Effects of joint lavage and steroid injection in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: results of a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Assessment of the efficacy of joint lavage versus joint lavage plus corticoids in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. A randomized placebo-controlled trial of arthroscopic lavage versus lavage plus intra-articular corticosteroids in the management of symptomatic osteoarthritis of the knee. A randomized, controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery versus closed-needle joint lavage for patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. Improvement of pain and function after arthroscopy and arthrocentesis of the temporomandibular joint: a comparative study. Arthroscopic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Results of a pilot study.
To evaluate the efficacy of joint lavage and intraarticular steroid injection, alone and in combination, in the treatment of patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA).
                Ninety-eight patients with painful tibiofemoral OA were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, controlled, 2 x 2 factorial-design trial of 6 months' duration. The 4 treatment groups consisted of 1) intraarticular placebo (1.5 ml of 0.9% normal saline), 2) intraarticular corticosteroids (3.75 mg of cortivazol in 1.5 ml), 3) joint lavage and intraarticular placebo, and 4) joint lavage and intraarticular corticosteroid. Outcome measures evaluated at baseline, week 1, week 4, week 12, and week 24 included severity of pain (100-mm visual analog scale [VAS]), global status (100-mm VAS), and Lequesne's functional index.
                No interaction between steroid injection and joint lavage was demonstrated. Patients who had undergone joint lavage had significantly improved pain VAS scores at week 24 (P = 0.020). In contrast, corticosteroid injection had no long-term effect (P = 0.313); corticosteroid injection was associated with a decrease in pain only at week 1 (P = 0.003) and week 4 (P = 0.020). After week 4, Lequesne's functional index was not significantly improved regardless of the assigned treatment.
                Compared with placebo, both treatments significantly relieved pain but did not improve functional impairment. The effects of the 2 treatments were additive. Cortivazol provided short-term relief of pain (up to week 4). The effects of joint lavage persisted up to week 24. Joint lavage (JL), involves the passage of cold sterile 0.9% saline through the knee joint in order to have the fluid reach the inside of the joint capsule. This technique was evaluated as a local treatment for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee alone (JL) and in combination with intra-articular infiltration with glucocorticoids (JLC).
                An overall 299 knees belonging to 205 patients (22% males, 78% females) with a mean age of 67 +/- 8 years and osteoarthritis of the knee of radiological grade II or III on the Kellgren scale were randomised in the ratio of 1:4 into two therapeutic groups, namely: JL (n = 62) and JLC (n = 237). All patients received joint lavage on day 0; in those of the JLC group, joint lavage was followed by infiltration of 40 mg of triamcinolone acetonide. The efficacy of both treatments was assessed by recording the corresponding values for the following variables: pain strength as measured by a visual analogy scale (VAS), effusion, crepitation, restricted motion, of osteoarthritis of the knee. spontaneous pain, pain on pressure, pain on passive motion and pain on active motion; all of these were recorded at the onset of the study, and after 1 and 3 months.
                There were no significant differences in the values of the variables at the different followup times. Also, pain severity was similar in both treatment groups. Thus, VAS for pain was 7.3 +/- 0.3 for the JL group and 7.1 +/- 0.2 for the JLC group at the onset, and decreased to 3.0 +/- 0.3 in the former and 2.8 +/- 0.2 in the latter after 1 month; the decrease was statistically significant in both cases. After 3 months, the JL and JLC groups had a VAS of 3.5 +/- 0.3 and 3.8 +/- 0.2, respectively.
                The results of this work suggest the absence of significant differences between the two treatments, such that both joint lavage alone and with infiltration with corticoids can be concluded as similarly effective for the symptomatic management To assess the efficacy of intra-articular steroid injections following arthroscopy and joint lavage in symptomatic OA of the knee.
                Seventy-seven patients with OA of the knee were randomized to receive either 120 mg methylprednisolone acetate (MPA) or placebo following arthroscopy. Clinical assessments included severity of pain on movement and at rest, stiffness, the presence of joint effusions, range of movement, WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) score and Lequesne functional assessment. The outcome measures were evaluated at baseline and 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 weeks. Further arthroscopies and synovial biopsies were performed at the time of clinical response and at relapse.
                An intention-to-treat analysis was performed on 71 patients (38 MPA, 33 placebo). Using the OARSI (Osteoarthritis Research Society International) response criteria, 58% of the steroid group vs 33% of the placebo group (adjusted relative risk = 2.38) (P = 0.004) responded at 4 weeks. At other time points, there were no significant differences between the treatment groups. There were no significant differences between the two treatment groups for pain, stiffness or WOMAC or Lequesne assessments at any time point.
                The response to intra-articular corticosteroids following joint lavage is short-lived (2-4 weeks), achievement of an OARSI response criterion being the only difference between the two groups. To compare arthroscopic surgery and closed-needle joint lavage for patients with non-end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee under controlled, experimental conditions.
                Thirty-two subjects who met specific clinical, radiologic, medical, and rehabilitation criteria were randomized to receive arthroscopic surgery (n = 18) or joint lavage (n = 14). Outcome measures evaluated at baseline and at 3 and 12 months of followup included 3 standard clinical parameters, self-reported pain and functional status (by the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales), 50-foot walk time, 2 global scales, and direct and indirect medical costs.
                At 3 months of followup, there were no significant between-group differences in pain, self-reported and observed functional status, and patient and "blinded" physician global assessments. The arthroscopic procedure cost $3,840 more than did closed-needle joint lavage. After 1 year, there were no between-group differences in medication costs, utilization of medical services, or indirect costs related to employment or use of household help. After 1 year, 44% of subjects who underwent arthroscopy reported improvement and 58% of subjects who underwent joint lavage improved. Patients with tears of the anterior two-thirds of the medial meniscus or any lateral meniscus tear had a higher probability of improvement (by "blinded" physician assessment) after arthroscopic surgery (0.63) than did patients with other intraarticular pathology (0.20).
                The search for and removal of soft tissue abnormalities via arthroscopic surgery does not appear justified for all patients with non-end-stage OA of the knee who fail to respond to conservative therapy, but it may be beneficial for certain subgroups. Many patients report symptomatic relief after undergoing arthroscopy of the knee for osteoarthritis, but it is unclear how the procedure achieves this result. We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopy for osteoarthritis of the knee.
                A total of 180 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee were randomly assigned to receive arthroscopic débridement, arthroscopic lavage, or placebo surgery. Patients in the placebo group received skin incisions and underwent a simulated débridement without insertion of the arthroscope. Patients and assessors of outcome were blinded to the treatment-group assignment. Outcomes were assessed at multiple points over a 24-month period with the use of five self-reported scores--three on scales for pain and two on scales for function--and one objective test of walking and stair climbing. A total of 165 patients completed the trial.
                At no point did either of the intervention groups report less pain or better function than the placebo group. For example, mean (+/-SD) scores on the Knee-Specific Pain Scale (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe pain) were similar in the placebo, lavage, and débridement groups: 48.9+/-21.9, 54.8+/-19.8, and 51.7+/-22.4, respectively, at one year (P=0.14 for the comparison between placebo and lavage; P=0.51 for the comparison between placebo and débridement) and 51.6+/-23.7, 53.7+/-23.7, and 51.4+/-23.2, respectively, at two years (P=0.64 and P=0.96, respectively). Furthermore, the 95 percent confidence intervals for the differences between the placebo group and the intervention groups exclude any clinically meaningful difference.
                In this controlled trial involving patients with osteoarthritis of the knee, the outcomes after arthroscopic lavage or arthroscopic débridement were no better than those after a placebo procedure. In 1993 and 1994, 720 patients with pain in the temporo-mandibular joint area were examined and treated. The authors describe their therapeutic protocol. Sixty-two patients were not relieved by conservative nonsurgical therapy and were treated by arthroscopy or arthrocentesis. In both groups the differences in functional result and in pain control were analysed. Results show that both arthroscopy and lavage are useful in improving function and diminishing pain. Arthroscopy shows better results for functional treatment whereas arthrocentesis and arthroscopy show similar results in pain control. The reasons why many patients seemingly benefit from arthroscopic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee remain obscure. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine if a placebo effect might play a role in arthroscopic treatment of this condition. After giving full informed consent, including full knowledge of the possibility and nature of a placebo surgery, five subjects were randomized to a placebo arthroscopy group, three subjects were randomized to an arthroscopic lavage group, and two subjects were randomized to a standard arthroscopic debridement group. The physicians performing the postoperative assessment and the patients remained blinded as to treatment. Patients who received the placebo surgery reported decreased frequency, intensity, and duration of knee pain. They also thought that the procedure was worthwhile and would recommend it to family and friends. Thus, there may be a significant placebo effect for arthroscopic treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. The small numbers in this preliminary study preclude a valid statistical analysis, and no conclusions can be drawn regarding the superiority of one treatment over another. A larger study is needed to evaluate fully the efficacy of an arthroscopic procedure for this condition and to decide if it is reasonable to expend health care resources for this treatment; the larger study should include a placebo control group.
Joint lavage does not result in a relevant benefit for patients with knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain relief or improvement of function.