief, pseudotumours occur frequently around MoP THAs. Women with a MoM THA and an elevated cobalt level are at greatest risk. In this study, pseudotumours had no effect on the functional outcome after either large head MoM or conventional MoP THA.

[A 65-year-old patient with an odontoid fracture caused by 'headbanging']

A 65-year-old woman who habitually made flexion-extension movements with her cervical vertebral column (so-called 'headbanging') was seen with complaints of the neck. X-rays of the neck revealed an odontoid fracture. Bone densitometry revealed lowered bone mineral density (osteopenia). The diagnosis was odontoid fracture due to headbanging, in the presence of osteopenia. Patient recovered after treatment with a neck collar worn for 6 months.

Is range of motion of the hip and ankle joint related to running injuries? A case control study

This study concerns a case-control study on the relation between range of motion (ROM) of the hip and ankle joints and running injuries. Sixteen male runners who had sustained a medically treated running injury during the year prior to the ROM measurements were matched for weekly running distance and age with sixteen male runners who had not sustained such an injury. All subjects were fit at the time of measurement. ROM was measured by standardized goniometry after a warm-up on a cycle-ergometer. Within non-injured subjects all goniometric measurements showed no significant (p > 0.05) differences between the left and right side of the body. Within injured subjects all goniometric measurements showed no significant (p > 0.05) differences between the injured and non-injured side of the body. Runners who had sustained a running injury showed a significant (p > 0.001) more restricted ROM of the hip joints (average ROM value 59.4 degrees +/- 8.0 degrees) in comparison to runners who had no been injured during the same period (average value ROM 68.1 degrees +/- 5.2 degrees). No such differences (p > 0.05) were found with regard to ankle ROM (average ROM value injured 12.8 degrees +/- 3.4 degrees and average ROM value non injured 14.0 degrees +/- 2.7 degrees). These findings suggest that ROM can be characterized as a more or less stable anthropometric trait.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)