ObjectiveTo observe the clinical effect of combined glucosamine hydrochloride and antiosteoporosis drugs in the treatment of senile knee osteoarthritis. MethodsA total of 120 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee treated from January 2014 to December 2015 were randomly divided into observation group and control group with 60 cases in each. The observation group received not only oral glucosamine hydrochloride, but calcium D3, alfacalcidol, and sodium phosphate for anti-osteoporosis treatment, while the control group was only given oral glucosamine hydrochloride. Lequesne score, curative effect and adverse drug reactions were compared between the two groups 2, 4, and 6 weeks after the beginning of treatment. ResultsWithin two weeks of treatment, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the effective rate (P ＞ 0.05) . But four and six weeks after treatment, the efficiency in the observation group was significantly higher than that in the control group (χ2=6.806, P ＜ 0.01; χ2=24.762, P ＜ 0.01) . Four and six weeks after treatment, Lequesne score of the observation group was significantly lower than that of the control group (t=2.199, P ＜ 0.05; t=4.748, P ＜ 0.001) . There was no significant difference in terms of adverse reactions between the two groups before and after treatment (χ2=0.617, P ＞ 0.05) . ConclusionCompared with single hydrochloric amino glucose treatment, glucosamine hydrochloride combined with anti-osteoporosis treatment for senile knee osteoarthritis has better treatment effect without increase in adverse drug reactions, and it is worth of clinical application.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the therapeutic effect of glucosamine hydrochloride combined with Tenghuangjiangu tablets on knee osteoarthritis. MethodsFrom August 2012 to February 2014, 180 patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomly divided into three groups with 60 in each. Patients in group A were treated with glucosamine hydrochloride; patients in group B were treated with Tenghuangjiangu tablets; and patients in group C were treated with the combination of glucosamine hydrochloride and Tenghuangjiangu tablets. After the 12-week treatment, clinical efficacy and safety of the treatment were observed and compared with those before the treatment. ResultsThe twenty-meter walking pain, Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the joint tenderness in the three groups 12 weeks after the treatment and 4 weeks after withdrawal improved obviously compared with those before the treatment (P<0.05), and the difference between the results of 12 weeks after treatment and 4 weeks after withdrawal was not significant (P>0.05). The improvement in group C was better than both group A and B with significant differences (P<0.05), while the difference between group A and B was not significant (P>0.05). There was no obvious abnormal routine blood and urine test result or damage of liver and lung functions during the treatment in all the three groups. Twelve weeks after treatment, six patients with abdominal ache were found in group A with an incidence of 10.0%; 5 abdominal ache and 2 diarrhea were in group B with a rate of 12.5%; and 4 abdominal ache and 3 diarrhea were in group C with a rate of 12.5%. All the patients completed the treatment. No significant difference in the incidence of adverse reactions was found among the three groups (P>0.05). ConclusionThe therapeutic effect of combined glucosamine hydrochloride and Tenghuangjiangu tablets is obvious on knee osteoarthritis with low incidence of adverse reactions.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy of glucosamine hydrochloride and diacerein for patients with knee osteoarthritis and the MRI variation. MethodsBetween January and June 2014, 90 patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomized into three groups: group A (treated by glucosamine hydrochloride), group B (treated by diacerein) and group C (treated by both glucosamine hydrochloride and diacerein). The score of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) index of osteoarthritis, MRI cartilage injury Recht grading and the curative effects for bone marrow edema, joint cavity effusion and meniscus injury were compared before and after the treatment. ResultsThe scores of WOMAC after treatment in all the groups were improved, while the therapeutic effect of group C lasted longer when medical treatment suspended. The number of articular surface with different degrees of cartilage injury showed no statistically significant change in all three groups (P ＞ 0.05) . The state of bone marrow edema and joint cavity effusion were improved with a statistically significant difference in all groups (P ＜ 0.05) . Patients with lateral meniscus degeneration in group A and patients with medial meniscal tear in group B both increased with statistically significant differences (P ＜ 0.05) . However, in group C, patients with lateral meniscus degeneration or meniscal tear decreased with statistically significant differences (P ＜ 0.05) . ConclusionsThe treatment for osteoarthritis by glucosamine hydrochloride is effective, and the curative effect lasts longer when treated by both glucosamine hydrochloride and diacerein. Glucosamine hydrochloride ameliorates the bone marrow edema and joint cavity effusion. Treatment together with diacerein leads to a better therapeutic effect for patients with meniscus degeneration, yet further studies are needed to prove its effects in ameliorating cartilage injury.
ObjectiveTo discuss the efficacy and safety of the joint application of oral glucosamine hydrochloride tablets and knee joint cavity ozone injection in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. MethodsFrom January 2014 to January 2015, 72 patients who matched the criteria of moderate knee osteoarthritis were randomly divided into two groups according to the table of random number: oral glucosamine hydrochloride tablet and knee joint cavity ozone injection group (group G+O) and ozone group (group O). Patients of group G+O orally took glucosamine hydrochloride tablets (0.48 g, 3 times/day) for twelve weeks, and ozone was injected into the patients’ knee joint once a week for the first four weeks. The treatment for group O patients was the same with Group G+O, except that the glucosamine hydrochloride tablets were replaced by glucosamine hydrochloride placebo (2 tablets, 3 times/day, taking orally). We recorded the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario & McMaster University (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index score and the adverse reactions before treatment and in the first, third and sixth month after treatment. ResultsPatients’ VAS scores and WOMAC scores of both the two groups in the first, third and sixth month after treatment were significantly different from those before the treatment (P ＜ 0.05) . In the first month after treatment, there were no significant difference in patients’ VAS scores and WOMAC scores between the two groups (P ＞ 0.05) . In the third and sixth month after treatment, there were significant differences in patients’ VAS scores and WOMAC scores between the two groups (P ＜ 0.05) . There was no obvious adverse reactions during the treatment. ConclusionsThe combined application of oral glucosamine hydrochloride tablets and knee joint cavity ozone injection and the ozone treatment for moderate knee osteoarthritis are both effective, without any adverse reaction. The combined treatment of oral glucosamine hydrochloride tablets and knee joint cavity ozone injection on moderate knee osteoarthritis has better long-term efficacy, and it is worth spreading.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical effect of combined air pressure wave and oral glucosamine in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. MethodsWe chose 200 patients with knee osteoarthritis treated in the Department of Rehabilitation between April 2013 and March 2015 as our research subjects. The patients were randomly divided into observation group and control group with 100 in each. The control group accepted conventional physical therapy, while the observation group underwent normal physical therapy in combination with air pressure wave and oral glucosamine treatment. We compared the two groups in terms of curative effects. ResultsThe total effective rate was not significantly different between the two groups (P＞0.05) , but in terms of efficiency rate, the observation group (85.0%) was significantly superior to the control group (73.0%) (P ＜ 0.05) . ConclusionCombined air pressure wave and oral glucosamine treatment for knee osteoarthritis is high efficient, which is worthy of being popularized.
ObjectiveTo study the effectiveness and safety of glucosamine for osteoarthritis (OA) in Asian population. MethodDatabases of PubMed, Embase, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang were searched from the time of establishment till May 2014 and controlled trials of glucosamine compared with placebo or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) were included. Quality evaluation and Meta-analysis by using RevMan 5.1 were performed. ResultsA total of 17 studies including 2 251 cases were included. The efficiency rate in the glucosamine group was higher than that in the NSAIDs group[OR=3.03, 95% CI (1.78, 5.18), P<0.000 1]. The efficiency rate in the glucosamine combined NSAIDs group was higher than that in the NSAIDs group[OR=4.30,95%CI (1.84,10.06),P=0.000 8]. The safety analysis showed that the adverse event rate in the glucosamine group was lower than that in the NSAIDs group[OR=0.23,95%CI (0.14,0.37),P<0.000 01], while the difference between the glucosamine combined NSAIDs group and the NSAIDs group was not statistically significant[OR=0.84, 95%CI (0.50, 1.41), P=0.50]. ConclusionsCompared with NSAIDs, glucosamine is better and safer for OA treatment in Asian population.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical effect of arthroscopic microfracture surgery combined with oral glucosamine hydrochloride in the treatment of early knee osteoarthritis. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 172 patients with knee osteoarthritis treated between March 2007 and August 2013. The patients were divided into observation group (n=82) and control group (n=90) according to their treatment. Patients in the control group only underwent arthroscopic debridement and cartilage defect microfracture surgery, while those in the observation group underwent arthroscopic microfracture surgery combined with oral glucosamine hydrochloride. The Lysholm knee functional scores, the Lequesne index and X ray image were used to compare the clinical efficacy between the two groups. ResultsThe postoperative symptoms of both the two groups were significantly alleviated. The Lequesne index was not significantly different between the two groups before surgery, and 1 and 3 months after surgery (P>0.05), but it was significantly difference between the two groups 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after surgery (P<0.05). Before surgery, the Lysholm score was not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05), and the score increased significantly after surgery in both the two groups (P<0.05). One and 3 months after surgery, the Lysholm score was not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05), but it was significantly higher in the observation group 6, 12, 18 and 24 months after surgery. ConclusionArthroscopic microfracture surgery combined with oral glucosamine hydrochloride is effective in treating patients with early knee osteoarthritis, and the clinical efficacy becomes more significant with the time of treatment.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical efficacy of glucosamine hydrochloride tablets in treating knee cartilage injury resulting from rheumatoid arthritis. MethodsWe selected 200 knee cartilage injury patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated in our hospital from January 2011 to January 2015 as the research subjects. They were divided into control group (n=98) and observation group (n=102) according to the time of admission. The control group was treated with conventional disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), while the observation group was treated with glucosamine hydrochloride tablets on the basis of DMARDs. The treatment effect was evaluated and compared between the two groups of patients 18, 36 and 54 weeks after the treatment. ResultsFifty-four weeks later, knee pain score of the observation group was better than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05) . The observation group had a lower Noyes evaluation level than the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P ＜ 0.05) . Adverse reaction in the observation group was 3.92% and it was 3.06% in the control group, and the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant (P ＞ 0.05) . ConclusionGlucosamine hydrochloride tablets combined with conventional anti-rheumatic treatment is effective for knee cartilage injury caused by rheumatoid arthritis, which can promote cartilage repair, and it is worthy of clinical application.
Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of glucosamine hydrochloride and Chinese traditional medicine of angelicae pubescentis and loranthi decoction in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Methods We included 142 patients with mild-to-moderate knee osteoarthritis treated between January 2014 and July 2015. The patients were randomly divided into treatment group and control group. The 72 patients in the treatment group received glucosamine hydrochloride, while the other 70 patients in the control group took oral Chinese medicine of angelicae pubescentis and loranthi decoction. The treatment course was one month. We observed the clinical curative effect of both the two groups. Results After the treatment, the difference in Visual Analogy Score (VAS) and Severity Index of Osteoarthritis (ISOA) in the two groups were significant compared with those before the treatment (P ＜ 0.05) . There were significant differences between the two groups in terms of VAS pain score, ISOA and treatment effectiveness (P ＜ 0.05) . Conclusion Glucosamine hydrochloride can obviously relieve knee osteoarthritis symptoms and improve knee function, which has a better curative effect than the traditional Chinese medicine of angelicae pubescentis and loranthi decoction.
ObjectiveTo observe and study the clinical effect of glucosamine in the treatment of patients with knee articular cartilage injury caused by rheumatoid arthritis. MethodsForty-six patients with knee articular cartilage injury caused by rheumatoid arthritis treated from January 2013 to June 2015 were selected as the research subjects, and they were randomly divided into control group (conventional treatment group, n=23) and observation group (conventional and glucosamine treatment group, n=23) . Then the Noyes classification and serum articular cartilage injury related indexes [cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP), matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-1, MMP-3 and mouse tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinase (TIMP)-1], inflammatory indexes [tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α, interleukin (IL)- 17 and IL-33] of the two groups before and after treatment were compared. ResultsIn the observation group, after treatment for 4, 8 and 12 weeks, Noyes grade was better than that in the control group, but with no statistical significance (P ＞ 0.05) . In the observation group, after treatment for 4, 8 and 12 weeks, serum inflammatory markers serum COMP, MMP-1, MMP-3 and TIMP-1 and other related indicators of cartilage damage and serum TNF-α, IL-17 and IL-33 were all significantly lower than those in the control group (P ＜ 0.05) . ConclusionIn the treatment of patients with knee articular cartilage injury caused by rheumatoid arthritis, glucosamine has active role for the improvement of articular cartilage injury and inflammatory stress state of patients.