Objective To access the protective effects of glucosamine hydrochloride capsules (OTL) on articular cartilage in osteoarthritis of rabbit. Methods Thirty-six New Zealand white rabbits were divided randomly into three groups (n=12): sham group (group A), anterior cruciate l igament transection (ACLT)/normal sal ine group (group B), and ACLT/ OTL group (group C). Rabbits in groups B, C received ACLT on the right knee. Rabbits in group A were not given ACLT ascontrol. Group C received a daily administration of OTL at a dose of 150 mg/kg of body weight for 12 weeks; in contrast, group B received normal sal ine at the same dose. All rabbits were sacrificed after 12 weeks. The right femoral condyle were removed and observed at pathologic changes with HE staining and graded by Mankin’s scale, the expression level of transforming growth factor β1 (TGF-β1) and interleukin 1β (IL-1β) were detected by immunohistochemical staining. Results All rabbits survived at the end of experiment and incision healed well. The gross observation showed that joint synovia increased and articular surface was smooth and integrity in group A; that ulcer was observed on the articular surface of group B; and that articular surface was smooth and integrity in group C. There were sigificant differences in articular cartilage scores between 3 groups (P lt; 0.05). The histological observation showed that the articular cartilage had normal structure and the cells arranged regularly in group A; that the articular cartilage became thin and the cells arranged irregularly in group B; and that the cells arranged with a clear layer and had regular shape in group C. The Mankin scores were 1.04 ± 0.13, 7.97 ± 0.12, and 2.81 ± 0.36 in groups A, B, and C, respectively; showing significant difference between 3 groups (P lt; 0.05). The result of immunohistochemistry showed that the expressions of TGF-β1 were 50.62 ± 1.51, 24.81 ± 1.28, and 41.57 ± 1.69 and the expressions of IL-1β were 13.12 ± 1.21, 62.53 ±2.37, and 30.67 ± 1.28; showing significant differences between 3 groups (P lt; 0.05). Conclusion A daily administration ofOTL at a dose of 150 mg/kg for 12 weeks can partially decrease the expression levels of IL-1β and increase the expression levels of TGF-β1, which delays the development of osteoarthritis.
【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the results of glucosamine hydrochloride in the treatment of knee degenerativeosteoarthritis (DOA) . Methods From February 2006 to January 2007, 60 patients with knee DOA were treated with glucosaminehydrochloride,including 15 males and 45 females. The ages of patients ranged from 41 to 67 years with an average ageof 57.5 years. The disease course ranged from 6 months to 3 years. Oral glucosamine hydrochloride was given twice a day, each750 mg, for a 6-week course of treatment; another course of treatment was repeated after 4 months. After two courses of treatment,the international standard DOA score of Lequesne index was used to evaluate the rest of knee pain, sports pain, tenderness,joints activity, morning stiffness and walking abil ity. Results All 60 patients finished treatment, various cl inical symptomsfor DOA disappeared completely in 31 cases and subsided in 27 cases; the cure rate was 51.7% and the total response rate was96.7%. The scores of rest pain, sport pain, tenderness, joints activity, morning stiffness and the abil ity to walk for knee after treatmentwere 0.5±0.2,0.7±0.4,0.8±0.3,0.9±0.4,0.6±0.3 and 0.9±0.4, showing statistically significant differences (P lt; 0.01) whencompared with preoperation (1.6±0.5,2.1±0.4,2.2±0.5,1.8±0.6,1.7±0.4 and 2.0±0.4). Adverse effect occurred in 3 cases (5%)and the patients recovered without special treatment. Conclusion Glucosamine hydrochloride can cure knee DOA withsymptom-rel ieving and joint function-improving action.
ObjectiveTo observe the therapeutic effect of electro-acupuncture combined with oral glucosamine hydrochloride capsules in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, and compare it with the curative effect of the two methods separately. MethodsA total of 168 patients with knee osteoarthritis treated from March 2006 to December 2012 were randomly divided into 3 groups. Electro-acupuncture combined with oral glucosamine hydrochloride capsules were given to the 58 patients in the treatment group, single acupuncture treatment was given to the 57 patients in control group A, and simple oral glucosamine hydrochloride capsules were given to the 53 patients in control group B. The treatment lasted for 6 weeks. Assessment of knee osteoarthritis by Lequesne international standard index number and the total efficiency was carried out before treatment and 3 weeks, 6 weeks and 6 months after treatment, respectively. ResultsThe total effective rate of the treatment group was 91.38%, of control group A was 68.42%, and of control group B was 79.25%. There was a significant difference between the treatment group and control group A, and between the treatment group and control group B (P<0.05). No blood, liver or kidney damage or gastrointestinal adverse reaction occurred among patients in all the three groups. ConclusionThe efficacy of electro-acupuncture plus oral glucosamine hydrochloride capsules is better than simple acupuncture and simple oral glucosamine hydrochloride capsules treatment.
ObjectiveTo observe the efficacy of self-behavior management combined with glucosamine hydrochloride for patients with early knee osteoarthritis. MethodsBetween October 2013 and March 2015, 240 patients with early knee osteoarthritis were randomly assigned to behavior therapy group (n=80) , drug treatment group (n=80) and combined treatment group (n=80) . Patients in the behavior therapy group were treated only by self-behavior management; patients in the drug treatment group were treated by glucosamine hydrochloride (0.48 g, three times per day); patients in the combined treatment group were treated by self-behavior management combined with glucosamine hydrochloride. The effect of treatment, adverse reactions, efficiency and expulsion rate were assessed 4, 8 and 12 weeks after treatment. ResultsThe Lequesne index and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) significantly decreased from week 4 when compared with week 0 after treatment in the combined treatment group, and there was a significant difference between the combined treatment group and single therapy group at week 8 and 12 (P ＜ 0.05) . The Lequesne index in the behavior therapy group and drug treatment group began to significantly decrease from week 8, and the WOMAC score significantly decreased from week 4 in the drug treatment group and from week 8 in the behavior therapy group. The efficiency increased with the treatment time prolonged in all three groups, but the efficiency in the combined treatment group was significantly higher than the single therapy group (P ＜ 0.05) . The shedding rates in the behavior therapy group, drug treatment group and combined treatment group were respectively 12.5%, 7.5% and 6.3%, without statistically significant difference (P ＞ 0.05) . The adverse reaction rate was low in all the three groups. ConclusionThe self-behavior management combined with glucosamine hydrochloride is an effective, safe and well-tolerated treatment for early knee osteoarthritis.
ObjectiveTo explore the efficacy of calcitonin combined with glucosamine hydrochloride on knee osteoarthritis. MethodsAccording to Kellgren-Lawrence radiographic scoring system, 156 patients with knee osteoarthritis diagnosed from November 2014 to April 2015 were classified as mild, moderate and severe cases. All of the patients were divided into control group (treated by glucosamine hydrochloride only) and trial group (treated by calcitonin combined with glucosamine hydrochloride) via table of random sampling numbers (with 78 patients in each group). The West Ontario and Manchester University (WOMAC) score was recorded at the 6th week and the 3rd month after the medication treatment. ResultsIn the patients with mild osteoarthritis, there were significant differences in WOMAC score of both groups at the 6th week and the 3rd month after treatment compared with those before the treatment (P<0.05); there were no significant differences between the two groups at the same time points after the treatment (P>0.05). In the patients with moderate osteoarthritis, WOMAC scores in the control group at the 3rd month differed much from that before the treatment (P<0.05); there were no significant differences between the two groups at the same time points after the treatment (P>0.05). In the patients with serious osteoarthritis, there was no significant difference in WOMAC scores in the control group after the treatment compared with that before the treatment (P>0.05); while in the trial group, the scores at the 3rd month after the treatment differed much from that before the treatment (P<0.05), and also from that in the control group (P<0.05). ConclusionFor mild knee osteoarthritis, the combined treatment is not superior to the single use of glucosamine hydrochloride. For moderate knee osteoarthritis, the combined treatment has faster effect than the single use of glucosamine hydrochloride. For severe osteoarthritis, the use of single glucosamine hydrochloride is not effective, while the combination of calcitonin and glucosamine hydrochloride is effective at the 3rd month after the treatment.
ObjectiveTo analyze the clinical efficacy of glucosamine hydrochloride in the treatment of lumbar facet joint osteoarthritis, in order to provide the most appropriate treatment for lumbar facet joint osteoarthritis. MethodsA total of 120 patients with lumbar facet joint osteoarthritis and low back pain treated between August 2014 and August 2015 were randomly divided into three groups with 40 in each. Group A was treated with glucosamine hydrochloride; group B accepted loxoprofen-sodium; and group C was given glucosamine hydrochloride plus loxoprofen-sodium. The courses of treatment were all 8 weeks in the three groups. Follow-up lasted for 16 weeks. Oswestry disability index (ODI) and visual analogue score (VAS) of the patients were compared before treatment, 8 weeks after treatment, and 8 weeks after withdrawal. ResultsThree patients in group B gave up treatment due to upper gastrointestinal moderate pain after taking the drug. Another 12 patients in group B suffered from upper gastrointestinal mild discomfort, and the symptoms alleviated after accepting symptomatic treatment. There were no drug-related adverse reactions in group A and C. A total of 117 patients completed the 8-week treatment and were all followed up. Before treatment, the ODI scores and VAS scores were not significantly different among the groups (P>0.05). After treatment, the scores changed significantly in all the groups (P<0.05). At week 8 after treatment, the clinical efficacy in group B and C was superior to that in group A, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between group B and C (P>0.05). Eight weeks after withdrawal, the clinical efficacy in group A and C was better than that in group B, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between group A and C (P>0.05). ConclusionGlucosamine hydrochloride is effective for low back pain caused by lumbar facet joint osteoarthritis, which has no non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug-related complications. It is worthy of clinical application.
ObjectiveTo investigate the therapeutic effect of glucosamine hydrochloride on chronic lumbago and backache. MethodsWe selected 328 outpatients with chronic lumbago and backache diagnosed between May 2014 and May 2015, and randomly (with single blind method) divided them into study group (n=172) and control group (n=156). Patients in the control group were treated with ibuprofen and placebo, while those in the study group were treated with ibuprofen and glucosamine hydrochloride. The short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ) was used for investigation at three time points (before the treatment, one month and two months after the treatment). ResultsThe score of SF-MPQ in the study group was 64.34±23.35 before the treatment, 44.04±13.22 one month after the treatment, and 19.87±8.11 two months after the treatment. While in the control group, the results at those three time points were 65.19±24.12, 47.04±11.36, and 54.44±21.39, respectively. There was no obvious difference between the two groups one month after the treatment (P>0.05). The pain was alleviated in both of the two groups one month after the treatment, while the therapeutic effect in the study group was significantly better than that in the control group two months after the treatment (P<0.05). Archenteric complications were found in 3 patients (1.74%) in the study group and 2 (1.28%) in the control group without a significant difference (P>0.05). ConclusionGlucosamine hydrochloride may effectively alleviate the lumbago and backache without any obvious adverse reactions.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of glucosamine hydrochloride in the treatment of osteoarthritis. MethodsA total of 150 patients with osteoarthritis treated between April 2014 and April 2015 were randomly divided into control group and trial group with 75 in each. Patients in the trial group accepted oral glucosamine hydrochloride, while those in the control group were given diclofenac sodium. Lequesne index, total effective rate and the incidence of adverse reactions of both groups were calculated before and 2, 4, 6 and 8 weeks after treatment, and 2 weeks after drug withdrawal. ResultsIn both groups, Lequesne index started to decrease after 2 weeks of treatment (P<0.05), and reached the minimum value at treatment week eight (P<0.05). The Lequesne index 2 weeks after drug withdrawal was still obviously lower than that before treatment (P<0.05). There was no significant differences in the total effective rate at treatment week eight (83.1% for the control group and 80.9% for the trial group) or the total effective rate 2 weeks after drug withdrawal (80.0% for the control group and 79.4% for the trial group) between the control group and the trial group (P>0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions of the trial group (6.7%) was significantly lower than that of the control group (21.3%) (P<0.05). ConclusionGlucosamine hydrochloride is effective and safe in the treatment of osteoarthritis, which is suitable for long-term treatment.
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 the clinical effect of combined traditional Chinese and Western medicine in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). MethodsA total of 180 KOA patients treated between January 2012 and June 2015 were randomly assigned to 3 groups: Chinese medicine group (group A, n=60) with acupuncture and irradiation therapy of specific electromagnetic wave therapeutic apparatus , western medicine group (group B, n=60) with oral glucosamine hydrochloride tablets and knee joint cavity injection of sodium hyaluronate, and integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine group (group C, n=60) with treatments combining those in both group A and B. The treatment course was 6 weeks. The Western Ontario & McMaster University (WOMAC) osteoarthritis index score and total effective rate were evaluated before treatment and 2 weeks after treatment, end of treatment and 5 months after treatment. ResultsAfter treatment, the average improvement of WOMAC scores in the three groups was significantly different (P ＜ 0.05) . The total effective rate was 78.33% in group A, 83.33% in group B, and 91.67% in group C. The difference of total effective rate between group C and A, and between group C and B was statistically significant (P＜0.05) ; and it was also statistically significant between group A and B (P ＜ 0.05) . There were two cases of adverse reactions in group A, two in group B, and two in group C, and the reactions were all relatively mild without any serious adverse events. ConclusionsChinese medicine and western medicine are both effective and safe for the treatment of KOA. When they are combined, the effect is further enhanced with no increase of adverse reactions.