Skip to main content
. 2006 Apr 19;2006(2):CD005321. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005321.pub2

9. Clinical benefit table: Euflexxa (Arthrease, BioHy) versus Hylan G‐F 20.

Study Time Treatment Outcome N of Pts Baseline Mean End of Study Mean Absolute Benefit Relative Difference
Thompson 2002 1‐4 wk E: BioHy (Arthrease) WOMAC pain (0‐100 mm VAS) 160 49.20 21.70 ‐1.00 (I) ‐1.9% (I)
    C: Hylan G‐F 20   161 51.90 25.40    
Thompson 2002 5‐13 wk E: BioHy (Arthrease) WOMAC pain (0‐100 mm VAS) 160 49.20 19.20 ‐1.10 (I) ‐2.1% (I)
    C: Hylan G‐F 20   161 51.90 23.00    
Kirchner 2005 1‐4 wk E: Euflexxa WOMAC physical function (0‐100 mm VAS) 160 47.0 22.3 ‐1.30 (I) ‐2.6% (I)
    C: Hylan G‐F 20   161 50.8 27.4    
Kirchner 2005 5‐13 wk E: Euflexxa WOMAC physical function (0‐100 mm VAS) 157 47.0 20.0 ‐1.60 (I) ‐3.1% (I)
    C: Hylan G‐F 20   158 50.8 25.4    
Kirchner 2005 1‐4 wk E: Euflexxa WOMAC stiffness (0‐100 mm VAS) 160 43.2 21.2 1.6 (W) 3.3% (W)
    C: Hylan G‐F 20   161 47.8 24.2    
Kirchner 2005 5‐13 wk E: Euflexxa WOMAC stiffness (0‐100 mm VAS) 157 43.2 18.2 0.8 (W) 1.7% (W)
    C: Hylan G‐F 20   158 47.8 22.0