Primary adhesive capsulitis is mainly characterized by spontaneous chronic shoulder pain and the gradual loss of shoulder motion. The main treatment for adhesive capsulitis is a trial of conservative therapies, including analgesia, exercise, physiotherapy, oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammation drugs, and intra-articular corticosteroid injections. Previously, it was reported that intra-articular corticosteroid lead to fast pain relief and improvement of range of motion (ROM). The objective of this study was to determine whether corticosteroid injections would lead to better pain relief and greater improvement in ROM. We searched PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane library. We included 5 articles of the 1166 articles identified. Totally injection group included 115 patients and placebo group included 110 patients. We calculated the weighted mean differences to evaluate the pain relief as the primary outcome. We determined the ROM as the secondary outcome. Study quality was evaluated using the 12-item scale. We also used the criteria of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation to evaluate the quality of evidence. In total, 5 studies were included, 4 of which were randomized clinical trials, with a sample size of 225 patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulders. The overall pooled data demonstrated that, compared with placebo as control treatment, intra-articular corticosteroid injections were more effective in reducing the pain score at 0 to 8 weeks, but there was no difference between the injection group and the control group at 9 to 24 weeks. Improvement of ROM in the injection group was greater than that of the control group both at 0 to 8 and 9 to 24 weeks. Intra-articular corticosteroid injections were more effective in pain relief in the short term, but this pain relief did not sustain in the long term. Intra-articular corticosteroid injection resulted in greater improvement in passive ROM both in the short and the long terms.

Osteolysis is an osteolytic lesion featured by enhanced osteoclast formation and potent bone erosion. Lacking of effective regimen for treatment of the pathological process highlights the importance of identifying agents that can suppress the differentiation and function of osteoclast. Artemether is a natural compound derived from Artemisia annua L. and it is popularized for the treatment of malaria. In present study, we demonstrated that artemether could suppress RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis and expression of osteoclast marker genes such as tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase, cathepsin K, matrix metalloproteinase 9, nuclear factor of activated T-cell cytoplasmic 1, and dendritic cell-specific transmembrane protein. It inhibited the osteoclastic bone resorption in a dose-dependent manner in vitro. Furthermore, artemether attenuated RANKL-induced MAPKs (ERK, JNK, p-38) activity. In addition, we have showed that artemether was able to mitigate bone erosion in a murine model of LPS-induced inflammatory bone loss. Taken together, these findings suggest that artemether reduces inflammatory bone loss via inhibition of MAPKs activation during osteoclast differentiation, and it might be a potential candidate for the treatment of osteoclast-related disorders.

Osteoporotic vertebral compressed fractures (VCFs) are the most common osteoporotic fractures. Although percutaneous vertebroplasty (PVP) reportedly relieves pain and improves function, a recent pooled analysis from two multicenter randomized controlled trials concluded the improvement in pain and disability treated with PVP was similar to those with sham surgery. Using meta-analysis we therefore asked whether compared with either nonoperative therapy or a sham injection for patients with VCF, PVP would (1) better relieve pain, (2) provide greater improvement in pain-related disability, and (3) increase the recurrence of vertebral fractures. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, and the Cochrane library using the keywords “vertebroplasty AND osteoporosis OR fracture”. We included nine of the 469 articles identified. Using a random effects model, we calculated the weighted mean differences to evaluate the pain reduction at different times as the primary outcome. Pain-related disability was assessed by a quality of life (QOL) measure. Improvement of QOL and recurrence of vertebral fractures were the secondary outcomes. We used subgroup analysis to reinvestigate pain relief and function improvement of PVP based on two different controls: nonoperative therapy and sham injection. The total number of patients was 886. Pain scoring was similar between the PVP group and the sham injection group at 1 to 29 days and 90 days. However, compared with nonoperative therapy, PVP reduced pain at all times studied. QOL in the PVP group was improved or tended to be improved compared with QOL for both control groups. The risk of new fractures was similar between the PVP groups and both control groups. Different control groups may have accounted for the different conclusions in the literature regarding the ability of PVP to relieve pain and restore function recovery. Compared with nonoperative treatment PVP relieved pain better and improved QOL. PVP did not increase the risk of new fractures. Level II, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Introduction: Intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) is often used as therapy for knee osteoarthritis because it is less expensive and less aggressive than total knee replacement. Therefore, it is important to document whether HA is safe and efficacious. We tested whether single and multiple injection viscosupplementation with HA is associated with clinically meaningful pain relief in a new randomized clinical trial (RCT). Our objective was to compare safety and efficacy of intra-articular HA in two formulations: one 3.0 ml injection of Durolane versus five 2.5 ml injections of Artz for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis pain. Methods: Patients (N = 349) from the People’s Republic of China were randomized to treatment (Durolane = 175, Artz = 174). The Durolane group received a 3.0 ml injection at week 0 (baseline), with sham skin punctures at weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4. The Artz group received one 2.5 ml injection at each of the same time points. The primary assessment tool was the Likert-type Western Ontario and McMaster University (WOMAC) pain scale at weeks 0, 6, 10, 14, 18, and 26. Secondary assessments were WOMAC physical function, knee stiffness, and global self-assessment, at identical time points. Statistically-controlled analyses were non-inferiority of Durolane over 18, then over 26 weeks, with a priori non-inferiority defined as 8% of the relevant scale. Acetaminophen was permitted as rescue analgesia and all adverse events (AEs) were recorded. Results: Overall study retention was excellent; 332 patients (95.1%) completed 18 weeks and 319 (91.4%) completed 26 weeks, with no significant retention difference between treatment arms. All variables met non-inferiority criteria over 18 and 26 weeks. Efficacy response in both arms was >90%. Treatment-related AEs were 9.8% (17/174) for Artz and 13.1% (23/175) for Durolane. Conclusions: A single injection of Durolane is non-inferior to 5 injections of Artz over 18 and 26 weeks for pain, physical function, global self-assessment, and knee stiffness. Both treatments were efficacious, safe, and well tolerated. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01295580. Registered 11 February 2011.