Choice of intra-articular injection in treatment of knee osteoarthritis: platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid or ozone options

Ozone therapy for knee osteoarthritis: a literature visualization analysis of research hotspots and prospects

Medical ozone is a molecule composed of three oxygen atoms with anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antioxidant functions. Ozone therapy (O 3 or O 2 - O 3 ) for knee osteoarthritis has gradually received increasing attention from researchers in recent years. Here, we discuss the research hotspots and development trends of ozone therapy for knee osteoarthritis through literature visualization and analysis. (1) From 2012 to the present, the overall trend of publications on ozone treatment for knee osteoarthritis has been increasing annually, and it has received widespread attention, especially in Iran and China. (2) Keyword analysis revealed that the keywords with the greatest number of citations for ozone treatment of knee osteoarthritis are "osteoarthritis," "ozone," "knee osteoarthritis," "ozone therapy," and "hyaluronic acid." (3) The results of the cocitation analysis revealed that the themes of the cocited literature are concentrated in 11 directions: intra-articular injections, intra-articular oxygen ozone, treatment of knee osteoarthritis, rehabilitation studies, time effects, pain function, comprehensive review, growth factors, rheumatic diseases, ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injections, and placebo. (4) The hotspots of the available highly cited literature have focused mainly on the efficacy and safety of ozone or growth factors alone in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Most of the literature suggests that intra-articular injections are the most common form of ozone therapy, and the accuracy and safety of ozone injections can be ensured using ultrasound-guided techniques. Ozone therapy has a positive short-term effect on pain control and functional recovery within 6 months after injection, but how to maintain the long-term efficacy of ozone therapy has rarely been described. It is hypothesized that the combination of ozone and growth factors may be beneficial for prolonging the efficacy of ozone therapy. (5) Ozone therapy has no advantages over other therapies in terms of therapeutic efficacy. Compared with ozone therapy, platelet-rich plasma and growth factor-rich plasma have better long-term outcomes in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, whereas stromal vascular components have the best effects on pain relief and functional improvement. Few studies address the combination of ozone and growth factors for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, and a few clinical studies registered have explored other treatments (e.g., corticosteroids). (6) Future studies could further explore the specific mechanisms and optimal dosing regimens of ozone combined with different growth factors in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis to compensate for the short-term efficacy of ozone therapy and to validate the long-term efficacy and safety of this combination therapy. It is also imperative to develop international guidelines for ozone therapy for osteoarthritis of the knee as soon as possible.

Long-term effectiveness of intra-articular injectables in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Intra-articular injectables are proposed as a solution for pain relief and functional improvement in knee osteoarthritis (OA), however most studies involving intra-articular knee injectables are focused on short-term relief, leaving the recommendations regarding long-term management unclear. This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the mid- to long-term effectiveness of intra-articular knee injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids (CS), and their combinations for management of knee OA.

METHODS

Relevant studies were searched through PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Register of Trials databases from inception to 20th October, 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of knee OA patients who had taken intra-articular injectable treatment with a follow-up duration of at least one year. The study included 37 RCTs involving 5089 patients. The outcomes assessed were pain relief and functional improvement of knee joint. The random effects Bayesian model was carried out for network meta-analysis. The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve demonstrated the rank probability of each injectable therapy for different outcomes.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed that, in terms of both knee pain relief and improvement of functional outcomes, the combined intra-articular injection of PRP and HA was ranked ahead of the isolated administration of PRP, followed by combination of HA with CS, HA alone, placebo, and CS at the end of one year.

CONCLUSION

These findings emphasize the sustained efficacy of PRP, particularly when combined with HA, in providing superior long-term pain relief and functional improvement in knee OA compared to other intra-articular injectables, highlighting its potential as a preferred treatment modality.

Most Orthopaedic Platelet-Rich Plasma Investigations Don't Report Protocols and Composition: An Updated Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to assess the heterogeneity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) preparation and composition reporting for the treatment of musculoskeletal/orthopaedic pathologies.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify Level I and Level II studies from 2016 to 2022 that evaluated the use of PRP therapy for musculoskeletal pathologies. The search phrase used was "platelet-rich plasma clinical studies." Studies were assessed based on their reporting of the PRP preparation methods and reporting of PRP composition.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-four studies (in 120 articles) met inclusion criteria for analysis. Of these studies, 15 (12.1%) provided comprehensive reporting, including a clear, well-described, and reproducible preparation protocol that future investigators can follow. Thirty-three studies (26.6%) quantitatively reported the final PRP product composition.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the studies using PRP for the treatment of musculoskeletal/orthopaedic pathologies, less than 20% provided a clear, well-described, and reproducible PRP preparation protocol, and only one-fourth of studies reported on the final PRP product composition.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A diverse current reporting of PRP composition between studies provides a high heterogeneity of the term "PRP," which becomes a limitation for a comparison of studies using PRP.

Does intra-articular medical ozone therapy applied at different concentrates improve outcomes of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis? A randomized clinical trial

This study evaluated and compared the clinical outcomes of intra-articular medical ozone therapies at 15 μg/L and 30 μg/L concentrates and non-ozone treatment for treating temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ-OA). The sample was composed of 48 patients, and they were randomly divided into three groups with equal numbers: the control group received only four sessions of intra-articular anesthesia (group 1), and the study groups received four sessions of 15 μg/L (group 2) or 30 μg/L (group 3) concentrated intra-articularly deposited medical ozone following the intra-articular anesthesia. The primary outcome variables were recorded preoperatively and 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The final sample comprised 11 patients in group 1, 16 in group 2, and 11 in group 3. The mean follow-up period was 13.56 ± 2.08 months. Significant improvements were observed in masticatory efficiency and MIO only in the study groups, as well as pain complaints, joint sounds, and pain at lateral palpation of TMJ in all groups. Study groups showed superior outcomes compared to the control group. Only masticatory efficiency increased significantly more in Group 3 than in Group 2. Despite the limited sample size, the present study's findings suggested that intra-articular medical ozone therapy produced superior outcomes compared to control groups for treating TMJ-OA. Both ozone doses produced significant and similar improvements in clinical outcomes, with the exception of masticatory efficiency.

Advances in the pathology and treatment of osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA), a widespread degenerative joint disease, predominantly affects individuals from middle age onwards, exhibiting non-inflammatory characteristics. OA leads to the gradual deterioration of articular cartilage and subchondral bone, causing pain and reduced mobility. The risk of OA increases with age, making it a critical health concern for seniors. Despite significant research efforts and various therapeutic approaches, the precise causes of OA remain unclear.

AIM OF REVIEW

This paper provides a thorough examination of OA characteristics, pathogenic mechanisms at various levels, and personalized treatment strategies for different OA stages. The review aims to enhance understanding of disease mechanisms and establish a theoretical framework for developing more effective therapeutic interventions.

KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW

This review systematically examines OA through multiple perspectives, integrating current knowledge of clinical presentation, pathological mechanisms, and associated signaling pathways. It assesses diagnostic methods and reviews both pharmacological and surgical treatments for OA, as well as emerging tissue engineering approaches to manage the disease. While therapeutic strategies such as exercise, anti-inflammatory drugs, and surgical interventions are employed to manage symptoms and modify joint structure, none have been able to effectively halt OA's advancement or achieve long-lasting symptom relief. Tissue engineering strategies, such as cell-seeded scaffolds, supportive matrices, and growth factor delivery, have emerged as promising approaches for cartilage repair and OA treatment. To combat the debilitating effects of OA, it is crucial to investigate the molecular basis of its pathogenesis and seek out innovative therapeutic targets for more potent preventive and treatment strategies.

Comparison of Different Molecular Weights of Intra-Articular Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Level I Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Background: The present Bayesian network meta-analysis compared the efficacy of intra-articular injections of different molecular weights of hyaluronic acid (HA) in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Methods: In November 2024, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. All randomised controlled trials investigating the efficacy of intra-articular HA injections for knee osteoarthritis were accessed. The outcome of interest was to evaluate pain according to the visual analogue scale (VAS). The groups included for comparison were the ultra-high molecular weight (UHMW), high molecular weight (HMW), medium molecular weight (MMW), and low molecular weight (LMW). Results: Data from 9822 patients were collected. The mean age of the patients was 62.1 ± 5.0 years with given comparability at baseline. Different follow-up periods were compared. The longest control period ranged from four to six months, and the UHMW and HMW injections were the interventions associated with the greatest reduction in the VAS. LMW HA was the intervention associated with the lowest decrease in VAS, falling short of the control group. Conclusions: The main findings of the present Bayesian network meta-analysis, with a current level I of evidence, suggests that the UHMW and HMW HA has a beneficial effect on pain at 6 months post intervention in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials Evaluating the Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis: Adherence to Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics

BACKGROUND

The Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopedics (MIBO) guidelines were developed in May 2017 to encourage improved reporting standards, promote increased transparency and reproducibility, and enhance clinical evaluation capabilities. The MIBO guidelines consist of 23 checklist items considered necessary to critically appraise clinical studies evaluating platelet-rich plasma (PRP).

PURPOSE

To assess randomized controlled trials that evaluated PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in order to systematically review their adherence to the MIBO guidelines.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review. Level 1a.

METHODS

A search was performed following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials reporting on knee osteoarthritis treated with intra-articular PRP. The studies were categorized into pre-, peri-, and post-MIBO groups based on the start date of data collection. The overall MIBO scores, defined as percentage of checklist items out of the 23 checklist items reported in 1 study, individual item scores, defined as percentage of studies reporting the checklist item within a specified group, and overall item score defined as the average of the individual item scores from all the included studies were calculated.

RESULTS

The review included 87 studies (7925 patients; 8118 knees). Of these, 51 studies were assigned to the pre-MIBO group, 19 studies to the peri-MIBO group, and 17 studies to the post-MIBO group. The overall MIBO score was 72%. No statistically significant differences in MIBO scores were found among the 3 MIBO groups (P = .345). The majority of the studies (62 studies; 71%) had MIBO scores <80%. MIBO items with particularly low item scores included reporting of whole-blood characteristics (20%), platelet recovery rate (22%), PRP analysis (30%), and PRP activation (47%). No significant difference among the 3 MIBO groups was found for the item scores except for the reporting of the recipient details (P = .012).

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the deficiencies in adherence to the MIBO guidelines, particularly in reporting key variables such as whole-blood characteristics, platelet recovery rate, PRP analysis, and PRP activation. These findings suggest that the publication of the MIBO guidelines has not resulted in improved reporting practices in studies investigating intra-articular PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Optimal Dosage of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in Patients With Osteoarthritis of the Knee: A Scoping Review

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a healthcare burden affecting over 595 million people worldwide. Recently, intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections from the patient's blood have shown promise in slowing KOA progression due to platelets' regenerative properties. This study aimed to evaluate the optimal dosing and schedule for PRP therapy in managing mild to moderate KOA. A systematic search was conducted across Embase, Ovid Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify articles published from August 2015 to March 2024. Keywords included "platelet rich plasma," "knee osteoarthritis," and "administration schedule." Inclusion criteria were studies on human patients utilizing PRP as monotherapy in experimental trials, while review articles, editorials, case reports, and meta-analyses were excluded. Three reviewers independently extracted and described patient interventions and outcomes, focusing on Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and imaging changes. Thirty-nine publications with PRP monotherapy protocols were found, with fourteen meeting the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies were randomized clinical trials, and two were longitudinal cohort studies, totaling 1704 patients with a mean follow-up of 7.51 ± 4.82 months. The most common PRP protocol was 4.357 ± 1.419 mL infusions, with three doses every four weeks and a single dose being frequent. Platelet values varied, with seven including a mean platelet count, three reporting that the platelet concentration in each dose had to be at least 150,000/μL, and four did not include platelet concentration. There was notable variation in PRP acquisition protocols, blood volume, and centrifugation processes across studies. Therapeutic benefits were represented by WOMAC and VAS scores rather than imaging changes. PRP injections appear to be safe and effective for symptomatic relief of knee pain associated with mild to moderate osteoarthritis (OA). The average infusion volume was 4 mL, administered at three doses four weeks apart. Given that platelet-derived growth factors promote the proliferation of chondrocytes and mesenchymal stem cells, leading to the stimulation of articular cartilage remodeling, further studies are warranted to assess the optimal platelet count necessary for the long-term effects of PRP in knee cartilage healing and sustained symptomatic improvement.

Randomized Controlled Trials for Platelet-Rich Plasma Use in Knee Osteoarthritis Rarely Report Key Sociodemographic Patient Variables: A Scoping Review

Purpose

To investigate the characteristics and rate of sociodemographic variables reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studying platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

In January 2024, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were queried for the phrase "Platelet-Rich Plasma Knee Osteoarthritis." Included studies were RCTs investigating PRP use in knee OA published in English between 2012 and 2023. Each RCT was inspected for patient age and sex or gender as well as the following sociodemographic variables: race, ethnicity, insurance status, income, housing status, work status, and education. Data were presented in a descriptive fashion and analyzed using χ2 test and Fisher's exact test to compare 2 and 3 categorical variables, respectively, with significance defined as P < .05.

Results

From 2012 through 2023, 71 RCTs met inclusion criteria. Included publications reported both age and sex or gender in 71/71 papers (100%). Reporting rates for other sociodemographic variables were as follows: race (3/71, 4.23%), work status (5/71, 7.04%), and education (3/71, 4.23%). No studies included the ethnicity, insurance status, income, or housing status of the enrolled patients. There was no difference in reporting sociodemographic variables by journal (P = .083) or by year of publication (P = .340). Sociodemographic variables were reported significantly less frequently than age and sex or gender (P < .001).

Conclusions

In this study, we found that age and sex or gender are always reported in RCTs of PRP use for knee OA. However, other sociodemographic variables, such as race, work status, and education, that may be important to understand are rarely reported.

Clinical Relevance

Sociodemographic variables may affect outcomes in knee osteoarthritis. It is important to understand which of these variables are most studied and which variables are most overlooked. This will help us better understand the quality of the available information.

Intra-articular injections of ozone versus hyaluronic acid for knee osteoarthritis: a level I meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Intra-articular injections of ozone and hyaluronic acid (HA) are routinely performed for the management of knee osteoarthritis. The present meta-analysis compared intra-articular injections of HA versus ozone in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The outcomes of interest were to determine if intra-articular ozone injections show comparable visual analogue scale (VAS) and Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores compared to intra-articular HA injections.

METHODS

This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the 2020 PRISMA statement. In January 2024, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. All the randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intra-articular HA versus ozone injections in patients with knee OA were accessed. Only studies which clearly stated that injections were performed in patients with knee OA were considered. Data concerning the VAS and WOMAC were retrieved at baseline and the last follow-up. Studies with a follow-up shorter than 4 months or longer than 6 months were not included.

RESULTS

Data from 424 patients were collected. 74% (314 of 424 patients) were women. The mean age of the patients was 61.1 ± 4.5 years, and the mean BMI was 27.8 ± 0.8 kg/m2. Compatibility was found in the mean age, mean BMI, PROMs, and the percentage of women. No difference was found in VAS at follow-up (P = 0.4).

CONCLUSION

The current level I evidence suggests that ozone and HA intra-articular injections achieve similar pain control between 4 and 6 months of follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate whether a combination of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) is more effective and safer than injection alone for treating KOA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for articles published until January 2024, and gray literature and bibliographic references were searched. All published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared pain, functional outcomes, and adverse events (AEs) associated with PRP + HA therapy vs. PRP or HA treatments. Two independent researchers extracted the pertinent data and evaluated the methodological quality following the PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes were pain, functional outcomes, and AEs. A fixed-effects model was used for data analysis in cases with low heterogeneity (P > 0.10 and I2 < 50%). Otherwise, a random effects model was used.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs involving 943 patients were included in the analysis. The statistical findings did not differ between the treatment of PRP + HA and PRP alone, while a discernible enhancement in treatment efficacy was observed when compared to HA monotherapy: the visual analog scale scores at 1- (mean difference[MD], -1.00; 95% CI: -1.37 - -0.62; P < .001), 6- (MD, -1.87; 95% CI: -3.46 - -0.28; P = .02), 12-months (MD, -2.07; 95% CI: -3.77 - -0.38; P = .02), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index total scores at 12-months (MD, -8.82; 95% CI: -14.48 - -3.16; P = .002). The incidence of adverse events was notably lower with PRP + HA than with HA alone (OR, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.19 - 0.69; P = .00) or PRP alone (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30 - 0.87; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

PRP + HA therapy resulted in more pronounced pain and functional improvement in symptomatic KOA patients than HA treatments, and combination therapy may have higher clinical safety than PRP or HA monotherapy.

The Effectiveness of a Single Hyaluronic Acid Injection in Improving Symptoms and Muscular Strength in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Multicenter, Retrospective Study

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a progressive and multifactorial disease that leads to joint pain, muscle weakness, physical disability, and decreased quality of life. In KOA, the quantity of hyaluronic acid (HA) and the molecular weight (MW) are decreased, leading to joint pain due to increased wear of the knee articular cartilage. Arthrogenic muscle inhibition, which is usually found in patients with KOA, is associated with joint inflammation, pain, and swelling, also causing muscle atrophy, primarily of the anterior thigh muscles, and hindering the rehabilitation process. The aim of our work was to determine if a single HA infiltration could minimize the effects of arthrogenic muscle inhibition in patients with KOA in the short term, using isokinetic dynamometry to evaluate the strength of the knee extensor and flexor muscles of the thigh. Thirty patients with KOA who underwent both clinical and isokinetic assessment, and that received a single injection of HA, were retrospectively included. Our results showed that a single intra-articular injection of HA significantly reduces pain and improves joint function at four weeks, while non-statistically significant improvements were observed for the reference isokinetic parameter (maximum torque) at both 90°/s and 180°/s. Further high-quality studies are necessary to confirm the results of our study.

Is There a Need for an Exogenous Activator Along with PRP for Early Knee Osteoarthritis? A Triple-Blinded Randomized Control Trial

Background

In addition to other variables associated with PRP injections for Knee Osteoarthritis (OA), some confusion exists about the role of exogenous activators. The current study looks at matched groups getting PRP injections with or without activator (Calcium gluconate) in early knee OA patients.

Methods

Patients of early OA knee meeting inclusion criteria were randomly divided into 2 groups; Group A (43 patients) received 8 ml PRP injection alone, and Group B (48 patients) received 8 ml PRP along with 2 ml Calcium gluconate as activator. The patients were evaluated at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months for WOMAC Pain and Total WOMAC scores; secondary variables assessed were VAS score and patient satisfaction.

Results

The baseline characteristics of both groups were comparable. Leucocyte-depleted PRP with 5 times concentration and average absolute platelet numbers of 7.144 billion per knee was injected. Mean Pain WOMAC scores decreased in both groups from baseline (group A-8.68, group B-9.09) to final follow-up (group A-4.67, group B-5.11). Similarly, Mean Total WOMAC scores decreased from baseline (group A-37.81, group B-37.41) to (group A-21, group B-21.36) at the final follow-up in both groups. There was no significant difference between both groups, and both showed similar trends. Similar findings were noted for VAS scores. Patient satisfaction was also not different (group A, 90.69%, group B, 89.58%) at the end of 6 months.

Conclusion

Our study concluded doubtful role of adding exogenous activator to PRP preparation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-024-01159-7.

Decadal analysis of efficacy and safety profiles of mesenchymal stem cells from varied sources in knee osteoarthritis patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Knee Osteoarthritis (KOA) is a debilitating degenerative joint ailment afflicting millions of patients. Numerous studies have assessed the efficacy of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) derived from various sources for KOA treatment, yet direct comparisons are scarce and inconsistent. Furthermore, network meta-analysis (NMA) conclusions require updating, while the safety of MSCs therapy remains contentious. This study evaluates therapeutic approaches involving MSCs from different sources in patients with KOA through randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies. The objective is to compare the effectiveness and safety of MSCs strategies from various sources for KOA treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify RCTs and cohort studies comparing different sources of MSCs in KOA patients. A randomized effects network meta-analysis was used to concurrently evaluate both direct and indirect comparisons across all protocols.

RESULTS

The NMA included 16 RCTS and reported 1005 participants. Adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AD-MSCs) were the most effective treatment, showing significant improvements in the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Short Form 36 (SF-36 scale), the International Knee Literature Committee Knee Evaluation Scale (IKDC subjective scores), and the Knee Injury and OA Outcome Score (KOOS). The probabilities are P = 85.3, P = 70.5, P = 88 and P = 87, respectively. Compared with placebo, AD-MSCs resulted in a VAS Score (SMD 0.97; 95%CI 0.37, 1.57), IKDC subjective scores (SMD -0.71; 95%CI -1.20, -0.21) was significantly reduced. Umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells (UC-MSCs) showed significant improvements in the University of Western Ontario and McMaster University OA (WOMAC) (P = 91.4). Compared with placebo, UC-MSCs had a higher WOMAC Score (SMD 1.65; 95%CI 0.27, 3.03) and ranked first. Compared with MSCs, placebo emerged as the safer option (P = 74.9), with a notable reduction in AEs associated with HA treatment (RR 0.77; 95%CI 0.61, 0.97). AD-MSCs were found to have the least favorable impact on AEs with a probability of P = 13.3.

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis established that MSCs offer pain relief and enhance various knee scores in KOA patients compared to conventional treatment. It also identifies other therapeutic avenues warranting further exploration through high-quality studies. Nonetheless, it underscores the necessity to emphasize the potential complications and safety concerns associated with MSCs.

Platelet-rich plasma intra-articular knee injections from open preparation techniques do not pose a higher risk of joint infection: A systematic review of 91 randomized controlled trials and 5914 injections

Purpose

To compare the infection rate of intraarticular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) knee injections between open and closed techniques in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the last decade.

Methods

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, PubMed, Scopus and Virtual Health Library were accessed in October 2022 using the terms 'platelet-rich plasma', 'PRP', 'knee' and 'tibiofemoral' alone and in combination with Boolean operators AND/OR. RCTs published during the last 10 years evaluating PRP intra-articular knee injections were considered eligible. Studies were excluded if the kit/preparation technique was not described. Data were presented using individual studies' absolute values, totals, and pooled percentages. Publication bias was assessed using the ROBIS tool.

Results

Ninety-one studies met the predetermined eligibility criteria. Forty-one implemented a closed technique, while 50 were open. All studies implementing a closed technique disclosed their commercial kits. Only 16 studies (17.58%) failed to report joint infections. Among the studies reporting joint infections as outcomes, 30 implemented a closed technique with 1195 patients, 1921 intra-articular knee injections and 95.44% of patient follow-up. On the other hand, 45 of them implemented an open technique with 2290 patients, 3993 intra-articular knee injections and 97.07% of patient follow-up. No patient had a joint infection among the included studies. Thirty-three studies prepared their PRP in controlled environments (36.26%). Most studies did not report where the preparation occurred (48.35%). Only twelve studies disclosed using laminar flow during preparation (13.19%). The infection rate for both techniques was 0 per 1000 knee injections.

Conclusion

Open PRP preparation techniques do not pose a higher risk of joint infection and can lower manufacturing costs when appropriate facilities are available. However, PRP preparation setting and laminar flow implementation data are deficient, and minimal requirements for good manufacturing practices demand further studies while adhering to local and regional regulations.

Level of Evidence

Level I, systematic review of RCTs.

Analogies Between Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid Intra-articular Injections in the Treatment of Advanced Knee Arthritis: A Single-Center Study

Background Knee osteoarthritis (KOA), a degenerative joint disease, is a common cause of chronic knee pain and disability in adults. Conservative management options are the first-line approach, but intra-articular injections, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA), are considered for advanced cases. This study aims to compare the efficacy of PRP versus HA injections in patients with advanced KOA. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on 145 patients with advanced KOA. Seventy patients received PRP injections, while 75 patients received HA injections. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score were employed to evaluate the treatment's efficacy. Adverse events associated with these injections were also recorded. Results Both PRP and HA injections significantly reduced pain and improved joint function in patients with advanced KOA. PRP injections were slightly more effective than HA injections in reducing pain scores. Both treatments showed similar improvements in functional outcomes. Adverse events were minimal and self-limiting for both treatments. Conclusions Both PRP and HA injections effectively ameliorate advanced KOA by reducing pain and improving function. PRP injections showed a slightly greater improvement in pain scores and functional outcomes. The choice between PRP and HA injections may depend on factors like cost, availability, and patient preference. Further research is needed to validate these findings and understand treatment suitability for different patient populations.

The use of injectable orthobiologics for knee osteoarthritis: A European ESSKA-ORBIT consensus. Part 1-Blood-derived products (platelet-rich plasma)

PURPOSE

The aim of this European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) consensus is to provide recommendations based on evidence and expert opinion to improve indications, decision-making and administration-related aspects when using blood-derived orthobiologics (for simplicity indicated as PRP-platelet-rich plasma-with PRP being the most common product) for the management of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Leading European expert clinicians and scientists were divided into a steering group, a rating group and a peer review group. The steering group prepared 28 question-statement sets divided into three sections: PRP rationale and indications, PRP preparation and characterisation and PRP protocol. The quality of the statements received grades of recommendation ranging from A (high-level scientific support) to B (scientific presumption), C (low-level scientific support) or D (expert opinion). The question-statement sets were then evaluated by the rating group, and the statements scored from 1 to 9 based on their degree of agreement with the statements produced by the steering group. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the document was submitted to the peer review group who evaluated the geographic adaptability and approved the document. A final combined meeting of all the members of the consensus was held to produce the official document.

RESULTS

The literature review on the use of blood-derived products for knee OA revealed that 9 of 28 questions/statements had the support of high-level scientific literature, while the other 19 were supported by a medium-low scientific quality. Three of the 28 recommendations were grade A recommendations: (1) There is enough preclinical and clinical evidence to support the use of PRP in knee OA. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a strong agreement (mean: 8). (2) Clinical evidence has shown the effectiveness of PRP in patients for mild to moderate degrees of knee OA (KL ≤ 3). This recommendation was considered appropriate with a strong agreement (mean: 8.1). (3) PRP injections have been shown to provide a longer effect in comparison to the short-term effect of CS injections. They also seem to provide a safer use profile with less potential related complications. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a very strong agreement (mean: 8.7). Six statements were grade B recommendations, 7 were grade C and 12 were grade D. The mean rating score was 8.2 ± 0.3.

CONCLUSIONS

The consensus group reached a high level of agreement on all the questions/statements despite the lack of clear evidence for some questions. According to the results from this consensus group, given the large body of existing literature and expert opinions, PRP was regarded as a valid treatment option for knee OA and as a possible first-line injectable treatment option for nonoperative management of knee OA, mainly for KL grades 1-3.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Technology Overview Summary: Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) for Knee Osteoarthritis

The Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) for Knee Osteoarthritis Technology Overview is based on a systematic review of current scientific and clinical research. Through analysis of the current best evidence, this technology overview seeks to evaluate the efficacy of PRP for patients with knee osteoarthritis. The systematic literature review resulted in 54 articles: 36 high-quality and 18 moderate-quality. The findings of these studies were summarized to present findings on PRP versus control/placebo, acetaminophen, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids, exercise, prolotherapy, autologous conditioned serum, bone marrow aspirate concentrate, hyaluronic acid, and ozone therapy. In addition, the work group highlighted areas that needed additional research when evidence proved lacking on the topic and carefully noted the potential harms associated with an intervention, required resource utilization, acceptability, and feasibility.

The effect of intra-articular ozone injection combined with home-based exercise on pain and function in daily living activities of patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis, a randomized double-blinded controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis is the most common arthritis. Various treatments such as analgesics, exercise therapy, and surgery in high-grade OA have been shown to reduce pain and improve patients' function; however, determining the optimal treatment remains a challenge. Ozone therapy is one of the injection techniques used for symptom relief in these patients. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of ozone injection in mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Thirty-three patients with grade II-III knee osteoarthritis based on the Kellgren-Lawrence classification were involved in the study, by block randomisation. Totally 42 knees were included. All patients received exercise therapy, 500 mg of acetaminophen tablets (up to 2 g per day as needed), and healthy nutrition. In a double-blinded method, the intervention group received Ozone injections, but the control group received placebo injections. Functional tests, including timed-up-and-go and 6-min walk tests, were assessed at baseline and immediately after the 6-week intervention. In addition, the pain was measured by VAS score, and stiffness and activity of daily living (ADL) were evaluated by KOOS questionnaire before and after a 6-week intervention and then one and six months afterwards.

FINDINGS

Improvements in pain and KOOS scores were seen in both groups in the 6th week of injections (p < 0.05), with significant differences between groups. However, the effects on pain and KOOS scores disappeared in the 1st and 6th months of follow-ups in the control group. Nevertheless, the effects persisted in the intervention group compared to the baseline and control group, which means that in the mentioned time points intervention group showed significant improvement compared to the control group (p < 0.05). In addition, functional tests showed significant differences between the two groups in the 6th week of injections (p < 0.001).

INTERPRETATION

Ozone injection is a non-surgical treatment for mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis that could decrease pain and improve function and ADL of patients in the short to mid-term (3-6 months), so it seems that adding Ozone injection to the routine exercise therapy in management of patients with knee OA could improve outcomes.

Single Shot of Knee Intraarticular Injection of Platelets Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Symptomatic Knee Osteoarthritis. An Observational Prospective Study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intra-articular PRP and HA in KOA patients. Methods: The current work was prospective randomized observational. Participants were divided into two groups. Group 1; 1 intra-articular PRP injection (15 mL) in 72 patients and Group 2; A single intra-articular injection of HA (80 mg/4 mL) was administered to 72 patients. All patients were evaluated before infiltration and 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after injection. Results: No significant difference was detected in the demographic distribution (gender and age) and Grade RT, Grade RL, Grade II OA and Grade III OA classifications of patients who received intra-articular PRP or HA injection for knee OA (p&gt;0.05). Compared with the HA group WOMAC mean of 48.8 and p&lt;0.05, there was no significant change in the PRP groups with the WOMAC mean of 68.9. At month 3, each group had significantly reduced overall WOMAC score compared to baselines in both groups. The mean WOMAC was 48.2 in the HA and 47.9 in the PRP group (P&lt;0.001). At 6 months, the average WOMAC score of the PRP group was 39.4, while this rate was 56.3 in the HA group (P&lt;0.001). The PRP group showed a steady improvement, while those treated with HA showed a rapid deterioration. At 12 months, the HA group's WOMAC scores (74.1) returned to baseline levels. The mean WOMAC of the PRP group was (58.9) (P&lt;0.001). Conclusion: The overall PRP improvement outweighs HA injections

Efficacy and safety of ozone therapy for knee osteoarthritis: an umbrella review of systematic reviews

The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ozone therapy (OT) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), which is the most common form of the disease. We analysed systematic reviews (SRs) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using the "A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews" (AMSTAR2) instrument to evaluate their quality. We developed a narrative synthesis report with eight SRs (15 RCTs/3,685 patients) to summarise the findings. The AMSTAR2 analysis indicated that all reviews had critically low confidence ratings. Statistically significant effects in pain reduction using OT compared to placebo groups were reported in three SRs. OT was shown to be comparable to other therapies in one SR and not superior in the other five. Six SRs highlighted the need for additional RCTs with improved methodological quality to confirm the efficacy of OT for KOA. SRs found fewer consistent effects for improving joint function. Regarding safety, seven SRs reported a low prevalence of minor adverse events linked with OT. Finally, this umbrella review highlights the beneficial effects and safety of OT in the treatment of KOA, particularly in pain control. The low methodological quality of RCTs and SRs limits the possibility of drawing conclusions on the effectiveness of the procedure in comparison to other therapies. Ensure adequate compliance with guidelines such as Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and AMSTAR2 has the ability to improve the quality of SRs in this area.

Bipolar radiofrequency ablation of genicular nerves in chronic knee pain: A novel technique for more complete sensory denervation

BACKGROUND

Monopolar radiofrequency ablation (MRFA) of the genicular nerves has been considered the main interventional treatment for chronic knee pain. However, the variable locations of these nerves could suggest that traditional MRFA of genicular nerves may be insufficient to cover the area needed to provide complete sensory denervation. For these reasons, some alternatives have been proposed to achieve an increase in the lesion area that offers better outcomes such a bipolar radiofrequency ablation (BRFA).

OBJECTIVE

To describe the efficacy and safety of the bipolar radiofrequency ablation (BRFA) of the genicular nerves in the patients with chronic knee pain.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in the Pain Medicine Department. Institutional review board approval from the Hospital Ethical Committee and informed consent were obtained. We reviewed our database for BRFA of genicular nerves from January 2018 to December 2021 for patients with chronic knee pain. The cannulas were placed using ultrasound guidance (10 cm, 22-gauge and 10 mm active curved tip), and each pair of cannulas were subjected to BRFA for 90 seconds at 80∘C. Data analysis was conducted using T-test for paired variables (Visual analogue scale and EuroQol, an instrument intended to complement other forms of quality-of-life measures).

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients met inclusion criteria after excluding 7 based on the study design. The mean improvement of our patients according to the VAS was -3.98 (95%CI: -4.37 to -3.59) p< 0.0001 and EuroQol +0.416 (95%CI: 0.364 to 0.468) p< 0.0001. The mean duration of improvement was 8 (6-11) months after BRFA. There were no reported serious adverse events related to the procedure, only local pain for 24 to 48 hours in 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

We can conclude that BRFA reduces procedural pain and increases the treatment area, providing more complete sensory denervation and improved clinical outcomes.

Comparative effectiveness of intra-articular therapies in knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis comparing platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with other treatment modalities

Introduction

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a progressive joint disease commonly treated with intra-articular injections, including platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), or corticosteroids (CS). This updated meta-analysis aims to enhance the statistical power of the results and provide comprehensive clinical evidence that reflects the most current research. By doing so, the authors aim to suggest a reliable estimate for the development of guidelines, addressing the pressing need for effective and minimally invasive treatment options.

Methods

PubMed, Scopus, clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Central were searched until March 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of intra-articular injectable therapies, including PRP, HA, CS, and placebo, in KOA. Data extraction involved baseline characteristics and outcome measures [Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, KOOS, and IKDC scores] at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. Statistical analysis, including subgroup analysis, assessment of heterogeneity, and publication bias, was conducted using Review Manager.

Results

Our meta-analysis of 42 studies involving 3696 patients demonstrated that PRP treatment resulted in significant pain relief compared to HA injections, as evidenced by improved WOMAC pain (MD: -0.74; 95% CI: -1.02 to -0.46; P≤0.00001; I 2=94%) and VAS pain (MD: -0.65; 95% CI: -1.24 to -0.06; P=0.03; I2=97%) outcomes. Similarly, PRP showed greater efficacy in reducing WOMAC pain (MD: -8.06; 95% CI: -13.62 to -2.51: P=0.004; I 2=96%) and VAS pain (MD: -1.11; 95% CI: -1.64 to -0.59; P≤0.0001; I 2=68%) compared to CS injections, with the most significant improvement observed at 6 months.

Conclusions

PRP is an effective treatment for KOA. It provides symptomatic relief, has the potential to reduce disease progression, and has sustained effects up to 12 months. PRP offers superior pain relief and functional enhancement compared to CS and HA injections.

The efficacy of ultrasonography-guided oxygen-ozone therapy versus corticosteroids in patients with knee osteoarthritis: A multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a widely-known disease distinguished by the breakdown of joint cartilage, leading to pain and morning stiffness. In this context, the role of corticosteroids is well known, but there is still a gap of knowledge on the duty of oxygen-ozone therapy (O2-O3).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate for effectiveness of ultrasound-guided O2-O3 injections compared with corticosteroid injections among patients diagnosed with knee OA.

METHODS

This randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on participants with knee OA who were randomly sorted into two groups: group A, undergoing corticosteroid group (n= 47) and group B, undergoing O2-O3 (n= 49) were injected within the knee joint under ultrasound guidance. The primary outcome measure was the change in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) score between baseline and 12-weeks post-injection. Secondary outcome measures included visual analog scale scores, joint effusion and a knee flexion ROM. Assessments were recorded at baseline and 4-weeks and 12-weeks post-injection. For the examination of intra- and inter-group variations at various time points, a repeated-measure analysis of variance (two-way ANOVA) was employed.

RESULTS

Ninety-six participants completed this study. Based on repeated measurement analysis of variance, a significant effect of time was found for all outcome measures in both groups. Both groups showed clinically significant improvements in knee pain, quality of life and, function. Baseline, 4-week post-injection and 12-week post-injection WOMAC scores (mean ± standard deviation) were 72.54 ± 18.89, 45,95 ± 13.30 and 37.10 ± 19.87 (p= 0.00, p= 0.00, p= 0.00; respectively) in the corticosteroid group, respectively and 68.23 ± 20.18, 42.99 ± 18.67, and 33.43 ± 18.24 (p= 0.00, p= 0.00, p= 0.00; respectively) in the ozone group, respectively. However, no significant group × time interaction was determined regarding all outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

The study demonstrates the efficacy of O2-O3 compared to steroid injections regarding functioning and pain relief among patients with diagnosed knee OA.

Effects of externally-applied, non-pharmacological Interventions on short- and long-term symptoms and inflammatory cytokine levels in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

With the continuous development of clinical medicine, an increasing number of non-pharmacological interventions have been applied for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), with the results of several recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showing that a variety of externally-applied, non-pharmacological interventions (EANPI) can improve symptoms and inflammation in patients with KOA. However, the relative benefits and disadvantages of non-drug therapies remain uncertain, and an optimal treatment strategy has not yet been determined.

Objective

This study applied network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare and rank the effectiveness of EANPI on the short- and long-term clinical symptoms and inflammatory cytokine levels in patients with KOA.

Methods

Two independent researchers searched online databases and performed manual retrieval of related citations to identify RCTs that met the selection criteria for the network meta-analysis. These researchers retrieved studies indexed from database inception to August 2023 and performed data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias.

Results

The analysis included 80 RCTs involving 8440 participants and nine externally-applied, non-pharmacological therapies, namely extracorporeal shock wave, radiofrequency, acupotomy, laser therapy, Tuina therapy, kinesio taping, electroacupuncture, platelet-rich plasma injection, and ozone therapy. The treatment courses ranged from 1 to 12 weeks, with follow-up periods ranging from 4 to 24 weeks. The results of the NMA indicated that each non-drug therapy was superior to sham intervention in improving all outcome indicators. Except for the visual analog scale (VAS) and Western Ontario MacMaster (WOMAC) pain outcomes, all non-drug therapies had better efficacy than pharmacological treatments. For short-term VAS and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), extracorporeal shock wave performed better than other therapies (90.2% and 85.2% respectively). Radiofrequency therapy may be the most promising method to reduce long-term VAS, short- and long-term WOMAC pain, and interleukin (IL)-1β level (84.8%, 97.8%, 90.1%, 94.8% respectively). Tuina therapy may be a significant choice for short- and long-term outcomes of WOMAC function and range of motion (ROM).

Conclusions

The results of the comprehensive comparison of the outcome indicators in 9 different EANPI indicated that radiofrequency and Tuina therapy were more effective and consistently ranked high in improving clinical symptoms in the short and long term. Radiofrequency is effective at relieving pain, and Tuina therapy can be given priority for treatment when hypofunction is the main symptom. EANPI to improve pain symptoms may be related to the regulation of inflammatory cytokine levels, which may be a potential mechanism of action.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?, identifier CRD42023464177.

Arthroscopy with Lipoaspirate and Plasma Infiltration Using Adipose-Derived Stem Cells Plus Platelet-Rich Plasma: Harvesting and Injection for Arthroscopic Treatment of Cartilage Defects of the Knee

Osteoarthritis, predominantly of the knee, is a highly prevalent disease leading to pain, reduced quality of life, and significantly reduced ability to work. With autologous orthobiologic options, new regenerative treatment methods have emerged, offering an alternative to early surgical intervention. Supercharged Liparthroplasty combines arthroscopy with lipoaspirate and plasma infiltration of the joint. Lipoaspirate contains high levels of adipose-derived stem cells, which show chondroprotective and anti-inflammatory qualities. Intra-articular injection, combined with platelet-rich plasma administration for accelerated cartilage metabolism, thus provides an optional approach in osteoarthritis treatment. This article aims to provide in detail our regimen for Supercharged Liparthroplasty, including tissue harvesting and preparation of the injectables, therefore enabling physicians to adopt this point-of-care technique.

The Influence of Industry Affiliation on Randomized Controlled Trials of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Industry funding and corporate sponsorship have played a significant role in the advancement of orthopaedic research and technology. However, this relationship raises concerns for how industry association may bias research findings and influence clinical practice.

PURPOSE

To determine whether industry affiliation plays a role in the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating platelet-rich plasma (PRP).

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases for RCTs published between 2011 and the present comparing PRP versus hyaluronic acid, corticosteroid, or placebo for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis was performed. To determine industry affiliation, the conflict of interest, funding, and disclosure sections of publications were assessed, and all authors were assessed through the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons disclosure database and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services open payments database. Studies were classified as industry affiliated (IA) or non-industry affiliated (NIA). The outcomes of each study were rated as favorable, analogous, or unfavorable according to predefined criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 37 studies (6 IA and 31 NIA) were available for analysis. Overall, 19 studies (51.4%) reported PRP as favorable compared with other treatment options, while 18 studies (48.6%) showed no significant differences between PRP and other treatment methods. There was no significant difference in qualitative conclusions between the IA and NIA groups, with the IA group having 3 favorable studies and 3 analogous studies and the NIA group having 16 favorable studies and 15 analogous studies (P = .8881). When comparing IA versus NIA studies using 6- and 12-month Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and International Knee Documentation Committee scores, there were no significant differences in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrated that qualitative conclusions and outcome scores were found to not be associated with industry affiliation. Although the results of this study suggest that there is no influence of industry involvement on RCTs examining PRP, it is still necessary to carefully evaluate pertinent commercial affiliations when reviewing recommendations from studies before adopting new treatment approaches, such as the use of PRP for knee osteoarthritis.

Knee osteoarthritis: Current status and research progress in treatment (Review)

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common chronic articular disease worldwide. It is also the most common form of OA and is characterized by high morbidity and disability rates. With the gradual increase in life expectancy and ageing population, KOA not only affects the quality of life of patients, but also poses a burden on global public health. OA is a disease of unknown etiology and complex pathogenesis. It commonly affects joints subjected to greater loads and higher levels of activity. The knee joint, which is the most complex joint of the human body and bears the greatest load among all joints, is therefore most susceptible to development of OA. KOA lesions may involve articular cartilage, synovium, joint capsule and periarticular muscles, causing irreversible articular damage. Factors such as mechanical overload, inflammation, metabolism, hormonal changes and ageing serve key roles in the acceleration of KOA progression. The clinical diagnosis of KOA is primarily based on combined analysis of symptoms, signs, imaging and laboratory examination results. At present, there is no cure for KOA and the currently available therapies primarily focus on symptomatic treatment and delay of disease progression. Knee replacement surgery is typically performed in patients with advanced disease. The current study presents a review of epidemiological characteristics, risk factors, histopathological manifestations, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment modalities and progress in KOA research.

Effects of adjuvant application of corticosteroid and ozone after ultrasound-guided puncture and lavage for the treatment of rotator cuff calcific tendinitis: study protocol for a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Steroid injection after percutaneous irrigation of calcific deposits is a common method for the treatment of rotator cuff calcific tendinitis (RCCT). However, steroids may prevent calcification resorption and cause potentially irreversible damage to tendons. Recent studies have confirmed the positive effects of ozone injection in shoulder tendinopathies, but no RCCTs have been reported. Thus, our study aims to evaluate the non-inferiority of ozone versus steroid injection.

METHODS

This is a prospective, randomized, parallel control and non-inferiority trial. A total of 100 patients with unilateral symptomatic RCCT will be enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to two groups: ultrasound-guided injection with ozone or corticosteroid. The primary outcome is the numeric rating scale for pain (NRS) at 1 week and 3 months following the procedure. Secondary outcomes include a multi-dimensional evaluation of shoulder disability and quality of life improvement, the degree of calcification absorption after treatment, and the number of multiple treatments.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study will provide short-term and long-term evidence for the effectiveness of ozone treatment in RCCT in relieving pain or improving shoulder function.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR2200063469. Registered on 7 September 2022.

Effects of platelet-rich plasma on subchondral bone marrow edema and biomarkers in synovial fluid of knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on subchondral bone marrow edema (BME) and the level of biomarkers in synovial fluid of the knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Eighty-one patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis were randomly divided into two groups according to the number of inpatients. Forty-five cases were treated with intra-articular injection of PRP (PRP group), 36 cases were treated with sodium hyaluronate (SH group), and the clinical effects were evaluated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores. The changes of subchondral BME were assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after treatment. The levels of TNFα, IL-6, MCP-1, MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 in synovial fluid were also detected.

RESULTS

All the patients completed the corresponding treatment and were followed up for 12 months without serious complications. After the treatment, the VAS and WOMAC scores of the two groups were significantly decreased, and the difference was statistically significant at different time points (P < 0.05). The VAS and WOMAC scores of the PRP group were better than those of the SH group (P < 0.05). MRI showed that the subchondral bone edema of the two groups were reduced in varying degrees, and the reduction was more noticeable in the PRP group (P < 0.05). The levels of TNFα, IL-6, MCP-1, MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 in two groups were decreased, and the difference was statistically significant at different time points (P < 0.05). However, the levels of TNFα, IL-6, MCP-1, MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 in the PRP group were significantly lower than those in the SH group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Intra-articular injection of PRP can significantly reduce the subchondral BME and the level of biomarkers in synovial fluid of the symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

Regenerative methods in osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common type of arthritis that can affect all joint structures. The primary goals of osteoarthritis treatment are to alleviate pain, reduce functional limitations, and improve quality of life. Despite its high prevalence, treatment options for osteoarthritis are limited, with most therapeutic approaches focusing on symptom management. Tissue engineering and regenerative strategies based on biomaterials, cells, and other bioactive molecules have emerged as viable options for osteoarthritis cartilage repair. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are the most commonly used regenerative therapies today to protect, restore, or increase the function of damaged tissues. Despite promising results, there is conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of regenerative therapies, and their efficacy remains unknown. The data suggest that more research and standardization are required for the use of these therapies in osteoarthritis. This article provides an overview of the application of MSCs and PRP applications.

Ozone Therapy versus Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Pain Relief in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: Preliminary Findings on Molecular and Clinical Outcomes from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Ozone therapy (OT) is used for the treatment of multiple musculoskeletal disorders. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in its use for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this double-blind randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the efficacy of OT compared with hyaluronic acid (HA) injections for pain relief in patients with knee OA. Patients with knee OA for at least three months were included and randomly assigned to receive three intra-articular injections of ozone or HA (once a week). Patients were assessed at baseline and at 1, 3, and 6 months after the injections for pain, stiffness, and function using the WOMAC LK 3.1, the NRS, and the KOOS questionnaire. Out of 55 patients assessed for eligibility, 52 participants were admitted to the study and randomly assigned into the 2 groups of treatment. During the study, eight patients dropped out. Thus, a total of 44 patients, reached the endpoint of the study at 6 months. Both Group A and B consisted of 22 patients. At 1-month follow-up after injections, both treatment groups improved statistically significantly from baseline in all outcomes measured. At 3 months, improvements remained similarly consistent for Group A and Group B. At 6-month follow-up, the outcomes were comparable between the 2 groups, showing only a worsening trend in pain. No significant differences were found between the two groups in pain scores. Both therapies have proven to be safe, with the few recorded adverse events being mild and self-limiting. OT has demonstrated similar results to HA injections, proving to be a safe approach with significant effects on pain control in patients affected by knee OA. Due to its anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects, ozone might be considered as a potential treatment for OA.

A comparative study of the efficacy of intra-articular injection of different drugs in the treatment of mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) has a high clinical prevalence and frequently interferes with patients normal lives. In KOA patients, evidence suggests that intra-articular (IA) injection improves joint function and decreases discomfort. Several IA injection treatments are used in daily practice to improve symptomatic control of knee osteoarthritis, but their efficacy is frequently disputed.

METHODS

This network meta-analysis compares the efficacy of different IA injections for mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. Seven databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine disc, WanFang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched for randomized controlled trials published up to and including December 20, 2021, and final follow up indicators were used. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score change from baseline were the primary outcomes. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess the quality and risks of biases of papers. We calculated the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome. State (Version 15.1, Texas, USA) and SPSS (Version 20, Chicago, USA) was used in all statistical analyses, and Review Manager (version 5.4) was used in assessing the risks of biases.

RESULTS

Our study included 16 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1652 patients. platelet-rich plasma (PRP) IA injection therapy had the highest likelihood of being the best intervention in reducing WOMAC pain (surface under the cumulative ranking area [SUCRA] 84.7%), stiffness (SUCRA 95.1%), and function (SUCRA 98.5%) scores, according to the SUCRA. The best measures for lowering the WOMAC total and VAS scores were IA injection platelet-rich plasma-derived growth factor (SUCRA 84.9%) and hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma (SUCRA 84.9%). In the VAS score group, PRP outperformed hyaluronic acid (HA) (WMD 1.3, 95% CI 0.55-2.55) and corticosteroids (CS) (WMD 4.85, 95% CI 4.02-5.08), according to the forest map results. PRP also outperformed CS (WMD 14.76, 95% CI 12.11-17.41), ozone (WMD 9.16, 95% CI 6.89-11.43), and PRP + HA (WMD 2.18, 95% CI 0.55-3.81) in the WOMAC total score group. Furthermore, PRP outperforms other drugs in terms of reducing WOMAC function, stiffness, and function score.

CONCLUSION

In patients with mild to moderate KOA, IA injection PRP outperformed IA injection ozone, HA, CS, platelet-rich plasma-derived growth factor, and hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma in terms of pain, stiffness, and dysfunction.

Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis Who Receive Platelet-Rich Plasma or Bone-Marrow Aspirate Concentrate Injections Have Better Outcomes Than Patients Who Receive Hyaluronic Acid: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature in order to compare the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify Level I studies that compared the clinical efficacy of at least 2 of the following 3 injection therapies: PRP, BMAC, and HA for knee OA. The search phrase used was knee AND osteoarthritis AND randomized AND ("platelet rich plasma" OR "bone marrow aspirate" OR "hyaluronic acid"). Patients were primarily assessed based on patient-reported outcome scores (PROs) including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies (all Level I) met inclusion criteria, including 1,042 patients undergoing intra-articular injection(s) with PRP (mean age 57.7 years, mean follow-up 13.5 months), 226 patients with BMAC (mean age 57.0 years, mean follow-up 17.5 months), and 1,128 patients with HA (mean age 59.0 years, mean follow-up 14.4 months). Non-network meta-analyses demonstrated significantly better post-injection WOMAC (p < 0.001), VAS (p < 0.01), and Subjective IKDC scores (p < 0.001) in PRP patients when compared to HA patients. Similarly, network meta-analyses demonstrated significantly better post-injection WOMAC (p < 0.001), VAS (p = 0.03), and Subjective IKDC (p < 0.001) scores in BMAC patients when compared to HA patients. There were no significant differences in post-injection outcome scores when comparing PRP to BMAC.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing treatment for knee OA with PRP or BMAC can be expected to experience improved clinical outcomes when compared to HA patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Meta-Analysis of Level I studies.

How Does Platelet-Rich Plasma Compare Clinically to Other Therapies in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There has been an increase in interest in the use of biological therapies in orthopaedic conditions such as knee osteoarthritis. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is one of these therapies, but it still lacks consistent results.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects (benefits and harms) of PRP intra-articular injection compared with other nonsurgical methods for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Three electronic databases were searched to identify relevant studies published before January 2021. The primary outcomes were pain, function, and failure of treatment. Risks of bias of all trials were assessed using a Cochrane risk of bias tool. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation System was used to assess the quality of evidence of included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 40 studies with 3035 participants were included. Analysis of this review focused on comparing PRP with hyaluronic acid, corticosteroid, and saline, as we believe they are the most relevant comparisons with the most studies available. At 6-month follow-up, PRP was as effective as and in some studies more effective than other therapies regarding pain, function, and stiffness. However, current evidence is of low or very low quality and is based on trials with high risk of bias and great heterogeneity among them. No significant difference among treatments was found concerning major adverse events and treatment failure.

CONCLUSION

Although studies suggest that PRP may be more effective than or at least as effective as other modalities of nonsurgical treatment for knee osteoarthritis in terms of pain, function, and adverse events, serious limitations and methodological flaws are considerable in the current literature. Therefore, the authors are not able to make recommendations for clinical practice regarding PRP for knee osteoarthritis.

Factors affecting decision-making for knee arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

Identifying factors affecting decision-making for knee arthroplasty in patients with knee osteoarthritis is critically important for pain relief, improving in knee function and reaching an optimal outcome. When decision-making is hurried or delayed, surgery may not occur in time, which complicates the surgery and increases its complications. This study was conducted to investigate the factors influencing decision-making for knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

This study is a qualitative study and inductive content analysis method. This study enrolled 22 patients undergoing knee arthroplasty selected through purposive sampling. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews and analyzed using inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Data analysis yielded three categories: hope to return to normal life, encouragement and recommendations, and trust and assurance.

CONCLUSION

To make better treatment-related decisions and achieve better outcomes based on the patient's values and wishes, it is necessary for the treatment team to increase its interactions and establish stronger communication with patients to make their expectations more realistic and help them understand the risks. They should also make efforts to increase patients' knowledge about the advantages and disadvantages of surgery and clarify what is important to them in decision-making.

The use of platelet-rich plasma in studies with early knee osteoarthritis versus advanced stages of the disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 31 randomized clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Reports have concluded that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an effective and safe biological approach to treating knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, the effectiveness of PRP in advanced stages of the disease is not entirely clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the use of PRP would be as effective in studies with early-moderate knee OA patients compared to studies including patients with end-stage OA, based on the Kellgren-Lawrence classification.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of PRP injections versus other intra-articular treatments on pain and functionality. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and the generic inverse variance method.

RESULTS

We included 31 clinical trials that reported data of 2705 subjects. Meta-analysis revealed an overall significant improvement of both pain [MD, - 1.05 (95% CI - 1.41 to - 0.68); I² = 86%; P ≤ 0.00001] and function [SMD, - 1.00 (95% CI - 1.33, to - 0.66); I² = 94%; P ≤ 0.00001], favoring PRP. Subanalysis for pain and functional improvement showed a significant pain relief in studies with 1-3 and 1-4 Kellgren-Lawrence OA stages and a significant functional improvement in studies with 1-2, 1-3 and 1-4 knee OA stages, favoring PRP.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that including patients with advanced knee OA does not seem to affect the outcomes of clinical trials in which the effectiveness of the PRP in knee OA is assessed.

The role of ozone treatment as integrative medicine. An evidence and gap map

Introduction

The Brazil has one of the largest public health systems in the world and in the 1980's, Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine were introduced. In 2018, the treatment with ozone became a complementary integrative practice showing several benefits. However, its effectiveness needs to be researched. The objective of this evidence gap map is to describe contributions of Integrative Medicines-Ozone treatment in different clinical conditions, to promote evidence-based practice.

Methods

We applied the methodology developed by Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information based on the 3iE evidence gap map. The EMBASE, PubMed and Virtual Health Library databases, using the MeSH and DeCS terms for the treatment with Ozone were used.

Results

26 systematic reviews were characterized, distributed in a matrix containing 6 interventions (parenteral oxygen/ozone gas mixture; parenteral ozonated water; systemic routes; topical application ozonated water; topical oxygen/ozone gas mixture; and topical ozonated oil) and 55 outcomes (cancer, infection, inflammation, pain, quality of life, wound healing and adverse effects). 334 associations between intervention and outcome were observed, emphasizing the parenteral oxygen/ozone gas mixture intervention (192 associations, 57%).

Conclusions

The evidence gap map presents an overview of contributions of Ozone treatment in controlling pain, infections, inflammation and wound healing, as well as increasing the quality of life, and it is directed to researchers and health professionals specialized in Ozone treatment. No serious adverse effects were related. Therefore, this treatment may be even more widely known as an integrative treatment, considering its low cost, efficiency and safety. Future studies should adopt economic impact assessments and the organization of health services.

Comparison of clinical efficiency between intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are non-surgical treatments for osteoarthritis (OA), but the comparison of their efficiency is still inconclusive.

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy of PRP and HA in the treatment of OA by meta-analysis and to explore the effects of different injection times and leukocyte concentration on the efficacy of PRP.

Design

Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted. The data were analyzed by Review Manager v5.4.1.

Data sources and methods

Articles were retrieved and screened from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. The outcome included the total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the visual analog scale (VAS), adverse events (AEs), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and the satisfaction rate.

Results

A total of 30 articles involving 2733 patients were included. The total WOMAC score and IKDC score of the PRP group were better than those of the HA group at the last follow-up time, while there was no significant difference in AEs, satisfaction rate, and VAS between the two groups. In our subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference between single-injection PRP and triple-injection PRP. Leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) was better than leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) in IKDC, but there was no significant difference between them in the other scores.

Conclusions

In the treatment of OA, compared with HA, PRP performed better in the improvement of the patient's function. There was no significant difference in VAS and AEs between the two groups, and the safety was comparable. LP-PRP looked to be superior to LR-PRP in functional recovery, but there appeared to be no significant difference in pain relief between them. There was no significant difference between single PRP and triple PRP in the subgroup analysis.

Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: An Updated Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Use of "orthobiologics" continues to expand for patients who have knee osteoarthritis (OA). We sought to perform a systemic review of biologic therapies relative to comparative groups, including the following: (1) platelet-rich plasma (PRP); (2) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs); (3) adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs); and (4) amniotic-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs). We assessed the following: (1) study methodologies; (2) cell preparations and formulations; (3) patient-reported outcome scores (PROMs); and (4) structural changes.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were queried (2013-2021) to conduct a systematic review of biologic therapies for knee OA, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eighty-two studies were included: PRP (51); BMSC (15); ADSC (11); and AMSC (5). Study evaluations were made using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. PROMs included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and the Visual Analog Scale. Structural change evaluations included ultrasounds, radiographs, or magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

PRP comprised a majority of the studies (n = 51), most with "fair" to "good" Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Studies had variable cell preparations and formulations, with comparison study results leading to inconsistent PROMs, and structural changes. A limited number of studies were included for BMSC, ADSC, and AMSC, all with similar findings to PRP.

CONCLUSION

Available literature evaluating "orthobiologics" for knee OA remain nonsuperior to comparison cohorts. Higher level studies with larger sample sizes and improved methodologies are warranted to suggest differences. Despite a growth of "orthobiologics" in clinics, this updated systematic review highlights the uncertain efficacy for use in knee OA.

Intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma decrease pain and improve functional outcomes than sham saline in patients with knee osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term clinical efficacy provided by intra-articular injections of either Pure Platelet-rich Plasma (P-PRP) or sham saline to treat knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

This prospective, parallel-group, double-blind, multi-center, sham-controlled randomized clinical trial recruited participants with KOA from orthopedic departments at nine public hospitals (five tertiary medical centers, four secondary medical units) starting January 1, 2014, with follow-up completed on February 28, 2021. Participants were randomly allocated to interventions in a 1:1 ratio. Data were analyzed from March 1, 2021, to July 15, 2021. Three sessions (1 every week) of P-PRP or sham saline injected by physicians. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) at 3, 6, 12, 24, 60 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score, intra-articular biochemical marker concentrations, cartilage volume, and adverse events. Laboratory of each hospital analyzed the content and quality of P-PRP.

RESULTS

610 participants (59% women) with KOA who received three sessions of P-PRP (n = 308, mean age 53.91 years) or sham saline (n = 302, mean age 54.51 years) injections completed the trial. The mean platelet concentration in PRP is 4.3-fold (95% confidence interval 3.6-4.5) greater than that of whole blood. Both groups showed significant improvements in IKDC, WOMAC, and VAS scores at 1 month of follow-up. However, only the P-PRP group showed a sustained improvement in clinical outcome measurements at month 24 (P < 0.001). There were statistically significant differences between the P-PRP and sham saline groups in all clinical outcome measurements at each follow-up time point (P < 0.001). The benefit of P-PRP was clinically better in terms of WOMAC-pain, WOMAC-physical function and WOMAC-total at 6, 12, 24, and 60 months of follow-up. No clinically significant differences between treatments were documented in terms of WOMAC-stiffness at any follow-up. A clinically significant difference favoring P-PRP group against saline in terms of IKDC and VAS scores was documented at 6, 12, 24 and 60 months of follow-up. At 6 months after injection, TNF-α and IL-1β levels in synovial fluid were lower in the P-PRP group (P < 0.001). Tibiofemoral cartilage volume decreased by a mean value of 1171 mm³ in the P-PRP group and 2311 mm³ in the saline group over 60 months and the difference between the group was statistically significant (intergroup difference, 1140 mm³, 95% CI - 79 to 1320 mm³; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this randomized clinical trial of patients with KOA, P-PRP was superior to sham saline in treating KOA. P-PRP was effective for achieving at least 24 months of symptom relief and slowing the progress of KOA, with both P-PRP and saline being comparable in safety profiles.

Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid versus platelet-rich plasma alone for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To systematically evaluate the curative efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), comparing with platelet-rich plasma alone.

Methods

Cochrane Library, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies regarding the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) comparing with platelet-rich plasma alone before January 15, 2022. The methodological quality of the ultimately included studies was assessed comprehensively, and meta-analysis was implemented using RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

Thirteen articles (9 RCTs, 4 cohort studies), including 1118 patients, were covered. There was no significant difference between the PRP + HA therapy and PRP-alone therapy in VAS scores at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months, WOMAC total scores at 3 months and KOOS at 1 month and 6 months. Compared with PRP-alone therapy, PRP + HA therapy was associated with significantly better improvement in VAS scores at 1 month, WOMAC total scores at 6 months, KOOS at 3 months, IKDC scores at 6 months and Lequesne index scores at 3 and 6 months. However, the smallest treatment effect of VAS scores, WOMAC total scores, KOOS and IKDC scores did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). However, PRP + HA therapy got a greater reduction in the rate of adverse events, compared with PRP-alone therapy.

Conclusion

The results of this meta-analysis indicated that PRP + HA therapy was not found to be superior to PRP-alone therapy in pain relief and function improvement for patients with KOA. However, combined PRP with HA injections was generally safer than PRP injections alone, by assessing the incidence of adverse events.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03398-6.

An Open-Labeled Randomized Prospective Multi-center Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Intra-articular Injection of OSSINEXT™, an Autologous Growth Factor Concentrate (AGFC) Compared to Hyaluronic Acid (HA) in Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis (OA) is known as degenerative arthritis and is the second most common rheumatologic problem with a prevalence of 22%-39% in India. Knee OA (KOA) is a major cause of mobility impairment, particularly among females. Non-surgical treatment options for KOA include intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA). Most commercially available PRP preparation kits do not remove RBCs and WBCs which are detrimental to the healing effects. Wockhardt Regenerative Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, India has developed a kit known as Ossinext™ which has an advantage over traditional PRP in that it eliminates RBCs and WBCs. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intra-articular injection of Wockhardt's Ossinext™ an autologous growth factor concentrate (AGFC) versus HA in KOA.

METHODS

 Male and female patients in the age group between 30 and 75 years with confirmed KOA on radiological assessment with Grades I-III on the Kellgren-Lawrence Grading Scale and with visual analog scale (VAS) pain score of 4 or more (on the numeric rating scale) in spite of taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) since past 2 weeks were considered for study participation. This was an open-labeled study and eligible patients were randomly allocated to AGFC or HA in a 1:1 fashion. Three intra-articular injections were given in the affected knee joint, i.e. at baseline, month 1, and month 2 visits. Patients were evaluated at regular intervals, i.e. at months 5, 8, and 11 for primary and secondary endpoints. The primary efficacy endpoint for this study was change from baseline in WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) scores at month 11 whereas the secondary efficacy endpoints were change from baseline of VAS pain scale at months 1, 2, 5, 8, and 11 as well as change from baseline of WOMAC, KOOS (Knee and Osteoarthritis Outcome System), and IKDC (International Knee Documentation Committee) scale at month 5, 8, and 11. For analysis a mixed model for repeated measures was used.

RESULTS

 Out of the 100 patients who were enrolled, 50 patients each were randomized to AGFC and HA arm. The results were analyzed from 99 patients (49 for AGFC and 50 for HA) who met the criteria for the modified intent to treat (mITT) population. At month 11 on the WOMAC scale, there was greater improvement seen with Ossinext™ compared to HA group which was also statistically significant with p-value of 0.0332. Within the group, there was statistically significant improvement before and after treatment in all scales, i.e. WOMAC, KOOS, IKDC, and VAS at all time points, i.e. months 5, 8, and 11 with a p-value as low as <0.0001. Within the group, the VAS score showed statistically significant improvement even at months 1 and 2 as well. A total of 24 patients reported 37 adverse events (AEs) during the study, most common being pain, pyrexia and swelling but none of the AEs reported during the study were considered as severe in intensity. There were no safety concerns reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, greater and statistically significant improvement was seen with Ossinext™ in WOMAC scores at month 11 compared to HA. Ossinext™ also showed marked statistically significant improvement from before treatment to after treatment in the WOMAC, KOOS, IKDC, and VAS scales used for the assessment of KOA with a p-value as low as <0.0001. Ossinext™ was also safe and well-tolerated.

Are leukocyte-poor or multiple injections of platelet-rich plasma more effective than hyaluronic acid for knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained popularity as a treatment option for knee osteoarthritis; however, its efficacy remains controversial. The optimal leukocyte concentration and number of injections have not been well investigated. This study was, therefore, designed to provide clinical evidence on the leukocyte concentration and number of intra-articular injections of PRP via a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus databases were searched and RCTs comparing PRP and hyaluronic acid (HA) for treating knee osteoarthritis were included. Clinical outcomes, including visual analog scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and adverse reactions, were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 138 studies were screened, of which 21 level 1 RCTs (2086 knees; 1077 PRP and 1009 HA) were included. PRPs showed significant improvement in pain according to the VAS score compared to HA at 6 and 12 months, regardless of leukocyte concentration. Both single and multiple injections of PRP improved pain better than HA at 12 months. Regarding function, both single and multiple injections of leukocyte-poor PRP and leukocyte-rich PRP led to significantly better improvement in total WOMAC score compared with HA at 6 months. There was no significant difference in procedure-related knee pain or swelling between the PRP and HA groups. Leukocyte-rich PRP had a significantly higher odds ratio for procedure-related knee pain or swelling compared to HA (odds ratio, 3.3 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-10.2], P = .037).

CONCLUSION

Based on evidence from Level 1 studies, intra-articular injection of PRP improves pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis for up to 12 months and is superior to HA, regardless of leukocyte concentration or number of injections. The findings of this study support the routine clinical use of intra-articular injections of PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, regardless of the type and frequency of PRP injection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Meta-analysis of level I studies.

Consensus Guidelines on Interventional Therapies for Knee Pain (STEP Guidelines) from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience

Knee pain is second only to the back as the most commonly reported area of pain in the human body. With an overall prevalence of 46.2%, its impact on disability, lost productivity, and cost on healthcare cannot be overlooked. Due to the pervasiveness of knee pain in the general population, there are no shortages of treatment options available for addressing the symptoms. Ranging from physical therapy and pharmacologic agents to interventional pain procedures to surgical options, practitioners have a wide array of options to choose from - unfortunately, there is no consensus on which treatments are "better" and when they should be offered in comparison to others. While it is generally accepted that less invasive treatments should be offered before more invasive ones, there is a lack of agreement on the order in which the less invasive are to be presented. In an effort to standardize the treatment of this extremely prevalent pathology, the authors present an all-encompassing set of guidelines on the treatment of knee pain based on an extensive literature search and data grading for each of the available alternative that will allow practitioners the ability to compare and contrast each option.

Intra-Articular Leukocyte-Rich Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Intra-Articular Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis of 14 Randomized Controlled Trials

(1) Background: To evaluate the clinical effects of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections in treating patients suffering from knee osteoarthritis (OA); (2) Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were searched from PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Keywords were: platelet-rich plasma, LR-PRP, leukocyte-rich, hyaluronic acid, and knee osteoarthritis. The included RCTs were published between the 1st of November 2011 and the 3rd of February 2021. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, and adverse events were used as outcomes for evaluation; (3) Results: A total of 14 RCTs were enrolled. At 6 months, revealed that the LR-PRP group was better than the HA group in WOMAC total, pain, and physical function scores. At 12 months, the LR-PRP group was better than the HA group in WOMAC stiffness and physical function scores. There was no significant difference in adverse events; (4) Conclusion: LR-PRP injection showed no significant pain relief effect as compared with HA injection. However, LR-PRP demonstrated better overall outcomes as compared to HA in knee OA patients at the follow-up periods of 3, 6, and 12 months. LR-PRP injection may be recommended as a feasible option in treating patients with knee OA.

Efficacy of Oxygen-Ozone Therapy and Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Context

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effect of the intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and oxygen-ozone therapy and provided an evidence-based methodology to treat KOA.

Method

Databases, including Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE, were searched. The retrieval period was before 2021. Two reviewers performed the process of screening and data extraction. Mean differences were calculated [95% confidence interval (CI)] with an inverse-variance method and fixed effect model. Meta-analysis was performed using the latest version of STATA version 16.

Results

A total of 12 studies out of 769 articles were evaluated. The mean difference of visual analog scale score between ozone and control groups in the first month after injection was -0.02 (MD, -0.02; 95% CI: -0.32, 0.28; P < 0.05). Mean differences of WOMAC pain, stiffness, and physical function score between baseline and after PRP were -3.53 (MD: -3.53; 95% CI: -4.04, -3.02; P = 0.00), -0.60 (MD: -0.60; 95% CI: -4.0 - 0.864, -0.34; P = 0.00), and -5.96 (MD: -5.96; 95% CI: -7.83, -4.09; P = 0.00).

Conclusions

Our results showed that to treat knee osteoarthritis, using PRP for a longer period of 6 - 12 months after the intervention shows better clinical results, while oxygen-ozone therapy has short-term results.

Combine Approach of Proximal Fibula Osteotomy (PFO) Followed by Intra-Articular Dextrose Prolotherapy in Severe Medial Knee Osteoarthritis

Background

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic and progressive degenerative disease. It resulted from mechanical and chemical disorders that damage the joint and the underlying bone. The management of knee OA is challenging due to poor self-regeneration of connective tissues. Surgical treatment with prolotherapy approaches was conducted to treat medial compartment knee OA.

Aim

To know the injection frequency to reach a 50% improvement in VAS score and WOMAC index.

Methods

Six patients who suffered from late-stage medial compartment knee OA underwent PFO followed by twelve sessions of intra-articular dextrose prolotherapy. The subjective pain score, visual analog scale (VAS), was assessed based on the patient subjectiveness before and after treatment. Patients marked the score from 0 to 10 cm to describe the current pain state. The functional index, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index used to evaluate the Patient's clinical symptoms. It ranges from 0 to 96 points consisting of three main sections: pain (total 20 points), stiffness (total: eight points), and physical function disability (total 68 points). Higher scores indicate severe symptoms and function.

Results

Four patients showed pain relief and functional improvement with more than 50% scores of VAS and WOMAC after the treatment. Two patients received more than twelve doses of intra-articular dextrose prolotherapy due to a lack of progress.

Conclusion

This study provides clinical evidence for a new treatment strategy for advanced knee OA. This combined therapy improves the patient's daily activity function and postpones the need for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Osteoarthritis of the Knee in Middle-age Athletes: Many Measures are Practiced, but Lack Sound Scientific Evidence

Osteoarthritis of the knee generally affects individuals from the fifth decade, the typical age of middle-age athletes. In the early stages, management is conservative and multidisciplinary. It is advisable to avoid sports with high risk of trauma, but it is important that patients continue to be physically active. Conservative management offers several options; however, it is unclear which ones are really useful. This narrative review briefly reports the conservative options for which there is no evidence of effectiveness, or there is only evidence of short-term effectiveness.