Search

To assess the serum iron and ferritin levels in relation to the prevalence of hyperuricemia (HU) and the serum uric acid (SUA) level.Serum iron and ferritin concentrations were detected by Ferene method and chemiluminescence method, respectively. SUA level was detected by uricase-PAP method. HU was defined as SUA ≥ 416 μmol/L for male and ≥ 357 μmol/L for female. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regressions were constructed to investigate the associations between serum iron/ferritin levels and prevalence of HU. Pearson correlation analysis and multivariable linear regression were performed to examine the correlations between serum iron/ferritin levels and SUA level.A total of 2824 subjects (mean age 52.2 ± 7.2) were included. The overall prevalence of HU was 17.3%. Compared with the lowest quartile, the multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of HU were 1.33 (95%CI 0.97-1.82), 1.17 (95%CI 0.85-1.60), and 1.56 (95%CI 1.14-2.13) in the second, third, and fourth quartiles of serum iron, respectively (P for trend = 0.012), and were 1.29 (95%CI 0.89-1.88) in the second, 2.13 (95%CI 1.47-3.07) in the third, and 2.25 (95%CI 1.54-3.29) in the fourth quartile of serum ferritin (P for trend 0.001). Pearson correlation coefficient indicated a weak positive correlation between serum iron (r = 0.2, P 0.001) and ferritin (r = 0.3, P 0.001) levels and SUA. Such positive correlations were further confirmed by multiple linear regression (serum iron: standardized β = 0.059, P 0.001; serum ferritin: standardized β = 0.061, P = 0.001).Both serum iron and ferritin showed a positive correlation with the prevalence of HU, and a weak positive correlation with SUA level. Key Points • Subjects with higher levels of serum iron or ferritin had higher prevalence of HU. • There was a weak positive correlation between serum iron/ferritin levels and SUA level.

The aim of the study is to examine the cross-sectional associations between dietary antioxidants (carotenoid, vitamin C, E, and selenium) intake and radiographic knee osteoarthritis (OA). A total of 4685 participants were included in this study. Dietary intake was assessed using a validated semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire. Radiographic knee OA was defined as Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade 2 in at least one leg. A multivariable logistic analysis model was established to test the relationship between dietary antioxidants (carotenoid, vitamin C, E, and selenium) intake and radiographic knee OA with adjustment of a number of potential confounding factors. A significant positive association between dietary vitamin C intake (P value for trend was 0.04 in multivariable adjusted analysis) and radiographic knee OA was observed. The relative odds of radiographic knee OA were increased by 0.39 times in the third quintile (OR 1.39, 95 % CI 1.11-1.73), 0.42 times in the fourth quintile (OR 1.42, 95 % CI 1.13-1.79), and 0.33 times in the fifth quintile (OR 1.33, 95 % CI 1.03-1.71). However, radiographic knee OA was not significantly associated with dietary carotenoid, vitamin E, and selenium. Among dietary antioxidants, dietary vitamin C intake was positively correlated with the prevalence of radiographic knee OA, while no significant association was found between dietary intake of carotenoid, vitamin E, and selenium and the prevalence of radiographic knee OA.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of topical diclofenac therapy for osteoarthritis (OA). A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted. A comprehensive literature search, covering the databases of Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE, was conducted in September 2014 to identify the randomized controlled trials which adopted the topical diclofenac therapy for OA. A total of nine papers were included in this meta-analysis. Topical diclofenac appears to be effective in both pain relief (standard mean differences (SMD) = 0.40; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.62; P = 0.0003) and function improvement (SMD = 0.23; 95 % CI 0.03 to 0.43; P = 0.03) when compared with the control group. The sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis showed that the result of pain intensity was stable and reliable, while the result of physical function improvement was vague. With respect to safety, topical diclofenac demonstrated a higher incidence of adverse events such as dry skin, rash, dermatitis, neck pain, and withdrawal. Topical diclofenac is effective in pain relief as a treatment of OA. It may also have a potential effect in function improvement, which needs further studies to be explored. Although, some adverse effects were observed in the application of topical diclofenac, none of them was serious.