Intra-articular Injection of Platelet-Rich Plasma Is Superior to Hyaluronic Acid or Saline Solution in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Triple-Parallel, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

The Long-Lasting Effects of "Placebo Injections" in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

To quantify the placebo effect of intraarticular injections for knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain, function, and objective outcomes. Factors influencing placebo effect were investigated.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Level of evidence, 2. PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and grey literature databases were searched on January 8, 2020, using the string: (knee) AND (osteoarthritis OR OA) AND (injections OR intra-articular) AND (saline OR placebo). The following inclusion criteria were used: double-blind, randomized controlled trials on knee osteoarthritis, including a placebo arm on saline injections. The primary outcome was pain variation. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool, and quality of evidence was graded following the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) guidelines.

RESULTS

Out of 2,363 records, 50 articles on 4,076 patients were included. The meta-analysis showed significant improvements up to the 6-month follow-up: Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)-pain -13.4 mean difference (MD) (95% confidence interval [CI]: -21.7/-5.1; P < 0.001), Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)-pain -3.3 MD (95% CI: -3.9/-2.7; P < 0.001). Other significant improvements were WOMAC-stiffness -1.1 MD (95% CI: -1.6/-0.6; P < 0.001), WOMAC-function -10.1 MD (95% CI: -12.2/-8.0; P < 0.001), and Evaluator Global Assessment -21.4 MD (95% CI: -29.2/-13.6; P < 0.001). The responder rate was 52% (95% CI: 40% to 63%). Improvements were greater than the "minimal clinically important difference" for all outcomes (except 6-month VAS-pain). The level of evidence was moderate for almost all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The placebo effect of knee injections is significant, with functional improvements lasting even longer than those reported for pain perception. The high, long-lasting, and heterogeneous effects on the scales commonly used in clinical trials further highlight that the impact of placebo should not be overlooked in the research on and management of knee osteoarthritis.

Intra-articular injection of Platelet rich plasma versus Hyaluronic acid for moderate knee osteoarthritis. A prospective, double-blind randomized controlled trial on 189 patients with follow-up for three years

Platelet-rich plasma injections have been proposed as an option for Conservative management of knee Osteoarthritis to provide symptomatic relief and also to delay the need for surgical intervention. Although almost all the current literatures provide some evidence on the benefits of this technique compared with Visco- supplementation, no studies have been performed to compare their Clinical outcomes. The purpose is to compare the Clinical outcomes provided by intra- articular injection of either Platelet rich plasma or Hyaluronic acid to treat knee Osteoarthritis. Study Design: Randomized Controlled Trial 200 Patients with a history of Symptomatic knee Osteo- arthritis (Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 or 3) were randomized to undergo 3 blinded intra-articular in- jections of either Platelet rich plasma or Hyaluronic acid. The Interval between successive injections was 2 weeks. Patients were evaluated prospectively before the injection and then at 2, 6, 12, 24, 30 and 36 months. Evaluation was based on International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Visual analog scale, VOMAC Score and the re- injection rate; 189 patients reached the final evaluation. Both platelet rich plasma and Hyaluronic acid were effective in improving knee Symptoms and functional status over time and remained stable over time up to 18 months Post-injection (No re-injection has been performed to any patient incorporated in this study during the first 18 months). The performed re-injections have been significantly lower in the PRP group. Both platelet rich plasma and Hyaluronic acid were effective in improving knee Symptoms and functional status over time and remained stable over time up to 18 months Post-injection. The rate of the required re-injections has been significantly lower in platelet rich plasma group. platelet rich plasma provide longer duration of symptomatic relief, longer duration of functional status improvement and lesser number of needed re-injections than Hyaluronic acid when the patients have been followed through 36 months.

Platelet-Rich Plasma and Stem Cell Injections in the Treatment of Arthritis of the Knee

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and stem cell (SC) injections have become increasingly common in the treatment of knee arthritis. This systematic review was performed to answer the following questions: (1) What effects does intraarticular PRP injection have in the setting of knee arthritis? (2) What effects does intra-articular SC injection have in the setting of knee arthritis? (3) What adverse events have been reported in the literature from PRP injections for knee arthritis? (4) What adverse events have been reported in the literature from SC injections for knee arthritis? [Orthopedics. 2021;44(6):376-383.].

Emerging and New Treatment Options for Knee Osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent type of arthritis worldwide, resulting in pain and often chronic disability and a significant burden on healthcare systems globally. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), analgesics, intra-articular corticosteroid injections are of little value in the long term, and opioids may have ominous consequences. Radiotherapy of knee OA has no added value. Physical therapy, exercises, weight loss, and lifestyle modifications may give pain relief, improve physical functioning and quality of life. However, no single treatment has regenerating potential for damaged articular cartilage. Due to a better understanding of osteoarthritis, innovative new treatment options have been developed. In this narrative review, we focus on emerging OA knee treatments, relieving symptoms, and regenerating damaged articular cartilage that includes intra-articular human serum albumin, conventional disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs), lipid-lowering agents (statin), nerve growth factors antagonists, bone morphogenetic protein, fibroblast growth factors, Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP), Mesenchymal Stem Cells (MSC), exosomes, interleukin-1 blockers, gene-based therapy, and bisphosphonate.

Intra-articular injection of autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the thumb first carpometacarpal joint: A pilot study

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the thumb first carpometacarpal joint. Injections were carried out in 27 thumbs. According to the Dell classification, there were 2 stage I, 11 stage II, 13 stage III and 1 stage IV cases. The bone marrow was aspirated from the iliac crest, concentrated by centrifugation, and injected under fluoroscopic control into the pathological thumb. Results were assessed at a mean 16 months' follow-up (range, 8-26). Clinical evaluation comprised QuickDASH and PRWE scores, pain at rest on a numerical analog scale (NAS), and thumb column abduction on goniometry. QuickDASH and PRWE scores were 59 (range, 27-82) and 88 range, 37-125) preoperatively and 29 (range, 0-64) and 50 (range, 1-99) postoperatively, respectively. Mean pain at rest on NAS improved from 7 (range, 1-10) to 4 (range, 0-9). Thumb abduction improved by a mean 18° over preoperative data. No postoperative complications were found. Two patients had to be operated on for inefficacy of injection. This is the first article presenting the effect of an intra-articular injection of BMAC in the thumb first carpometacarpal joint and the results were encouraging. Many patients showed improved quality of life and pain relief. These injections appear to be an effective means of postponing surgery.

American Medical Society for Sports Medicine Position Statement: Principles for the Responsible Use of Regenerative Medicine in Sports Medicine

ABSTRACT

Many sports medicine physicians are currently considering introducing regenerative medicine into their practice. Regenerative medicine and the subclassification of orthobiologics are a complicated topic and have produced widely varying opinions. Although there is concern by government regulators, clinicians, scientists, patient advocacy organizations, and the media regarding the use of regenerative medicine products, there is also excitement about the potential benefits with growing evidence that certain regenerative medicine products are safe and potentially efficacious in treating musculoskeletal conditions. Sports medicine physicians would benefit from decision-making guidance about whether to introduce orthobiologics into their practice and how to do it responsibly. The purpose of this position statement is to provide sports medicine physicians with information regarding regenerative medicine terminology, a brief review of basic science and clinical studies within the subclassification of orthobiologics, regulatory considerations, and best practices for introducing regenerative medicine into clinical practice. This information will help sports medicine physicians make informed and responsible decisions about the role of regenerative medicine and orthobiologics in their practice.

Intra-Articular Injection of PRP in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Using Big Data

Observing data on the characteristics of intra-articular injection of sodium citrate for knee osteoarthritis is an important reference value for human safety and evacuation design. To address the problems of slow data collection and poor accuracy of results of knee osteoarthritis behavior, under intensive conditions of intra-articular injection for knee osteoarthritis, this paper designs a data mining-based feature extraction system for intra-articular injection of sodium citrate for knee osteoarthritis. Using the Hadoop architecture, we extract the basic data of human behavior in the two-dimensional plane by storing and stitching the collected continuous data and discriminate the behavioral categories of knee osteoarthritis. We collected a real dataset from 84 patients with knee osteoarthritis treated in our hospital from October 2019 to October 2020. The dataset was divided into 42 patients in the tretinoin group and 42 patients in the sodium glutamate group according to the randomized number table method. The trimethoprim group was treated with intra-articular injection of trimethoprim, and the sodium citrate group was treated with intra-articular injection of sodium citrate. The clinical efficacy, joint mobility, intra-articular fluid volume, Lysholm score of knee joint, numerical pain intensity scale (NRS) score, and adverse effects of the two groups were compared before and after treatment. In our experiments, we observed that, compared with triamcinolone acetonide intra-articular injection, sodium hyaluronate intra-articular injection is more effective in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. It can effectively improve knee function and reduce pain and adverse reactions.

Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma and plasma for symptomatic treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has a still conflicting efficacy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and might be a minimally invasive and safe treatment alternative. The potential benefit of only plasma (non-enriched) has never been investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and plasma to improve pain and function in participants with KOA over 24 weeks.

Methods

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 3 groups (n = 62): PRP (n = 20), plasma (n = 21) and saline (n = 21). Two ultrasound-guided knee injections were performed with a 2-week interval. The primary outcome was visual analog scale 0-10 cm (VAS) for overall pain at week 24, with intermediate assessments at weeks 6 and 12. Main secondary outcomes were: KOOS, OMERACT-OARSI criteria and TUGT.

Results

At baseline, 92% of participants were female, with a mean age of 65 years, mean BMI of 28.0 Kg/m²and mean VAS pain of 6.2 cm. Change in pain from baseline at week 24 were -2.9 (SD 2.5), -2.4 (SD 2.5) and -3.5 cm (SD 3.3) for PRP, plasma and saline, respectively (p intergroup = 0.499). There were no differences between the three groups at weeks 6 and 12. Similarly, there were no differences between groups regarding secondary outcomes. The PRP group showed higher frequency of adverse events (65% versus 24% and 33% for plasma and saline, respectively, p = 0.02), mostly mild transitory increase in pain.

Conclusions

PRP and plasma were not superior to placebo for pain and function improvement in KOA over 24 weeks. The PRP group had a higher frequency of mild transitory increase in pain.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03138317, 03/05/2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04706-7.

Synopsis of the 2020 US Department of Veterans Affairs/US Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guideline: The Non-Surgical Management of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis

In July 2020, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and US Department of Defense (DoD) approved a new joint clinical practice guideline for the non-surgical management of hip and knee osteoarthritis. This synopsis highlights some of the recommendations. In February 2019, the VA/DoD Evidence-Based Practice Work Group convened a joint VA/DoD guideline development effort that included clinical stakeholders and conformed to the National Academy of Medicine's tenets for trustworthy clinical practice guidelines. The guideline panel developed key questions, systematically searched (ie, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE PreMEDLINE, PubMed, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality website) and evaluated the literature, created a simple 1-page algorithm, and advanced 19 recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system. This synopsis summarizes key recommendations in all 6 topics covered in the guideline. These topics are diagnosis, self-management, physical therapy, pharmacotherapy, orthobiologics, and complementary and integrative health.

Comparison between intra-articular infiltrations of placebo, steroids, hyaluronic and PRP for knee osteoarthritis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Regarding the efficacy of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid and corticosteroids, current evidence is controversial. The superiority of one technique over another is questioned and debates are ongoing. The purpose of the present study was to compare and investigate the efficacy of these intra-articular infiltrations in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted comparing patient outcomes at 3, 6 and 12-months of follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA extension statement for reporting systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions. All the RCTs comparing the outcomes of two or more intra-articular infiltrations of interest for knee OA were considered for inclusion. The outcomes of interest were the WOMAC and VAS scores. The network meta-analyses were performed using the STATA routine for Bayesian hierarchical random-effects models.

RESULTS

Data from 30 RCTs (3463 patients) were collected. At 3-months follow-up, PRP showed the best WOMAC scores, followed by the Placebo, CCS and HA. At 6-months follow-up, PRP showed the best WOMAC scores, followed by HA, CCS and Placebo. At 12-months follow-up, PRP showed the best WOMAC scores, followed by the Placebo, HA and CCS. At 3-months follow-up, the PRP showed the best VAS scores, followed by CCS, HA and Placebo. At 6-months follow-up, PRP showed the best VAS scores, followed by CCS, Placebo and HA. At 12-months follow-up, the PRP showed the best VAS scores, followed by CCS, Placebo and HA.

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular injections of PRP demonstrated the best overall outcome compared to steroids, hyaluronic acid and placebo for patients with knee osteoarthrosis at 3, 6 and 12-months follow-up. Among CCS, hyaluronic acid and placebo, no discrepancies were detected.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs.

Novel assessment of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma on functional and patient-reported outcomes in knee osteoarthritis: a pilot study

Background: Leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP) has demonstrated to be beneficial for patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA); however, reliable objective end points to accurately assess its therapeutic effects is lacking. Aim: To investigate the efficacy of LR-PRP as assessed by functional and patient-reported outcomes at early time points (6 weeks). Materials & methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study in 12 patients with diagnosed KOA (Kellgren Lawrence score of II-III), who underwent a single ultrasound-guided LR-PRP injection. Results: There was significant improvement in timed up and go, pain and quality of life scales and balance parameters. There were nonsignificant improvements in range of motion and gait parameters. Conclusion: LR-PRP demonstrates efficacy in meaningful end points for functional and patient-reported outcomes at early time points in patients with KOA.

Nonoperative and Operative Soft-Tissue and Cartilage Regeneration and Orthopaedic Biologics of the Knee: An Orthoregeneration Network (ON) Foundation Review

Orthoregeneration is defined as a solution for orthopedic conditions that harnesses the benefits of biology to improve healing, reduce pain, improve function, and optimally, provide an environment for tissue regeneration. Options include: drugs, surgical intervention, scaffolds, biologics as a product of cells, and physical and electro-magnetic stimuli. The goal of regenerative medicine is to enhance the healing of tissue after musculoskeletal injuries as both isolated treatment and adjunct to surgical management, using novel therapies to improve recovery and outcomes. Various orthopaedic biologics (orthobiologics) have been investigated for the treatment of pathology involving the knee, including symptomatic osteoarthritis and chondral injuries, as well as injuries to tendon, meniscus, and ligament, including the anterior cruciate ligament. Promising and established treatment modalities include hyaluronic acid (HA) in liquid or scaffold form; platelet-rich plasma (PRP); bone marrow aspirate (BMA) comprising mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs), hematopoietic stem cells, endothelial progenitor cells, and growth factors; connective tissue progenitor cells (CTPs) including adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs) and tendon-derived stem cells (TDSCs); matrix cell-based therapy including autologous chondrocytes or allograft; vitamin D; and fibrin clot. Future investigations should standardize solution preparations, because inconsistent results reported may be due to heterogeneity of HA, PRP, BMAC, or MSC preparations and regimens, which may inhibit meaningful comparison between studies to determine the true efficacy and safety for each treatment.

Intra-Articular Injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma, Adipose Mesenchymal Stem Cells, and Bone Marrow Mesenchymal Stem Cells Associated With Better Outcomes Than Hyaluronic Acid and Saline in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To perform a network meta-analysis to evaluate clinical efficacy and treatment-related adverse events (AEs) of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA), leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP), leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP), bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs), adipose mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs), and saline (placebo) during 6 and 12 months of follow-up.

METHODS

Six databases were searched for randomized controlled trials. Outcome assessment included the visual analog scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) pain subscore, WOMAC score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, and treatment-related AEs. Main inclusion criteria were at least one of the aforementioned outcome measurements, a minimum follow-up period of 5 months, and >80% patient follow-up. Treatments combined with the use of other operations or drugs were excluded.

RESULTS

Forty-three studies meeting the eligibility criteria were included. At 6 months, VAS scores and WOMAC pain subscores showed that AD-MSCs were the best treatment option (surface under the cumulative ranking curve [SUCRA] = 96.7%, SUCRA = 85.3%, respectively). According to WOMAC scores and subjective IKDC scores, LP-PRP was the most effective treatment (SUCRA = 86.0%, SUCRA = 80.5%, respectively). At 12 months, only AD-MSCs were associated with improved VAS scores compared with the placebo (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -20.93, 95% credibility interval [CrI], -41.71 to -0.78). Both LP-PRP and AD-MSCs were more beneficial than the placebo for improving WOMAC pain subscores (WMD = -30.08; 95% CrI, -53.59 to -6.25; WMD = -34.85; 95% CrI, -68.03 to -4.86, respectively). For WOMAC scores, LP-PRP and LR-PRP were significantly associated with improved WOMAC scores compared with the placebo after sensitivity analysis was performed (WMD = -35.26; 95% CrI, -64.99 to -6.01; WMD = -38.69; 95% CrI, -76.21 to -2.76). LP-PRP exhibited relatively better efficacy in improving subjective IKDC scores than the placebo (WMD = 13.67; 95% CrI, 4.05-23.39). Regarding safety, all treatments except for LP-PRP (relative risk = 1.83; 95% CrI, 0.89-4.64) increased treatment-related AEs compared with the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of current research findings, during 6 months of follow-up, AD-MSCs relieved pain the best; LP-PRP was most effective for functional improvement. During the 12-month follow-up, both AD-MSCs and LP-PRP showed potential clinical pain relief effects; functional improvement was achieved with LP-PRP. Unfortunately, AD-MSC/LP-PRP functional comparisons were only based on WOMAC scores due to missing IKDC scores. BM-MSCs seem to have potentially beneficial effects, but the wide credibility interval makes it impossible to draw a well-supported conclusion. HA viscosupplementation clinical efficacy was lower than that of biological agents during follow-up, which may be related to the properties of the drugs. Considering the evaluation of treatment-related AEs, LP-PRP is the most advisable choice; although the AEs of these treatments are not serious, they may affect treatment compliance and satisfaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, meta-analysis of Level I and II studies.

Adverse Reactions and Clinical Outcomes for Leukocyte-Poor Versus Leukocyte-Rich Platelet-Rich Plasma in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background:

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained attention as a therapeutic option for knee osteoarthritis; however, its efficacy varies widely. Leukocytes in PRP raise the concern of aggravating proinflammatory activity. To date, PRP has rarely been investigated with regard to leukocyte concentration.

Purpose:

To provide clinical evidence of the intra-articular injection of PRPs containing different leukocyte concentrations.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. PRP was classified into leukocyte-poor (LP-PRP) and leukocyte-rich (LR-PRP). Clinical outcomes including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, and adverse reactions were evaluated. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria were used for quality assessment.

Results:

Included were 32 studies with an evidence level between 1 and 4. Both LP-PRP and LR-PRP showed improvements above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in VAS pain score. No significant intergroup difference was seen at 3, 6, or 12 months of follow-up. Regarding function, both LP-PRP and LR-PRP showed improvements above the MCID in the WOMAC and IKDC scores, with no significant difference between the groups. Adverse reactions for pain were significantly higher in LR-PRP than in LP-PRP (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-2.10; P = .01). After intra-articular PRP injection, LR-PRP showed a significantly higher rate of swelling than LP-PRP (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.99; P = .02). The mean Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score of the included studies was 18.6 (range, 10-24).

Conclusion:

Intra-articular PRP injection resulted in improvements above the MCID in terms of pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis up to 12 months. The risk of local adverse reactions appeared to be increased after LR-PRP compared with LP-PRP injection. The findings of this review can support the potential use of intra-articular PRP injection for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. In clinical application, clinicians need to consider selecting a specific type of PRP for knee osteoarthritis.

A Prospective Study Comparing Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma Combined with Hyaluronic Acid and Autologous Microfragmented Adipose Tissue in Patients with Early Knee Osteoarthritis

The objective of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of repeated doses of leucocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) plus hyaluronic acid (HA) to a single dose of autologous microfragmented adipose tissue (AMAT) injections in patients with early osteoarthritis (OA) symptoms. Eighty knees in 50 patients (mean age: 61.3 years) were randomly allocated into two equal groups in a nonblinded design and prospectively followed for 12 months. Group 1 received three intra-articular injections (1 month apart) using autologous LP-PRP+HA. Group 2 received a single dose of AMAT injection. Outcomes were measured by PROMs Tegner, Marx, visual analog scale, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 6 and 12 months. Both groups had significant clinical and functional improvement at 6 and 12 months. The differences between groups were statistically significant in Tegner score and KOOS symptoms (both P < 0.05) at 6 months in group 2. The test with statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) at 12 months was Tegner (P < 0.001), with group 2 having a higher median than group 1. LP-PRP+HA and AMAT lead to clinical and functional improvement at 6 and 12 months. AMAT showed better clinical results in Tegner and KOOS symptoms at 6 months and Tegner at 12 months. Understanding which therapy offers the most benefits with the least risk can significantly improve the quality of life for millions of people affected by OA. Long-term randomized controlled studies are needed to verify differences in efficacy.

Role of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The clinical efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of osteoarthritis remains controversial. In this paper, we evaluated the clinical efficacy of PRP in the treatment of osteoarthritis using meta-analysis, providing evidence for the selection of clinical treatment options.

METHODS

We performed a computer-based search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases to retrieve articles using the search terms "platelet-rich plasma", "osteoarthrosis", and "knee joint". Quality evaluation and data extraction were performed. The combined effect was assessed using RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials, involving 320 patients, were included in this study. No significant differences were observed in the International Knee Documentation Committee score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, or the absolute value of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score between the experimental and control groups. The absolute value of the VAS score and change in the WOMAC score were significantly decreased and patient satisfaction was increased in the experimental group, as compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that intra-articular injection of PRP is an effective treatment for osteoarthritis that can reduce post-operative pain, improve locomotor function, and increase patient satisfaction.

Efficacy and Safety of Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma in Osteoarthritis Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common disease in aged adults. Intra-articular (IA) injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy is an effective minimally invasive treatment for KOA. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with placebo or other conservative treatments.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis to identify relevant articles from online register databases such as PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score. The secondary outcome was the adverse event rate.

Results

A total of 895 articles were identified, of which 23 randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria were determined as eligible. Compared with placebo, PRP had a lower VAS score and higher IKDC subjective score at the 6^th month after treatment and significantly less WOMAC score during the follow-up period. Compared with oral NSAIDs, PRP gained a lower WOMAC score at the 6^th month after treatment. The VAS score decreased after treatment when reaching PRP and CS. As compared to the HA, the VAS score, WOMAC score, and IKDC subjective score all revealed better PRP results. There were no significant differences in adverse event rates comparing PRP versus placebo or HA. Different PRP applications did not show significant differences in VAS score in the 1^st month and WOMAC score in the 3^rd month after treatment.

Conclusion

To compare with the conservative treatments mentioned above, PRP is more effective in relieving symptoms. There were no significant differences between triple PRP application and single PRP application in short-term curative effect.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Combined With Hyaluronic Acid Improves Pain and Function Compared With Hyaluronic Acid Alone in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) injections versus HA injections alone for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eligible randomized-controlled trials and observational studies directly comparing combined PRP-HA injections with HA injections alone were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central databases from inception to May 2020. A random effects model meta-analysis was conducted and the I² statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Four studies comprising 377 patients (PRP-HA: 193, HA: 184) with knee OA ranging from I-IV Kellgren-Lawrence grading scale were included. The final follow-up was 12 months in 3 studies and 6 months in 1 study. Patients who received PRP combined with HA had significantly greater improvements compared with those injected with HA alone in terms of visual analog scale scores at 3-month (standardized mean difference [SMD] 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-1.70; I² = 56.7%; P < .001), 6-month (SMD 1.08; 95% CI 0.54-1.62; I² = 67.9%; P < .001), and 12-month (SMD 1.13; 95% CI 0.74-1.52; I² = 0.0%; P < .001) and 12-month Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) physical functioning (SMD 0.91; 95% CI 0.65-1.17; I² = 0.0%; P < .001) and 12-month WOMAC stiffness (SMD 1.09; 95% CI 0.80-1.38; I² = 0.0%; P < .001) scores. No difference was identified in terms of 12-month WOMAC pain score (SMD 0.36; 95% CI -0.19 to 0.91; I² = 74.1%; P = .195).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptomatic patients with knee OA who were injected with a combination of PRP and HA demonstrated greater improvement in pain and function compared with patients who received HA injections only, as assessed by 3-, 6-, and 12-month visual analog scale scores and 12-month WOMAC physical function and stiffness scores. This study provides encouraging evidence for the use of the combined PRP-HA injections in the management of symptomatic patients with knee OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III (meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized comparative trials).

Treatment of knee osteoarthritic pain with platelet-rich plasma: a systematic review of clinical studies

Introduction: Knee osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease that is secondary to degradation of articular cartilage, reformation of subchondral bone through degradation and proliferation as well as presence of synovitis. Materials & methods: This systematic review was conducted and reported as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Results: A total of 30 of the 48 comparators showed statistically significant superiority with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) compared with a control, while the other 16 comparators showed no significant difference between PRP and the comparator. Conclusion: We can only recommend PRP for patients with early-stage osteoarthritis (I or II) and who are aged below 65, based on our findings. Based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) recommendations, while studies reviewed were randomized controlled studies, and therefore, high grade, due to variance in imprecision, risk of bias and inconsistency among the 37 studies, it would be reasonable to rate this paper as subjectively moderate.

Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma Combined With Hyaluronic Acid Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis Is Superior to Platelet-Rich Plasma or Hyaluronic Acid Alone in Inhibiting Inflammation and Improving Pain and Function

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and explore the therapeutic mechanisms of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) as a treatment for knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

In total, 122 knees were randomly divided into HA (34 knees), PRP (40 knees), and PRP+HA (48 knees) groups. Platelet densities in whole blood and PRP were examined using Wright-Giemsa staining. Visual analogue scale, Lequesne, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Lysholm scores, and postoperative complications were evaluated. High-frequency color Doppler imaging was used to observe the synovium and cartilage. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays were used to quantify interleukin-1β, tumor necrosis factor-α, matrix metalloproteinase-3, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 levels in synovial fluid.

RESULTS

The platelet density in PRP was 5.13-times that in whole blood (P = .002). At 24 months, pain and function scores in the PRP+HA group were better than those in the HA-alone and PRP-alone groups (P_pain = .000; P_function = .000). At 6 and 12 months, synovial hyperplasia in the PRP and PRP+HA groups was improved (P < .05). After 6 and 12 months, the synovial peak systolic velocity, synovial end-diastolic velocity, systolic/diastolic ratio, and resistance index were improved in the PRP+HA group (P < .05). Complications were greatest in the PRP group (P = .008). After 6 and 12 months, interleukin-1β, tumor necrosis factor-α, matrix metalloproteinase-3, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 in the PRP and PRP+HA groups decreased (P < .05), with more apparent inhibition in the PRP+HA group (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

PRP combined with HA is more effective than PRP or HA alone at inhibiting synovial inflammation and can effectively improve pain and function and reduce adverse reactions. Its mechanism involves changes in the synovium and cytokine content.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, Prospective cohort study.

[Evidence in Infiltrative Pain Therapy of the Musculoskeletal System]

Musculoskeletal pain symptoms frequently generate limitations in daily work and life in many patients. Usually, symptomatic treatment is possible before clarifying the in depth diagnosis. A symptom-based infiltration therapy will never replace a thoroughly done physical examination and thoughtful collection of patient history, however, it can be of great benefit for the patient when done focused on the point of pain and executed with profound anatomical knowledge. Furthermore, the knowledge of the level of evidence of therapeutic infiltrations improves their outcomes and shapes realistic patients' expectations. Ultrasound-guided therapeutic infiltrations improve the outcome despite the use of lower amounts of active agents by pinpointed applications. This article provides an overview of the scientific evidence of effectiveness of (ultrasound-guided) infiltration techniques in diverse musculoskeletal regions.

Intra-Articular Injections of Hyaluronic Acid or Steroids Associated With Better Outcomes Than Platelet-Rich Plasma, Adipose Mesenchymal Stromal Cells, or Placebo in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical effects of hyaluronic acid (HA), steroids, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), or adipose mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) injections in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials with OA of the knee that compared HA, steroids, PRP, adipose MSC, or their combination with placebo or in head-to-head combination were identified from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases up to June 30, 2019. We performed a network meta-analysis of the relevant literature to determine whether there was benefit from HA, steroids, PRP, or adipose MSC treatment as compared with placebo.

RESULTS

A total of 43 trials covering 5554 patients were included. Steroids were ranked most likely to be effective for the management of pain or function, with adipose MSC and multiple PRP appearing least likely to be effective. Although no significant difference was observed among the 6 interventions, except for single PRP with respect to adverse effects, steroids and HA exhibited a lower rate of AEs compared with the placebo. In view of severe adverse effects, only single PRP was superior to placebo. Direct pairwise meta-analysis for pain relief showed that HA was superior to placebo or single PRP, but steroids had a significantly worse effect than single PRP. In addition, direct pairwise meta-analysis for adverse effects favored steroids in comparison to HA.

CONCLUSIONS

The ranking statistics like surface under the cumulative ranking curve values of our network meta-analysis support the use of steroids and HA for appropriate patients with knee OA. For pain relief and AEs, steroids are most likely the best treatment, followed by HA. Single PRP, multiple PRP, and adipose MSC interventions do not result in a relevant reduction of joint pain nor improvement of joint function compared with placebo. However, treatment effect differences were small and potentially not clinically meaningful, indicating that other factors, such as cost and patient preferences, may be more important in patients with knee OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

meta-analysis of non-homogenous randomized controlled trials, Level II.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis of 26 Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) in patients with adult knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and to explore the most effective and safe protocol by using a meta-analysis method.

METHODS

This study was based on Cochrane methodology for conducting a meta-analysis. Only randomized controlled trials with an experimental group that used PRP and a control group that received HA were eligible for this study. The participants were adults who had KOA. The outcome measures were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the visual analog scale (VAS), the EuroQol VAS, the International Knee Documentation Committee, the Tegner score, the Lequesne Scale, the Knee injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, satisfaction rate, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses was performed for patients with different doses, types, and times of PRP interventions and grades of OA. The Review Manager Database was used to analyze the included studies.

RESULTS

Twenty-six randomized controlled trials involving 2430 patients were included. The WOMAC total scores, WOMAC physical function scores, and VAS scores of the PRP group were better than the those of the HA group at 3, 6, and 12 months. The PRP group had better WOMAC pain, WOMAC stiffness, EuroQol VAS, and International Knee Documentation Committee scores than the HA group at 6 and 12 months. There was no significant difference in adverse events between the 2 groups (relative risk 1.21, 95% confidence interval 0.95-1.54; P = .13).

CONCLUSIONS

For the nonsurgical treatment of KOA, compared with HA, intra-articular injection of PRP could significantly reduce patients' early pain and improve function. There was no significant difference in adverse events between the 2 groups. PRP was more effective than HA in the treatment of KOA, and the safety of these 2 treatment options was comparable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, meta-analysis of Level I RCTs.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are 2 nonoperative treatment options for knee osteoarthritis (OA) that are supposed to provide symptomatic relief and help delay surgical intervention.

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy and safety of PRP and HA injections for the treatment of knee OA.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of level 1 studies.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify level 1 studies that compared the clinical efficacy of PRP and HA injections for knee OA. The search phrase used was platelet-rich plasma hyaluronic acid knee osteoarthritis randomized. Patients were assessed via the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scale. A subanalysis was also performed to isolate results from patients who received leukocyte-poor and leukocyte-rich PRP.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies (all level 1) met inclusion criteria, including 811 patients undergoing intra-articular injection with PRP (mean age, 57.6 years) and 797 patients with HA (mean age, 59.3 years). The mean follow-up was 11.1 months for both groups. Mean improvement was significantly higher in the PRP group (44.7%) than the HA group (12.6%) for WOMAC total scores (P < .01). Of 11 studies based on the VAS, 6 reported PRP patients to have significantly less pain at latest follow-up when compared with HA patients (P < .05). Of 6 studies based on the Subjective IKDC outcome score, 3 reported PRP patients to have significantly better scores at latest follow-up when compared with HA patients (P < .05). Finally, leukocyte-poor PRP was associated with significantly better Subjective IKDC scores versus leukocyte-rich PRP (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing treatment for knee OA with PRP can be expected to experience improved clinical outcomes when compared with HA. Additionally, leukocyte-poor PRP may be a superior line of treatment for knee OA over leukocyte-rich PRP, although further studies are needed that directly compare leukocyte content in PRP injections for treatment of knee OA.

Editorial Commentary: Meta-analysis Shows That Platelet-Rich Plasma Is Safe and Effective for Knee Osteoarthritis: Future Randomized Controlled Trials Must Be of High Quality-Not High Quantity

The use of platelet-rich plasma in knee osteoarthritis is still controversial, and meta-analysis shows that platelet-rich plasma can be effective and safe for nonoperative management of knee osteoarthritis. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are essential tools for evaluating the effectiveness and safety of new therapeutic interventions. Meta-analysis of these RCTs is critical to try to approximate the truth but also reminds us that sometimes, "value does not necessarily derive from quantity but rather from quality." Given the fact that approximately 92.8% of published abstracts of RCTs report at least 1 significant outcome (indicated as at least P < .05), there is a notion that significant outcomes are most likely to become published, suggesting a potential publication bias. Therefore, additional studies repeating the significant outcomes are sometimes necessary.

Intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a consensus statement from French-speaking experts

PURPOSE

There has been much debate regarding the use of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as symptomatic treatment for knee osteoarthritis. The objective of this consensus was to develop guidelines for PRP injections in knee osteoarthritis according to the French National Authority for Health recommendations.

METHODS

Fifteen physicians from different French-speaking countries (10 rheumatologists, 4 specialists in rehabilitation and sports medicine and 1 radiologist) were selected for their expertise in the areas of PRP and osteoarthritis. A comprehensive literature review was conducted on Medline including all published therapeutic trials, open studies, meta-analysis and systematic reviews focusing on the effects of PRP in knee OA, as well as fundamental studies concerning the characteristics of the various types of PRP and their mechanisms, indexed before April 2019. Using the method recommended by the French National Authority for Health inspired by the Delphi consensus process, 25 recommendations were finally retained and evaluated. The recommendations were classified as appropriate or not appropriate, with strong or relative agreement, or uncertain if a consensus was not achieved.

RESULTS

Among the 25 recommendations selected, the main ones are the following: (1) Intra-articular injections of PRP are an effective symptomatic treatment for early to moderate knee osteoarthritis. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a relative agreement (Median = 8; rank = 6-9). Level of evidence 1A. (2) A PRP treatment sequence in knee osteoarthritis may include 1-3 injections. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a strong agreement (Median = 9; rank = 7-9). Level of evidence 1A. (3) Leucocytes-poor PRP should be preferred in knee osteoarthritis. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a relative agreement (Median = 8; rank = 5-9). Level of evidence 5. (4) Intra-articular PRP knee injections should be performed under ultrasound or fluoroscopic guidance. This recommendation was considered uncertain with no consensus (Median = 8; rank = 3-9). Level of evidence 5. (5) PRP should not be mixed with an anesthetic or intra-articular corticosteroid. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a relative agreement (Median = 9; rank = 6-9). Level of evidence 5 CONCLUSION: Those 25 recommendations should standardize and facilitate the use of IA PRP injections, which are considered by experts as an effective treatment especially in early or moderate knee OA. Although a strong or relative agreement from the experts was obtained for most of the recommendations, many of them had a very low level of evidence (Level 5) and were principally based on the clinical experience of the experts.

Intra-articular injection with Autologous Conditioned Plasma does not lead to a clinically relevant improvement of knee osteoarthritis: a prospective case series of 140 patients with 1-year follow-up

Background and purpose - Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is broadly used in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, but clinical outcomes are highly variable. We evaluated the effectiveness of intra-articular injections with Autologous Conditioned Plasma (ACP), a commercially available form of platelet-rich plasma, in a tertiary referral center. Second, we aimed to identify which patient factors are associated with clinical outcome. Patients and methods - 140 patients (158 knees) with knee osteoarthritis (Kellgren and Lawrence grade 0-4) were treated with 3 intra-articular injections of ACP. The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), pain (Numeric Rating Scale; NRS), and general health (EuroQol 5 Dimensions; EQ5D) were assessed at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months' follow-up. The effect of sex, age, BMI, Kellgren and Lawrence grade, history of knee trauma, and baseline KOOS on clinical outcome at 6 and 12 months was determined using linear regression. Results - Mean KOOS increased from 37 at baseline to 44 at 3 months, 45 at 6 months, and 43 at 12 months' follow-up. Mean NRS-pain decreased from 6.2 at baseline to 5.3 at 3 months, 5.2 at 6 months, and 5.3 at 12 months. EQ5D did not change significantly. There were no predictors of clinical outcome. Interpretation - ACP does not lead to a clinically relevant improvement (exceeding the minimal clinically important difference) in patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis. None of the investigated factors predicts clinical outcome.

Efficacy of Autologous Conditioned Serum (ACS), Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP), Hyaluronic Acid (HA) and Steroid for Early Osteoarthritis Knee: A Comparative Analysis

BACKGROUND

Intra-articular injection therapy constituting corticosteroids, viscosupplements and blood-derived products are considered to have a key role in non-operative management of osteoarthritis knee. While corticosteroids and viscosupplements have proven short-term efficacy in early osteoarthritis; orthobiologics are gaining increased attention in osteoarthritis management. The aim of present study was thus to compare two commonly used biologics (platelet-rich plasma/PRP and autologous conditioned serum/ACS) to each other and to established therapies.

METHODS

After required institutional clearances, all patients presenting with early primary osteoarthritis knee who had failed initial conservative management and received only unilateral knee injection were included. Patients in the PRP group were compared to the other groups (comprising the HA/hyaluronic acid group, steroid group, and a matched cohort who had been administered ACS for the same indication earlier). Clinical outcome was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire and Visual Analogue scale (VAS) pre-injection and at 6 months.

RESULTS

ACS and PRP did not have any significant difference in terms of either WOMAC score (p = 0.154) or VAS score at 6 months (p = 0.850). The scores for both these orthobiologics were better than the control groups (HA group and Steroid group). Between the two control groups, HA group had better VAS scores as compared to the Steroid group (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The clinical outcomes following intra-articular injection of ACS and PRP are better than controls (HA and steroid), but a difference between the two orthobiologics could not be demonstrated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3b.

Hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma for the management of knee osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

Symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) remains a substantial cause of pain and disability worldwide and effective management in young patients without indications for total knee arthroplasty remains challenging. Intra-articular injections represent a viable option in the non-operative treatment of knee OA. Hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) are two commonly utilized intra-articular treatment modalities that are of particular clinical interest in the current literature. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide a concise review of the current literature on the use of HA, PRP, and HA-PRP conjugates for the treatment of symptomatic knee OA.

METHODS

A review of the literature utilizing PubMed, OVID/Medline, and Cochrane databases on basic science and clinical literature pertaining to preparation, composition, and outcomes of HA, PRP, and HA-PRP conjugates in patients with symptomatic knee OA.

RESULTS

Both HA and PRP have been shown to be efficacious for the treatment of symptomatic knee OA, with HA injections providing limited short-term improvement, while PRP may provide greater therapeutic relief, particularly with the use of leukocyte-poor (LP-PRP) formulations. Despite limited data, the combination of different formulations of HA-PRP conjugates may provide a synergistic effect, resulting in a clinically significant improvement in both pain and function.

CONCLUSION

In patients with symptomatic knee OA, intra-articular HA and PRP provide short-term improvement in pain and function, while the efficacy of HA-PRP conjugates warrants further study.

Platelet-rich plasma versus hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection compared with hyaluronic acid (HA) injection for patients undergoing knee osteoarthritis.

Methods

We systematically searched electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library on January 23, 2020 to identify relevant studies issued in English languages. The outcomes evaluating the efficacy of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) treatment were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores (WOMAC pain, function, stiffness, and total scores) at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months; International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, Lequesne Index score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, EQ-VAS scores, and KOOS scores. The pooled data were analyzed by Stata 12.0.

Results

A total of 20 RCTs were enrolled in the present meta-analysis. The pooled results demonstrated that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection reduced pain more effectively than hyaluronic acid (HA) injection at 6-month and 12-month follow-up evaluated by WOMAC pain scores and VAS scores. EQ-VAS in the patients treated with PRP injection was lower than that in patients with HA injection at 12 months. Moreover, the patients with PRP injection had a better function recovery than those with HA injection at 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up, as evaluated by WOMAC function scores. WOMAC total scores showed significant difference at 6-month and 12-month follow-up. The IKDC scores indicated PRP injection was significantly more effective than HA injection at 3 months and 6 months. However, the Lequesne Index scores, KOOS scores, and adverse events did not show any significant difference between groups.

Conclusion

Intra-articular PRP injection appeared to be more efficacious than HA injection for the treatment of KOA in terms of short-term functional recovery. Moreover, PRP injection was superior to HA injection in terms of long-term pain relief and function improvement. In addition, PRP injection did not increase the risk of adverse events compared to HA injection.

Future of Chondroprotectors in the Treatment of Degenerative Processes of Connective Tissue

Osteoarthritis is one of the most common diseases of the connective tissue of the elderly. It was found that most epidemiological studies used the Kellgren and Lawrence system for classification of osteoarthritis, which indicates one of the 5 degrees (0-4) of osteoarthritis in various joints according to the radiographic atlas. It has been proven that chondroprotectors are represented by the following active substances: chondroitin sulfate, glucosamine sulfate or hydrochloride, hyaluronic acid, glycosaminoglycans, extraction preparations from animal or plant raw materials. The sources of raw materials for the manufacture of combined chondroprotectors are known, methods for their preparation and use are described. The main drugs on the chondroprotective market are presented. The effectiveness of their use for the treatment of osteoarthritis has been proven. It was found that preparations containing chondroitin sulfate have anti-inflammatory activity, affecting mainly the cellular component of inflammation, stimulate the synthesis of hyaluronic acid and proteoglycans. Methods of treating osteoarthritis using cell therapy (the use of readily available, highly proliferative, and multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells) are presented.

Development and Prospect of Intra-Articular Injection in the Treatment of Osteoarthritis: A Review

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common degenerative disease that affects the vast majority of the elderly and may eventually embark on the road of the total knee arthroplasty (TKA), although controversy still exists in the medical community about the best therapies for osteoarthritis. Compared with physical therapy, oral analgesics and other non-operative treatments, intra-articular injection is more safe and effective. Moreover, intra-articular injection is much less invasive and has fewer adverse reactions than surgical treatment. This article reviews mechanism, benefits and adverse reactions of corticosteroids (CS), hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), mesenchymal stem cell (MSCs), stromal vascular fraction (SVF) and other new therapies (for example: gene therapy). The application prospect of intra-articular injection was analyzed according to the recent progress in drug research.

Evidence on ankle injections for osteochondral lesions and osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the evidence supporting safety and effectiveness of intra-articular injective treatments for ankle lesions ranging from osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLT) to osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A systematic review and a meta-analysis were performed on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library in March 2020. Safety was evaluated through the reported side effects and effectiveness through the scores used. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and the Downs and Black checklist. For each outcome, the quality of evidence was graded according to GRADE guidelines.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies (21 for OA, 3 for OLT) were included on hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), saline, methylprednisolone, botulinum toxin type A (BoNT-A), mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and prolotherapy. No severe adverse events were reported. For OLT, a comparison was possible between HA and PRP showing no significant difference. For ankle OA, a significant difference favouring HA versus saline was documented at six months (p < 0.001). The GRADE level of evidence was very low.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis supports the safety of intra-articular treatment for ankle OA and OLT, while only a very low evidence supports the efficacy of HA in terms of better results versus placebo for the treatment of ankle OA, and other conclusions are hindered by the scarcity of the available literature. This urges further and stronger trials to specifically investigate potential and limitations of these different injective approaches for the treatment of OLT and ankle OA.

The Clinical Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Knee Disorders and Surgery-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In recent years, the interest in biological treatment of knee lesions has increased, especially the application of platelet-rich plasma is of particular note. The number of articles evaluating platelet-rich plasma (PRP) efficacy in the recovery of knee disorders and during knee surgery has exponentially increased over the last decade. A systematic review with meta-analyses was performed by assessing selected studies of local PRP injections to the knee joint. The study was completed in accordance with 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A multistep search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed to identify studies on knee surgery and knee lesion treatment with PRP. Of the 4004 articles initially identified, 357 articles focusing on knee lesions were selected and, consequently, only 83 clinical trials were analyzed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool to evaluate risk. In total, seven areas of meta-analysis reported a positive effect of PRP. Among them, 10 sub-analyses demonstrated significant differences in favor of PRP when compared to the control groups (p < 0.05). This study showed the positive effects of PRP, both on the recovery of knee disorders and during knee surgery; however further prospective and randomized studies with a higher number of subjects and with lower biases are needed.

Cooled radiofrequency ablation provides extended clinical utility in the management of knee osteoarthritis: 12-month results from a prospective, multi-center, randomized, cross-over trial comparing cooled radiofrequency ablation to a single hyaluronic acid injection

BACKGROUND

Safe and effective non-surgical treatments are an important part of the knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment algorithm. Cooled radiofrequency ablation (CRFA) and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections are two commonly used modalities to manage symptoms associated with knee OA.

METHODS

A prospective 1:1 randomized study was conducted in 177 patients comparing CRFA to HA injection with follow-ups at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. HA subjects with unsatisfactory outcomes at 6-months were allowed to crossover and receive CRFA. Knee pain (numeric rating scale = NRS), WOMAC Index (pain, stiffness and physical function), overall quality of life (global perceived effect = GPE, EQ-5D-5 L), and adverse events were measured.

RESULTS

At 12-months, 65.2% of subjects in the CRFA cohort reported ≥50% pain relief from baseline. Mean NRS pain score was 2.8 ± 2.4 at 12 months (baseline 6.9 ± 0.8). Subjects in the CRFA cohort saw a 46.2% improvement in total WOMAC score at the 12-month timepoint. 64.5% of subjects in the crossover cohort reported ≥50% pain relief from baseline, with a mean NRS pain score of 3.0 ± 2.4 at 12 months (baseline 7.0 ± 1.0). After receiving CRFA, subjects in the crossover cohort had a 27.5% improvement in total WOMAC score. All subjects receiving CRFA reported significant improvement in quality of life. There were no serious adverse events related to either procedure and overall adverse event profiles were similar.

CONCLUSION

A majority of subjects treated with CRFA demonstrated sustained knee pain relief for at least 12-months. Additionally, CRFA provided significant pain relief for HA subjects who crossed over 6 months after treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03381248. Registered 27 December 2017.

Intra-articular injection of culture-expanded mesenchymal stem cells with or without addition of platelet-rich plasma is effective in decreasing pain and symptoms in knee osteoarthritis: a controlled, double-blind clinical trial

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and laboratory outcomes of intra-articular injections of culture-expanded bone-derived mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) with or without platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to intra-articular corticosteroid injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Forty-seven patients with radiographic and symptomatic knee OA were randomized into three groups for intra-articular injections: autologous bone marrow-derived culture-expanded MSCs (n = 16); autologous bone marrow-derived culture-expanded MSCs + PRP (n = 14); and corticosteroid (n = 17). The outcomes were assessed by the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and range of motion (ROM) at baseline, 1, 2, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months and intra-articular cytokines analysis at baseline, 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

The three groups showed significant improvement in most KOOS domains and global score at 1st month and all domains and global score at 12-month follow-up (p < 0.05). At the 1st month, only the MSCs group showed significant differences in KOOS symptoms domain (p = 0.003). The MSCs and MSCs + PRP groups showed the highest percentage of improvement in most KOOS domains and global score compared to the corticosteroid group. All three groups showed a significant reduction in intra-articular levels of human interleukin-10 cytokine, from baseline to 12 months (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

An intra-articular injection of bone marrow-derived culture-expanded MSCs with or without the addiction of PRP is effective in improving the function and decreasing symptoms caused by knee OA at 12-month follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Should Platelet-Rich Plasma or Stem Cell Therapy Be Used to Treat Osteoarthritis?

Osteoarthritis is the most common form of arthritis and unfortunately lacks disease-modifying treatments. This has led to a growing demand for more effective nonoperative treatment options. Platelet-rich plasma and mesenchymal stem cell therapy offer the potential to modify the natural course of knee osteoarthritis using cell-based technology. Because of the lack of high-quality evidence and the large degree of heterogeneity, in terms of study designs and measured outcomes, the use of platelet-rich plasma or mesenchymal stem cell therapy to treat knee osteoarthritis cannot be recommended at this time.

Alternative and complementary therapies in osteoarthritis and cartilage repair

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint condition and, with a burgeoning ageing population, is due to increase in prevalence. Beyond conventional medical and surgical interventions, there are an increasing number of ‘alternative’ therapies. These alternative therapies may have a limited evidence base and, for this reason, are often only afforded brief reference (or completely excluded) from current OA guidelines. Thus, the aim of this review was to synthesize the current evidence regarding autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), vitamin D and other alternative therapies. The majority of studies were in knee OA or chondral defects. Matrix-assisted ACI has demonstrated exceedingly limited, symptomatic improvements in the treatment of cartilage defects of the knee and is not supported for the treatment of knee OA. There is some evidence to suggest symptomatic improvement with MSC injection in knee OA, with the suggestion of minimal structural improvement demonstrated on MRI and there are positive signals that PRP may also lead to symptomatic improvement, though variation in preparation makes inter-study comparison difficult. There is variability in findings with vitamin D supplementation in OA, and the only recommendation which can be made, at this time, is for replacement when vitamin D is deplete. Other alternative therapies reviewed have some evidence (though from small, poor-quality studies) to support improvement in symptoms and again there is often a wide variation in dosage and regimens. For all these therapeutic modalities, although controlled studies have been undertaken to evaluate effectiveness in OA, these have often been of small size, limited statistical power, uncertain blindness and using various methodologies. These deficiencies must leave the question as to whether they have been validated as effective therapies in OA (or chondral defects). The conclusions of this review are that all alternative interventions definitely require clinical trials with robust methodology, to assess their efficacy and safety in the treatment of OA beyond contextual and placebo effects.

Platelet Concentrates in Musculoskeletal Medicine

Platelet concentrates (PCs), mostly represented by platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) are autologous biological blood-derived products that may combine plasma/platelet-derived bioactive components, together with fibrin-forming protein able to create a natural three-dimensional scaffold. These types of products are safely used in clinical applications due to the autologous-derived source and the minimally invasive application procedure. In this narrative review, we focus on three main topics concerning the use of platelet concentrate for treating musculoskeletal conditions: (a) the different procedures to prepare PCs, (b) the composition of PCs that is related to the type of methodological procedure adopted and (c) the clinical application in musculoskeletal medicine, efficacy and main limits of the different studies.

Platelet-Rich Plasma for Sport-Active Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: Limited Return to Sport

Objective

To evaluate a cohort of sport-active patients suffering from cartilage degeneration and OA, in terms of clinical outcome and return to sport (RTS) after platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injective treatment.

Design

This study included forty-seven sport-active patients ≤50 years old with unilateral symptomatic knee cartilage degeneration or OA. Patients received 3 PRP injections and were prospectively evaluated at baseline and then at 2, 6, 12, and 24 months follow-up by IKDC subjective EQ-VAS, and Tegner scores. Furthermore, patients were asked about their RTS, in terms of return to any sport level or to their activity level before symptoms onset.

Results

IKDC subjective score improved significantly at all follow-ups, changing from 59.2 ± 13.6 to 70.6 ± 13 at 12 months and to 76.7 ± 12.5 at 24 months (p < 0.0005). A similar outcome was observed with the EQ-VAS score. Tegner score improved from 3.6 ± 1.4 to 4.8 ± 0.9 at 24 months (p < 0.0005). A similar outcome was observed with the EQ-VAS score. Tegner score improved from 3.6 ± 1.4 to 4.8 ± 0.9 at 24 months (p < 0.0005). A similar outcome was observed with the EQ-VAS score. Tegner score improved from 3.6 ± 1.4 to 4.8 ± 0.9 at 24 months (p < 0.0005). A similar outcome was observed with the EQ-VAS score. Tegner score improved from 3.6 ± 1.4 to 4.8 ± 0.9 at 24 months (

Conclusions

Sport-active patients affected by knee OA can benefit from PRP injections, with pain and function improvement over time. However, results are less satisfactory in terms of RTS since only half can achieve the same sport level as before the onset of symptoms. Patients undergoing PRP treatment should be made aware of their low chances to go back to high-impact sport activities.

East meets West: current practices and policies in the management of musculoskeletal aging

Healthy aging is defined as the process of developing and maintaining the functional ability that enables wellbeing in older age. Healthy aging is dependent upon intrinsic capacity, a composite of physical and mental capacities, and the environment an individual inhabits and their interactions with it. Maintenance of musculoskeletal health during aging is a key determinant of functional ability. Sarcopenia, osteoporosis and osteoarthritis, are a triad of musculoskeletal diseases of aging that are major contributors to the global burden of disease and disability worldwide. The prevention and management of these disorders is of increasing importance with pressure mounting from the aging population. In a new initiative, the Chinese Medical Association, Chinese Society of Osteoporosis and Bone Mineral Research, and the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases jointly organized a symposium to discuss current practices and policies in the management of musculoskeletal aging. The meeting allowed experts from Europe and China to share their experience and recommendations for the management of these three major diseases. Discussing and analyzing similarities and differences in their practice should lead, through a mutual enrichment of knowledge, to better management of these diseases, in order to preserve intrinsic capacity and retard the age-related degradation of physical ability. In future, it is hoped that sharing of knowledge and best practice will advance global strategies to reduce the burden of musculoskeletal disease and promote healthy aging tailored to meet the individual patient’s needs.

Editorial Commentary: Platelet-Rich Plasma or Profit-Rich Placebo: Variability of Composition, Concentration, Preparation, and Many Other Yet-Unknown Factors Determine Effectiveness

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) frequently is used in orthopaedics, and its application is supported by clinical studies for a variety of conditions. For knee osteoarthritis, it is more effective than hyaluronic acid, providing significant better pain relief and functional improvement. However, different compositions of PRP, absolute platelet counts, and many other physiological and demographic variables will influence the effectiveness. Variability of the composition of the ingredients of PRP surely has a substantial influence on outcome.

Editorial Commentary: Could Biological Treatments Be the Game-Changing Factor for Osteoarthritis?

The realization of the presence of an inflammatory component in cartilage degeneration together with the promising application of platelet-rich plasma and amnion as "healing agents" opened a new window of opportunity for biological treatments in osteoarthritis. If the goal is to delay or even cease the degenerative process, then treating the cause rather than the symptom is a key factor for this biological intervention to be successful. As new biological agents arise, there are 3 crucial milestones that need to be met in laboratory and clinical studies: safety, reasonable cost, and improved effectiveness in comparison with alternatives.

The Clinical Use of Biologics in the Knee Lesions: Does the Patient Benefit?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Overview the outcomes of the latest use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the treatment of knee lesions in the clinics and discuss the challenges and limitations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent clinical studies mainly indicate there may be benefit of PRP usage for the treatment of knee lesions. As an autologous source of bioactive components, PRP has been shown to be typically safe, free of major adverse outcomes. The use of PRP has been continuously increasing, and some well-designed, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trials have been published. Clinical outcomes relating to PRP usage are multifactorial and depend on the severity of the lesion and patient characteristics. Although PRP is safe to use and it can be easily applied in the clinics, case-specific considerations are needed to determine whether PRP could be beneficial or not. If the use of PRP is favored, then, the configuration/optimization of the preparation and administration/delivery strategy with or without a concomitant treatment may further enhance the clinical outcomes and patients' experience.