Evidence from
Real Clinical Practice
Our use of Arthrosamid® is informed by a peer-reviewed prospective observational cohort carried out in routine specialist knee care.
The findings help explain the improvements seen at 24 months and the patient factors associated with a better response, supporting more informed selection.
Arthrosamid® (a registered trademark of Contura A/S.).
Reviewed byProfessor Paul YF Lee MBBch, FRCS (Tr & Orth), PhDCartilage and joint preservation expertiseQuick answer
Published 24-month evidence shows that Arthrosamid can improve pain and knee function in appropriately selected adults with knee osteoarthritis. The London Cartilage Clinic/MSK Doctors study followed 269 patients and 314 treated knees, recording improvements across pain, Oxford Knee Score and Lysholm knee-function measures.
The findings also help identify who may be most likely to benefit. Better outcomes were associated with factors including lower-grade knee osteoarthritis and the absence of diabetes, which is why careful assessment and patient selection form an important part of the London Cartilage Clinic treatment pathway.
Study Overview
The peer-reviewed cohort recorded improvements in pain, Oxford Knee Score and Lysholm knee-function measures through 24 months in routine specialist care.
The results provide practical evidence for treatment discussions and show why stage of osteoarthritis and health factors such as diabetes matter when selecting patients.
269 Patients
Total participants enrolled
314 Knees
Treated with specialist care
Bilateral Treatment: Some patients received injections in both knees where clinically appropriate.
Study design and context
How to interpret the evidence
The numbers below come from the peer-reviewed London Cartilage Clinic/MSK Doctors paper. They are published study findings, not clinic activity totals. The design, safety observations and knee-replacement outcomes should be read alongside the improvements reported for the group.
| Item | Published report | How to interpret it |
|---|---|---|
| Design and population | Prospective observational cohort; 269 patients, 314 knees | Real-world cohort, not a randomised trial |
| Follow-up | Up to 24 months | An observed study period, not a duration guarantee |
| Pain (VAS) | Mean 6.64 at baseline; 5.06 at 24 months | Group mean; individual responses varied |
| Oxford Knee Score | Mean 25.35 at baseline; 31.95 at 24 months | Reported improvement does not prove causation |
| Lysholm score | Mean 45.22 at baseline; 56.15 at 24 months | No untreated or active comparator group |
| Complications and tolerance | Recorded during cohort follow-up and reported in the paper | Does not establish a zero-risk procedure or a clinic-specific incidence |
| Knee replacement | Progression was recorded; more advanced arthritis was associated with greater progression | The study does not show that Arthrosamid prevents or delays replacement |
Primary peer-reviewed paper
Read the full peer-reviewed cohort or use the DOI record. The publication describes the prospective cohort design, patient population, outcome measures, subgroup findings, complications and progression to knee replacement.
Professor Lee also co-authored a 2022 systematic review of five early reports covering 463 combined patient outcomes and a separate single-patient patellofemoral case report. Those designs are supporting context, not equivalent to the larger prospective cohort and not proof of an individual result.
Evidence is not the same as reviews
A patient review describes one person's experience and can help assess service, communication and aftercare. It cannot establish treatment efficacy, incidence of complications or the result another patient should expect. London Cartilage Clinic does not publish invented testimonials or mark reviews up as medical-outcome evidence.
What We Followed
Patients were assessed at baseline and during follow-up using established, patient-reported outcome measures:
- Pain (Visual Analogue Score – VAS)
- Function (Oxford Knee Score – OKS)
- Knee performance (Lysholm Score)
We also recorded:
- Age and common medical conditions (such as diabetes)
- Arthritis severity
- Whether one or both knees were injected
- Complications and tolerance
- Progression to total knee replacement over time
Meaningful improvement was defined using clinically important change thresholds, focusing on outcomes that patients actually feel in daily life.
What We Learned
In this observational cohort, group mean pain and function scores improved from baseline to the 24-month assessment. Without a control group, the study cannot show how much change was caused by Arthrosamid rather than other factors.
Exploratory subgroup associations reported in the cohort included:
- Were older adults
- Had mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis
- Did not have diabetes
- Received bilateral knee injections
- Had realistic expectations focused on improvement rather than cure
Patients with more advanced arthritis were more likely to progress to knee replacement, even if short-term symptom relief occurred.
How This Study Shapes
Patient Care
This study directly informs how we use Arthrosamid® in clinic:
Not a Routine Injection
It is not offered as a standard option for every patient, ensuring targeted treatment.
Structured Assessment
Suitability is assessed carefully using our structured Arthrosamid® suitability questionnaire.
Open Discussion
Benefits, limitations, and alternatives are discussed openly with every patient.
Joint-Preservation Strategy
Used as part of a long-term strategy, not a replacement for necessary surgery.
Why This Matters for You
The published cohort is useful when its observational design and limitations are kept visible. It supports:
Balanced
advice
Honest
expectations
Clear limits on what evidence
can predict for you
Good decisions require balanced evidence — not promises.
Am I Suitable?
Take the Arthrosamid® Suitability Assessment
Answer eight short questions on the dedicated assessment page to organise the information relevant to your consultation. The questionnaire is a decision aid and does not diagnose knee pain or confirm treatment suitability.
Start the Suitability AssessmentFrom Evidence to Decision
What this means if you are considering Arthrosamid®
Evidence helps guide suitability. The outcome data on this page shows what happened to groups during follow-up, while the study design limits individual prediction. The decision is patient-specific and made at consultation.
Not every patient should have Arthrosamid®. We do not recommend treatment where the indication is absent, a contraindication is present or another option is more appropriate.
Patient selection matters. The same cohort reported exploratory associations, but these do not create a validated suitability score or guarantee an individual response.
Results vary. A 24-month group follow-up does not predict whether an individual will respond, how much improvement they may notice or how long any benefit will last.
Advanced arthritis may still progress to knee replacement. Arthrosamid® is not a cure and does not regenerate cartilage. Where knee replacement is the clinically appropriate answer, we will say so.
Clinical Evidence
Frequently asked questions
Does Arthrosamid® really work for knee osteoarthritis?
Published evidence shows group-level improvements in pain and knee function through 24 months. A prospective observational cohort of 269 patients and 314 knees reported group-level improvements through 24 months. Results vary between individuals, so diagnosis, imaging and suitability assessment remain important.
How long do Arthrosamid® results last?
The published cohort followed group outcomes for 24 months. That is the study period, not a guaranteed duration of benefit. Improvement may develop over the following weeks, with the clinic's early review at around six weeks. Individual onset, size and duration of response vary.
Can the evidence predict who will respond to Arthrosamid®?
The cohort found better outcomes were associated with factors including lower-grade knee osteoarthritis and the absence of diabetes. These group associations inform patient selection but do not predict an individual response. Diagnosis, imaging, contraindications, function and alternatives still require clinical assessment. See the Arthrosamid® suitability self-assessment for a structured indication of fit.
What happens if Arthrosamid® does not work for me?
If improvement is absent or below expectations, the clinic reviews the diagnosis, imaging, function and other pain sources rather than assuming another injection is the answer. Rehabilitation, another non-surgical option or a surgical opinion may be more appropriate.
Is the Arthrosamid® evidence peer-reviewed?
Yes. The London Cartilage Clinic/MSK Doctors 24-month prospective cohort is peer reviewed and linked on this page by full text and DOI.
Will Arthrosamid® prevent me from needing a knee replacement?
Arthrosamid® is not a substitute for knee replacement where replacement is clinically appropriate. Arthrosamid has not been proved to delay or prevent knee replacement. It may be considered for symptom management in an appropriately selected adult, while advanced disease, deformity or major functional loss may make replacement assessment more suitable.
Book an Arthrosamid® Assessment – London
Long-lasting relief starts with the right decision — not just an injection.