Pharmacological Management of Osteoarthritis With a Focus on Symptomatic Slow-Acting Drugs: Recommendations From Leading Russian Experts

BACKGROUND

This article describes an updated stepwise algorithm for the pharmacological management of osteoarthritis (OA) to establish a treatment method for patients with OA.

SUMMARY

In step 1, background maintenance therapy includes symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA, especially prescription crystalline glucosamine sulfate product, for which the high-quality evidence base of efficacy is unequivocal, or prescription chondroitin sulfate. Oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or paracetamol only as rescue analgesia is given on top of the background therapy. Step 2: For patients with persistent OA symptoms, the use of oral NSAIDs is mandatory for maintaining supportive therapy with symptomatic slow-acting drugs for OA. It is recommended to properly stratify patients and carefully select oral NSAID therapy to maximize the benefit-to-risk ratio. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid and intra-articular corticosteroids are recommended as well in step 2 of the algorithm, especially for patients who do not respond to the previous therapies. Step 3: Duloxetine is considered along with the previous procedures, especially in patients with pain from central sensitization. Step 4: Total joint replacement is recommended for patients with severe symptoms and poor quality of life.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

The current guidelines and literature review provide evidence-based recommendations supported by clinical experience on how to organize the treatment process in patients with knee OA applicable in the Russian clinical practice.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

International evidence-based guidelines lack consensus on different treatments, including the use of prescription crystalline glucosamine sulfate, NSAIDs, and intra-articular hyaluronic acid. The content of this article needs a further discussion about the clinical evidence and harmonization of recommendations for knee OA management.

[Efficacy and safety of magnet therapy using portable device for knee osteoarthritis. 55-week double-blind study results]

Instrumental physiotherapeutic treatment using portable devices is optimal for patients with rheumatic diseases due to the devices' greater accessibility. However, there are still issues concerning the efficacy of physical factors generated by portable equipment in osteoarthritis (OA), mostly due to the limited evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy and safety of long-term use of the portable magnet therapy device ALMAG+ (Almag Active) in knee OA (KOA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, prospective, 55-week clinical trial of the medical device was conducted. The study included patients with primary and secondary (associated with immunoinflammatory rheumatic diseases) KOA stages I-III according to Kellgren-Lawrence diagnosed using generally accepted criteria (R. Altman et al., 1986). Enrollment of patients with secondary KOA was allowed given that the remission or low disease activity was achieved. During the study patients had to receive steady drug therapy. No intra-articular injections of glucocorticosteroids, hyaluronic acid, PRP, and physiotherapy procedures for knees (electrotherapy, shockwave therapy, heat therapy, hydrotherapy, peloid therapy) were allowed three months or less before the enrollment and throughout the study. According to the approved protocol, 77 patients (mean age 52.73±12.97 years) from two research centers participated in the study: 32 (41.6%) were males, and 45 (58.4%) were females. Primary KOA occurred in 41 (52%) patients, 36 (46.8%) patients had secondary KOA (associated with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, Sjögren's disease, psoriatic arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, or diffuse scleroderma). All patients received NSAIDs as a concomitant therapy, 24.7% received diacerein, 28.6% received disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, 2.6% received methylprednisolone up to 8 mg/day, and 9% received biologic therapy. After randomization, 40 (52%) patients received placebo treatments (Group 1) and 37 (48%) received active treatments (Group 2). Both groups were comparable in the main parameters. The proportion of smokers was higher in Group 2, but the difference was not statistically significant. During the 55-week follow-up, three courses of 18 daily home magnet therapy procedures each were performed.

RESULTS

In both groups, starting from week 5 of the study, an improvement of pain on movement and at rest according to VAS compared to the baseline (p<0.01 at all assessment time points) was observed, which can be explained by a pronounced placebo effect, often observed in OA. The improvement of pain at rest was more prominent in Group 2 vs. Group 1 at Week 21 (p=0.038) and Week 55 (p=0.017) of the study, probably due to the anti-inflammatory effect. The overall WOMAC index score was also lower in Group 2 vs. Group 1 at Weeks 21 and 55 (p=0.03 at both time points). The mean articular cartilage thickness, determined by ultrasound, reduced in Group 1 and remained practically unchanged in Group 2 (p=0.011). No adverse events associated with the use of the ALMAG+ (Almag Active) device, according to the attending physician, and no exacerbations of immunoinflammatory rheumatic diseases during the study period were reported.

CONCLUSION

The results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of magnet therapy using a portable device demonstrated analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and structure-modifying effects of this type of physiotherapeutic treatment. No adverse events and exacerbations of rheumatic diseases associated with the study treatment have been reported.

[Apparatus physiotherapy in the treatment of rheumatic diseases]

Rheumatic diseases are a major medical and social problem. The mechanisms' variety of these diseases' development requires different approaches: the strategies of drug and non-drug therapy in modern rheumatology are designed to be complemented to each other. The most relevant treatment of rheumatic conditions is the method of pulsed magnetic fields because the sensitivity of biological tissues to them is the highest one.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficiency and safety of the ALMAG + magnetic therapy device in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joints».

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article presents preliminary data of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study «Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of the ALMAG + magnetic therapy device in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee joints». The study includes 70 patients (25 men, 45 women) of which 34 (48.6%) are patients with primary osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee joints (OAKS) and 36 (51.4%) are with secondary knee OA (on the background of immunoinflammatory rheumatic diseases). The patients were randomely divided into 2 groups: the main group (active devices) with 34 (48.6%) patients and the control group (placebo devices) - 36 (51.4%) patients. Patients of the main and control groups were comparable in all main parameters. During the study, the patients underwent 3 courses of treatment with the ALMAG + apparatus or with a placebo apparatus during the year. The preliminary analysis includes data on 58 patients who underwent at least 2 courses of therapy (28 patients from the main group and 30 from the control group).

RESULTS

Pain at rest decreased in the main group by 4.0±2.9 mm, in the control group - by 1.07±2.21 mm (p=0.420), after the second course - by 5.13±3.4 and 1.81±2.19 mm (p=0.406), respectively. In the main group, the total WOMAC index decreased after the 1st course of physiotherapy from 24.0±14.9 to 20.25±14.31 mm (p=0.038), after the 2nd course it slightly increased - to 22.96±14.8 mm (p=0.314), in the control group the WOMAC index did not change statistically significantly: it decreased after the 1st course from 26.3±21.9 to 24.6±20.83 mm (p=0.112), after the 2nd course it increased to 27.04±21.9 mm (p=0.088).

CONCLUSION

Thus, the use of the ALMAG + apparatus at home contributed to a decrease in pain at rest and a significant decrease in the WOMAC index in patients with primary and secondary OA of the knee joints. Pulsed magnetotherapy did not cause adverse events or exacerbation of immunoinflammatory diseases.

[Symptomatic slow-acting drugs in the treatment of osteoarthritis: focus on glucosamine preparations]

The article discusses the place of symptomatic slow-acting drugs in current guidelines for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Special emphasis is put ot glucosamine preparations, the attitude towards which, until recently, was ambiguous. The results of experimental and clinical studies demonstrating the advantages of crystalline glucosamine sulfate over preparations/food additives of glucosamine hydrochloride are presented. The differences in the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of glucosamine sulfate and glucosamine hydrochloride, which may be the reason for the ineffectiveness of the latter in clinical trials, are discussed.

Medium- and long-term results of high tibial osteotomy in patients with primary and secondary knee osteoarthritis with varus deformity

The most common operation for knee osteoarthritis (OA) is total knee arthroplasty (TKA); however, the latter is associated with the development of severe complications. This was the reason for the revival of the interest of orthopedic traumatologists in high tibial osteotomy (HTO), the essence of which is to transfer the load away from the affected medial part of the knee joint (KJ) to the intact lateral one.

Objective: to evaluate the medium- and long-term results of open-wedge (OW) HTO in primary and secondary I–III stage knee OA.

Patients and methods. The Laboratory of Orthopedic Rheumatology and Rehabilitation, V.A. Nasonova Research Institute of Rheumatology, performed 10 OW HTOs in 9 patients in 2005 to 2009 and 21 more OW HTOs in 19 patients in 2014 to 2018 (a total of 31 operations). The male/female ratio was 2.5:1. The mean age of the patients was 57.6±12.5 years; the body mass index (BMI) was 28.5±3.6 kg/m2 ; the correction angle was 11.7±2.5°. Preoperative planning was performed using the Miniaci method; the X-ray stage of knee OA was evaluated according to the Kellgren–Lawrence classification. OW HTO was carried out. For assessment of its results, the investigators determined the degree of pain using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and the KJ status by the Knee Society Score (KSS) scale. The results were assessed at one (n=31), 3.5±0.6 (n=28), and 8.5±1.3 (n=10) years.

Results and discussion. There was a tendency to worsen surgical results over time. The mean VAS values for pain at 1, 3.5, and 8.5 years were as follows: 9.8±10.3; 21.2±16.2 and 38±15.5 mm, respectively. In the same periods, the KSS functional scores were 83.6±14.8, 85.2±12.6, and 80.5±14.2; the objective scores were 80.7±8.5, 75.2±12.7, and 67.8±16.3. There was a strong correlation between the severity of pain and the functional and objective KSS scores (-0.78, -0.81 years, and -0.91 at 1, 3.5, and 8.5 years, respectively; p<0.05). At 3.5±0.6 years, the survival rate after OW HTO was 96.6%. None of the patients examined at 8.5±1.3 years after OW HTO needed TKA. The surgical result was studied in 2 patients at 14 years; one patient underwent TKA, the other refused surgical intervention, the result was satisfactory.

Conclusion. OW HTO has limited indications for use. However, in patients who are allowed to undergo this operation, pain syndrome can be relieved, by maintaining and/or improving KJ function; in most cases, TKA can be delayed for more than 10 years.