Supartz
Published by
Last Updated On October 28, 2024

Supartz vs Orthovisc – A Thorough Comparison

Oct 24, 2024

A systematic review and meta-analysis published in The BMJ found that viscosupplementation significantly reduces pain and improves function in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). This treatment has become essential for those seeking non-surgical relief from knee OA symptoms.

Supartz and Orthovisc are two leading viscosupplements used to manage knee OA. While both aim to restore joint lubrication and reduce pain, their composition and treatment protocols differ. Understanding these differences can help patients and healthcare providers make informed decisions about the best treatment option.

In this article, we will compare Supartz vs Orthovsic and discuss their efficacy, application methods, and patient outcomes to help you choose the most suitable treatment for knee osteoarthritis.

Key Takeaways

  • Supartz and Orthovisc are effective viscosupplements for managing knee osteoarthritis. They provide pain relief and improve joint function by supplementing natural hyaluronic acid in the knee.
  • Both treatments have a high safety profile, with few adverse effects reported. They offer a non-surgical option for those looking to manage osteoarthritis symptoms and delay more invasive procedures.
  • Supartz is well-suited for gradual improvement, offering steady pain relief and enhanced mobility over a more extended treatment schedule. It is ideal for patients with mild to moderate osteoarthritis.
  • Orthovisc delivers faster results due to its higher concentration of hyaluronic acid, making it a good choice for those seeking quicker pain relief with fewer injections.
  • Choosing between Supartz and Orthovisc depends on factors such as treatment duration, cost, and the severity of symptoms. Patients with different needs may benefit from one treatment over the other.
Buy SUPARTZ® (Italian)
SUPARTZ® (Italian)

$ 299.00
Add To Cart
+
Buy ORTHOVISC®
ORTHOVISC®

$ 52.00
Add To Cart
+

About: Trusted by over 2,000+ global clients since 2014, Maylips has become a leading supplier of cosmetic, skincare, and orthopedic products for medical and aesthetic professionals. Maylips offers a wide range of authentic brand-name products at competitive wholesale prices, sourced from around the world. If you’re looking to buy Supartz online, contact our sales team for guidance.

Introduction to Supartz and Orthovisc

Supartz and Orthovisc are popular treatments used to help ease the symptoms of knee osteoarthritis. Both involve injecting hyaluronic acid directly into the knee joint to restore lubrication, reduce pain, and improve movement. This can make a big difference for people struggling with knee stiffness and discomfort.

Although they aim to achieve similar results, Supartz and Orthovisc have some key differences. Supartz is made from purified hyaluronic acid sourced from rooster combs, while Orthovisc uses a higher concentration of non-animal-based hyaluronan.

Composition and Properties

Supartz and Orthovisc differ in their compositions and properties, which can affect how each treatment manages knee pain and supports joint mobility.

Composition and Properties of Supartz

Supartz is a knee pain treatment using a clean hyaluronic acid gel. Key features include:

  • Purity: Contains no harmful pyrogens, ensuring safety for patients.
  • Concentration: Each milliliter contains 10mg of hyaluronic acid, making it lighter than some alternatives.
  • Function: Helps improve joint movement and reduce pain.
  • Safety: High safety profile with rare and primarily minor side effects.

Supartz’s formulation aims to enhance knee function while minimizing adverse reactions, making it a reliable option for managing osteoarthritis-related pain.

Composition and Properties of Orthovisc

Orthovisc is another treatment for knee pain characterized by:

  • Purity: Composed of clean hyaluronic acid gel, free from harmful pyrogens.
  • Concentration: Contains 15mg/ml of hyaluronic acid, offering a higher dose than Supartz.
  • Function: Provides cushioning and support to improve knee movement and alleviate pain.
  • Safety: Generally safe with few adverse reactions due to its pure formulation.

Thanks to its higher hyaluronic acid content, Orthovisc is often chosen for its effectiveness in managing osteoarthritis symptoms.

Applications and Indications

Supartz is typically administered as a series of weekly injections over several weeks. It is indicated primarily for knee osteoarthritis, helping reduce pain and improve movement. It may also be used off-label for other joints like the hip or shoulder to manage osteoarthritis symptoms.

Meanwhile, Orthovisc offers a more condensed treatment schedule, often requiring fewer injections. It is indicated for knee osteoarthritis, particularly in cases where quicker relief is needed. The higher concentration of hyaluronic acid provides enhanced lubrication and helps address cartilage-related symptoms. Like Supartz, it may also be used off-label for osteoarthritis in other joints, such as the hip or ankle.

Efficacy and Patient Outcomes

Clinical studies have demonstrated that Supartz is effective in managing knee osteoarthritis. A review of pivotal clinical trials showed that single 5-week courses of Supartz provide clinically meaningful reductions in pain and improved function for up to 6 months.

Repeated courses are as safe as single courses and have an extremely low risk of infection. Additionally, Supartz has been shown to improve muscle strength, gait pattern, and balance in initial studies.

Orthovisc has also been extensively studied for its efficacy in treating knee osteoarthritis. Randomized, controlled trials have shown that it effectively alleviates pain and improves joint function in patients with mild to severe OA. Its safety profile is favorable compared to other hyaluronic acid preparations.

Patient Outcomes with Supartz and Orthovisc

Patients treated with Supartz have reported significant improvements in pain and function. The improvements were sustained for up to 6 months post-treatment, with no serious side effects or complications reported. Repeated courses of Supartz have shown similar efficacy and safety profiles, making it a reliable option for long-term management of knee osteoarthritis.

Similarly, patients receiving Orthovisc injections have experienced notable pain relief and enhanced joint function. The treatment has been effective across various degrees of osteoarthritis severity, and the incidence of adverse events has been low.

Comparison of Benefits

Both Supartz and Orthovisc offer valuable benefits for managing knee osteoarthritis, but each has its strengths.

  • Supartz: Provides steady pain relief and improves joint function over time, making it ideal for patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. The treatment is known for its high safety profile and can help delay the need for more invasive procedures.
  • Orthovisc: Delivers faster relief due to its higher concentration of hyaluronic acid, offering significant improvements in joint mobility and pain reduction with fewer injections. It’s particularly beneficial for those needing quicker results.

While Supartz is suitable for gradual, long-term management, Orthovisc’s higher concentration may provide a more immediate boost. The choice depends on the patient’s specific needs, such as the severity of symptoms and desired speed of relief.

Comparison of Drawbacks

While both Supartz and Orthovisc are effective for knee osteoarthritis, they have some drawbacks.

  • Supartz: The main drawback is the longer treatment schedule, requiring multiple weekly injections over several weeks. Some patients may also find the effects less immediate compared to other options like Orthovisc or even Synvisc, which is often discussed in the context of “Supartz vs Synvisc.”
  • Orthovisc: Although it offers faster relief, Orthovisc can be more expensive due to its higher concentration of hyaluronic acid. It may not be suitable for all patients, particularly those sensitive to its formulation.

When weighing treatments like Supartz vs Synvisc or Orthovisc, it’s important to consider the treatment duration and cost. Supartz may be better for those looking for gradual improvement, while Orthovisc appeals to patients seeking quicker relief despite the higher cost. Each has its own limitations, depending on individual needs and budget.

Conclusion

Choosing between Supartz and Orthovisc involves factors like cost, hyaluronic acid concentration, and individual patient needs. Each option has its advantages and drawbacks, so doctors weigh these aspects to recommend the most suitable treatment for knee osteoarthritis.

While both can provide relief, the best choice ultimately depends on what works best for each person.

FAQs

1. How do Supartz and Orthovisc differ in composition?

Supartz is made from purified hyaluronic acid derived from rooster combs and contains 10mg/ml. Meanwhile, Orthovisc uses a higher concentration of non-animal-based hyaluronic acid, 15mg/ml.

2. Which treatment is more suitable for rapid pain relief?

Orthovisc may be better for rapid pain relief due to its higher hyaluronic acid concentration, which provides faster improvements in joint mobility and pain reduction.

3. Can Supartz and Orthovisc be used for joints other than the knee?

While both are primarily indicated for knee osteoarthritis, they may also be used off-label for other joints, such as the hip or shoulder, depending on a doctor’s recommendation.

4. Are there any side effects associated with these treatments?

Both Supartz and Orthovisc have a high safety profile. Side effects are typically mild and temporary, such as localized pain, swelling, or stiffness at the injection site.

Need help, additional info, or customized deals?

Talk with our sales representative.

Book a Meeting

References

Pereira TV, Jüni P, Saadat P, et al. Viscosupplementation for knee osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. Published online July 6, 2022:e069722. doi:https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2022-069722 

de Rezende MU, de Campos GC. VISCOSUPPLEMENTATION. Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition). 2012;47(2):160-164. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30080-X