These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Rheological Properties of Commercially Available Hyaluronic Acid Products in the United States for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis Knee Pain.
    Author: Nicholls M, Manjoo A, Shaw P, Niazi F, Rosen J.
    Journal: Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord; 2018; 11():1179544117751622. PubMed ID: 29326532.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: The inconsistent results within the current literature regarding the efficacy of intra-articular-hyaluronic acid (IA-HA) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) have been suggested to be due to intrinsic differences between individual HA products. The purpose of this investigation is to define the rheological differences between currently available HA products in the United States at the time of this study for the treatment of knee OA, which will help elaborate on the appropriateness of classifying HA products as a class opposed to as individual agents. METHODS: The rheological parameters for Euflexxa, Orthovisc, Supartz, Monovisc, Synvisc, Synvisc-One, Gel-One, and Hyalgan were obtained with a TA AR 2000 EX Rheometer with a cone-plate geometry (40-mm plate diameter and a 2° cone angle) at room temperature. RESULTS: The bulk rheological parameters of the different products suggest molecular structures traversing the range of dilute solution (Hyalgan, Supartz), semidilute solution (Euflexxa, Orthovisc), entangled solutions (Monovisc, Synvisc, Synvisc-One), and even gel-like (Gel-One) behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the differences in rheological properties between IA-HA products, the universal assessment of these products as a class may not be appropriate. Instead, it may be more appropriate to assess each product individually. Future research should aim to link these differences in rheological properties to the differences in clinical efficacy seen across these IA-HA products.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]