Comparison of the efficacy of autologous Lp-PRP and Lr-PRP for treating intervertebral disc degeneration: in vitro and in vivo study

BACKGROUND

Intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) was the most common cause of low back pain. Platelet rich plasma (PRP) has the potential to repair IDD, however, there is still no conclusion on whether Leukocyte-poor platelet rich plasma (Lp-PRP) or Leukocyte-rich platelet rich plasma (Lr-PRP) is better for the treatment of IDD.

METHODS

First, we conducted an in vitro study to compare the effects of autologous Lp-PRP and Lr-PRP on human degenerated nucleus pulposus (NP) cells. Then we verified the in vivo effects of autologous Lp-PRP and Lr-PRP in treating disc degeneration through a rabbit IDD model.

RESULTS

The in vitro study showed both autologous Lp-PRP and Lr-PRP can promote the cell proliferation, the synthesis of COL II and Aggrecan of human degenerated NP cells, while Lp-PRP are better than Lr-PRP (P<0.05). In addition, only Lp-PRP can inhibit the apoptosis of human degenerated NP cells (P<0.05), whereas Lr-PRP activates the catabolism on the contrary (P<0.05). Further, the in vivo study through the rabbit IDD model verified that autologous Lp-PRP has better effects than autologous Lr-PRP in repairing IDD according to X-ray, MRI, histological, and immunohistochemical assessment (P<0.05, respectively). And the caspase-3 IHC results also showed that only autologous Lp-PRP treatment could inhibit apoptosis of NP cells in the rabbit IDD model (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Combining in vivo and in vitro studies, the present study confirmed that autologous Lp-PRP has a better effect than autologous Lr-PRP in repairing IDD, which may be due to the inflammatory factors (TNFα, IL-1β, etc.) in Lr-PRP antagonizing part of the repair effects and promoting the catabolism additionally. Therefore, our findings suggest that Lp-PRP may provide better results than Lr-PRP for treating IDD. Further randomized clinical trials will provide evidence to guide practice.

EXPLORING THE FEASIBILITY OF PLATELET-RICH PLASMA INJECTIONS FOR INTERVERTEBRAL DISCOPATHY: A PILOT STUDY

Objective

This longitudinal pilot study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, safety and potential benefits of Platelet-Rich Plasma injections into the lumbar intervertebral discs in patients with low back pain and degenerative intervertebral monodiscopathy, assessing potential efficacy on disability.

Design

Longitudinal pilot study.

Methods

Six participants with chronic low back pain and lumbar degenerative intervertebral disc (monodiscopathy) disease underwent 1 Platelet-Rich Plasma injection, with a 1-year follow-up. Platelet-Rich Plasma injections were administered into the lumbar intervertebral disc, and outcomes were measured using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, numeric rating scale for pain, Tampa scale for kinesiophobia and lumbar flexion range. Magnetic resonance imaging analysis assessed disc changes.

Results

No adverse events were reported. At the end of the 1-year follow-up, half of the patients showed significant improvements in disability scores at 1 year, while 3 of the 6 patients had no change. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed no significant disc changes.

Conclusion

Platelet-Rich Plasma injections show promise for some patients with low back pain and degenerative intervertebral discopathy patients. However, caution is warranted due to study limitations, including small sample size and lack of a control group. Further research is needed to define Platelet-Rich Plasma therapy protocols.

The Clinical Efficacy of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma Interventional Circulatory Perfusion Combined with Radiofrequency Ablation and Thermocoagulation in the Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain

Objective

In this study, we aimed to explore the efficacy of the autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) interventional circulatory perfusion combined with radiofrequency ablation and thermocoagulation (RFAT) in the treatment of discogenic low back pain (DLBP).

Methods

From January 2020 to November 2022, 158 patients of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University were selected as the study subjects, and 24 patients met the exclusion criteria. The 134 patients who met the inclusion criteria were divided into 65 patients in the control group (3 patients lost to follow-up) and 69 patients in the observation group (5 patients lost to follow-up), so 126 patients were actually completed the study, including 62 patients in the control group and 64 patients in the observation group. The control group responsible disc received RFAT, and an interventional circulatory perfusion was performed; the observation group received RFAT, and an interventional circulatory perfusion was performed, and then autologous PRP 2 ml was injected. Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were performed before and 4 and 8 weeks after treatment, and the efficacy was evaluated at 4 and 8 weeks after treatment. The changes of lumbar disc MRI before and after treatment were observed.

Results

The differences in the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) between the observation group and the control group before the treatment were not statistically significant (P > 0.05 in both). However, four weeks and eight weeks after the treatment, the VAS scores and the ODIs were significantly lower in both groups than those before the treatment (P < 0.05 in both). In terms of the therapeutic efficacy, eight weeks after the treatment, the total effective rates in the control group and the observation group were 67.7% and 87.5%, respectively, with the observation group being superior to the control group (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

After RFAT, interventional circulatory perfusion combined with autologous PRP intramedullary injection in the lumbar disc is a safe and effective treatment for DLBP, and it had superior long-term effects in improving the clinical symptoms and patient dysfunction than the RFAT and interventional circulatory perfusion.

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) Evidence-Based Clinical Guideline of Interventional Treatments for Low Back Pain

Introduction

Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety.

Objective

The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders.

Methods

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented.

Results

After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain.

Conclusion

The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

Intradiscal Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for Discogenic Low Back Pain: A Clinical Trial

Background. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) contains high concentrations of growth factors and cytokines and may promote healing and tissue formation and exert anti-inflammatory effects. PRP has been shown to improve intervertebral disc degeneration in vivo and in vitro. This study is aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of autologous PRP on discogenic low back pain (DLBP) at 48 weeks postinjection in patients who received a single intradiscal injection. Methods. All patients received a single intradiscal injection of PRP in a prospective trial. The pain scores, lumbar function, and adverse events were assessed at 1 week, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and 48 weeks postinjection and compared to the preinjection values (0 weeks). Results. Data were analysed from 31 patients with a 94% follow-up rate. Compared to preinjection, pain and lumbar function were significantly improved, and there were significant differences ( $P<0.05$ ) over the 48-week follow-up. Twenty-two (71%) patients were classified as successes after the intradiscal injection of PRP. One patient received surgery at two weeks postinjection due to intervertebral discitis. Conclusions. Intradiscal injection of PRP can significantly relieve pain sensation and improve lumbar function in patients with DLBP over a 48-week follow-up period. Further randomized controlled clinical trials are needed to assess the effects of this injection therapy.

Clinical outcomes following intradiscal injections of higher-concentration platelet-rich plasma in patients with chronic lumbar discogenic pain

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess clinical outcomes following intradiscal injections of higher-concentration (> 10 ×) platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with chronic lumbar discogenic pain and to compare outcomes with a historical cohort.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 37 patients who received intradiscal injections of higher-concentration (> 10 ×) PRP and had post-procedure outcomes data (visual numerical scale pain score, Functional Rating Index [FRI], and NASS Patient Satisfaction Index). Outcomes were compared to a historical cohort of 29 patients who received intradiscal injections of < 5X PRP.

RESULTS

Pain and FRI scores significantly improved by 3.4 ± 2.5 and 46.4 ± 27.6, respectively, at 18.3 ± 13.3 months following intradiscal injections of > 10 × PRP (p < 0.001). These improvements were greater than those reported by the historical cohort (1.7 ± 1.6 and 33.7 ± 12.3; p = 0.004 and 0.016, respectively). Additionally, the satisfaction rate was higher in patients receiving > 10 × PRP compared to those receiving < 5 × PRP (81% vs. 55%; p = 0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study suggest that clinical outcomes can be optimized by using PRP preparations that contain a higher concentration of platelets. Further research is needed to continue to optimize the composition of PRP used to treat patients with lumbar disc disease.

Intradiscal injection for the management of low back pain

Low back pain (LBP) is a common clinical problem and a major cause of physical disability, imposing a prominent socioeconomic burden. Intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) has been considered the main cause of LBP. The current treatments have limited efficacy because they cannot address the underlying degeneration. With an increased understanding of the complex pathological mechanism of IDD, various medications and biological reagents have been used for intradiscal injection for the treatment of LBP. There is increasing clinical evidence showing the benefits of these therapies on symptomatic relief and their potential for disc repair and regeneration by targeting the disrupted pathways underlying the cause of the disease. A brief overview of the potential and limitations for these therapies are provided in this review, based on the recent and available data from clinical trials and systematic reviews. Finally, future perspectives are discussed.

Should Degenerated Intervertebral Discs of Patients with Modic Type 1 Changes Be Treated with Mesenchymal Stem Cells?

Low back pain (LBP) has been among the leading causes of disability for the past 30 years. This highlights the need for improvement in LBP management. Many clinical trials focus on developing treatments against degenerative disc disease (DDD). The multifactorial etiology of DDD and associated risk factors lead to a heterogeneous patient population. It comes as no surprise that the outcomes of clinical trials on intradiscal mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) injections for patients with DDD are inconsistent. Intradiscal MSC injections have demonstrated substantial pain relief and significant disability-related improvements, yet they have failed to regenerate the intervertebral disc (IVD). Increasing evidence suggests that the positive outcomes in clinical trials might be attributed to the immunomodulatory potential of MSCs rather than to their regenerative properties. Therefore, patient stratification for inflammatory DDD phenotypes may (i) better serve the mechanisms of action of MSCs and (ii) increase the treatment effect. Modic type 1 changes—pathologic inflammatory, fibrotic changes in the vertebral bone marrow—are frequently observed adjacent to degenerated IVDs in chronic LBP patients and represent a clinically distinct subpopulation of patients with DDD. This review discusses whether degenerated IVDs of patients with Modic type 1 changes should be treated with an intradiscal MSC injection.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Releasate versus Corticosteroid for the Treatment of Discogenic Low Back Pain: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Clinical application of platelet-rich plasma is gaining popularity in treating low back pain (LBP). This study investigated the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma releasate (PRPr) injection into degenerated discs of patients with discogenic LBP. A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial was conducted. Sixteen patients with discogenic LBP received an intradiscal injection of either autologous PRPr or corticosteroid (CS). Patients in both groups who wished to have PRPr treatment received an optional injection of PRPr eight weeks later. The primary outcome was change in VAS from baseline at eight weeks. Secondary outcomes were pain, disability, quality of life (QOL), image analyses of disc degeneration, and safety for up to 60 weeks. The VAS change at eight weeks did not significantly differ between the two groups. Fifteen patients received the optional injection. Compared to the CS group, the PRPr group had a significantly improved disability score at 26 weeks and walking ability scores at four and eight weeks. Radiographic disc height and MRI grading score were unchanged from baseline. PRPr caused no clinically important adverse events. PRPr injection showed clinically significant improvements in LBP intensity equal to that of CS. PRPr treatment relieved pain, and improved disability and QOL during 60 weeks of observation.

ADSC-Based Cell Therapies for Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Review of Recent Clinical Trials

Recently published clinical trials involving the use of adipose-derived stem cells (ADSCs) indicated that approximately one-third of the studies were conducted on musculoskeletal disorders (MSD). MSD refers to a wide range of degenerative conditions of joints, bones, and muscles, and these conditions are the most common causes of chronic disability worldwide, being a major burden to the society. Conventional treatment modalities for MSD are not sufficient to correct the underlying structural abnormalities. Hence, ADSC-based cell therapies are being tested as a form of alternative, yet more effective, therapies in the management of MSDs. Therefore, in this review, MSDs subjected to the ADSC-based therapy were further categorized as arthritis, craniomaxillofacial defects, tendon/ligament related disorders, and spine disorders, and their brief characterization as well as the corresponding conventional therapeutic approaches with possible mechanisms with which ADSCs produce regenerative effects in disease-specific microenvironments were discussed to provide an overview of under which circumstances and on what bases the ADSC-based cell therapy was implemented. Providing an overview of the current status of ADSC-based cell therapy on MSDs can help to develop better and optimized strategies of ADSC-based therapeutics for MSDs as well as help to find novel clinical applications of ADSCs in the near future.

Complementary and Alternative Modalities (CAM) for pain management in musculoskeletal diseases (MSDs)

Musculoskeletal diseases are a group of clinical conditions affecting the body's movement and remain a common source of pain affecting the quality of life. The aetio-pathological reasons for pain associated with musculoskeletal diseases can be varied and complex. Conventional medicine can treat or modify pain due to musculoskeletal diseases; however, these may be associated with some side effects and at times may not be able to relieve pain completely. These treatment modalities also have ceiling effects like doses of analgesics, the number of nerve blocks, etc. Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) provides a supplementary, unconventional modality to alleviate discomfort and disability associated with these mostly chronic conditions to manage activities of daily living. These modalities have been variedly combined with conventional management for symptom control and thus improve day-to-day activities. We assess the role of commonly used CAM modalities in the management of pain arising from Musculoskeletal diseases.

Risks of Intradiscal Orthobiologic Injections: A Review of the Literature and Case Series Presentation

BACKGROUND

Intervertebral disc disease (IDD) is responsible for a large portion of back pain with historically suboptimal treatments for long-term improvement. IDD pathogenesis is thought to arise at a cellular and biochemical level, making biologically based injections an area of clinical interest. Although human studies have shown promise, emerging data suggest there may be risks inherent to such injections that were previously unrecognized. The aim of this review is to summarize the known risks to date and provide mitigation steps to reduce potential complications in the future. In addition, we present a small case series of serious adverse events (SAEs) from our clinical practice.

METHODS

A literature review was performed to identify human intradiscal autologous biologic injection studies to date, including mesenchymal signaling cells (MSCs) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) preparations, which were reviewed for complications. Cases of complication following intradiscal orthobiologic injection were identified from a single outpatient center and reviewed.

RESULTS

Publications of MSC-based intradiscal injection documented 136 total patients treated with two SAEs reported, one infection and one progressive disc herniation. Publications of PRP intradiscal injection included 194 patients with one SAE reported. We also review three cases of previously unpublished SAEs, including one case of confirmed infection with Cutibacterium acnes (C acnes) and two presumed cases of discitis without pathogen confirmation. Bone marrow concentrate was the injectate in all three cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Although biologic intradiscal injection shows promise for the treatment of discogenic back pain, there are inherent risks to be considered and mitigated. We currently recommend a leukocyte-rich PRP and a two-needle delivery technique coupled with intradiscal gentamicin to mitigate the risk of postinjection spondylodiscitis. Further research is needed using large registries to not only track clinical outcomes but also complication rates.

Intervertebral Disc Degeneration: The Role and Evidence for Non-Stem-Cell-Based Regenerative Therapies

The use of non-stem-cell-based regenerative medicine therapies for lumbar discogenic pain is an area of growing interest. Although the intervertebral disc is a largely avascular structure, cells located within the nucleus pulposus as well as annulus fibrosis could be targeted for regenerative and restorative treatments. Degenerative disc disease is caused by an imbalance of catabolic and anabolic events within the nucleus pulposus. As catabolic processes overwhelm the environment within the nucleus pulposus, proinflammatory cytokines increase in concentration and lead to further disc degeneration. Non-stem-cell-based therapies, which include growth factor therapy and other proteins, can lead to an increased production of collagen and proteoglycans within the disc.

The Effect of Intradiscal Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for Management of Discogenic Lower Back Pain: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

Although several researches of animal and human subjects have yielded promising results regarding intradiscal injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the management of intervertebral disc (IVD) pathologies, small sample sizes and unstandardized graft preparation procedures hampered these research efforts. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of intradiscal PRP injection for the treatment of discogenic lower back pain.

Methods

The PubMed, SCOPUS, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for relevant studies published from January 01, 1980 to December 14, 2020. The keywords used for the search were (platelet-rich plasma) AND (intradiscal OR back pain OR lumbar spine OR discogenic). Filters were used to select studies with human participants; all study designs were included.

Results

After the systematic review, three articles, including one randomized control trial and two prospective observational studies, were included in the final analysis. Analysis of changes in visual analogue scale (VAS) scores showed that VAS scores were significantly reduced two and six months after intradiscal PRP injection (two months: standardized mean difference [SMD] = −0.837, 95% CI = −1.158 to −0.516, P < 0.001; six months: SMD = −1.430, 95% CI = −2.209 to −0.652, P < 0.001), but not after one month (SMD = −0.661, 95% CI = −1.346 to 0.023, P = 0.058). Regarding changes in Owestry Disability Index (ODI), ODI scores were significantly reduced after six months (SMD = −0.964, 95% CI = −1.885 to −0.043, P = 0.040).

Conclusion

Intradiscal PRP injections are effective in relieving pain and improving disabilities caused by discogenic lower back pain. However, the pain-reducing effect significantly manifests two or six months after the injections, but not after one month.

Painful intervertebral disc degeneration and inflammation: from laboratory evidence to clinical interventions

Low back pain (LBP), as a leading cause of disability, is a common musculoskeletal disorder that results in major social and economic burdens. Recent research has identified inflammation and related signaling pathways as important factors in the onset and progression of disc degeneration, a significant contributor to LBP. Inflammatory mediators also play an indispensable role in discogenic LBP. The suppression of LBP is a primary goal of clinical practice but has not received enough attention in disc research studies. Here, an overview of the advances in inflammation-related pain in disc degeneration is provided, with a discussion on the role of inflammation in IVD degeneration and pain induction. Puncture models, mechanical models, and spontaneous models as the main animal models to study painful disc degeneration are discussed, and the underlying signaling pathways are summarized. Furthermore, potential drug candidates, either under laboratory investigation or undergoing clinical trials, to suppress discogenic LBP by eliminating inflammation are explored. We hope to attract more research interest to address inflammation and pain in IDD and contribute to promoting more translational research.

Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma on Intervertebral Disc Degeneration In Vivo and In Vitro: A Critical Review

Intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) is a globally occurring disease that represents a significant cause of socioeconomic problems. Currently, the main method for treating IDD is surgery, including discectomy and vertebral fusion. Several in vitro experiments demonstrated that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) could stimulate cell proliferation and extracellular matrix regeneration. Additionally, in vivo experiments have proven that PRP injection could restore intervertebral disc height. Clinical studies demonstrated that PRP injection could significantly relieve patient pain. However, further studies are still required to clarify the roles of PRP in IDD prevention and treatment. This review is aimed at summarizing and critically analyzing the current evidence regarding IDD treatment with PRP.

The Technique of Intradiscal Injection: A Narrative Review

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common spine diseases and represents the most frequent cause of absence from work in developed countries. Approximately 40% of chronic LBP is related to discogenic origin. The goal of the study is producing a review of literature to describe analytically the techniques of intradiscal injections.

Methods

PubMed database was searched for clinical studies with the different key terms: “intradiscal”, “injection”, “steroid” “procedures”, “techniques”, “CT”, “MRI”, “fluoroscopy”, “fluoroscopic”, “guidance”, “ozone”, “ultrasound”, “images”. Only studies written in English, French, or Italian in which the intradiscal injection represents the main procedure for the low back discopathy treatment on humans were considered. We excluded the articles that do not mention this procedure; those which indicated that the intradiscal injection had happened accidentally during other treatments; those reporting the patient’s pain was determined by other causes than the discopathy (facet joint syndrome, tumor, spondylodiscitis).

Results

Thirty-one articles dated from 1969 to 2018 met the criteria. The examined population was 6843 subjects, 52.3% male and 47.7% female, with a mean age of 45.9±10.1 years. The techniques are highly variable in terms of procedure: different operators, needle guidance, injection sites, drugs, tilt angle of the needle).

Conclusion

The efficacy and the safety of the intradiscal procedures are not easily comparable due to different types of studies and their limited number. Further studies are needed to standardize the intradiscal injection technique/procedure to improve safety, repeatability and effectiveness, and last but not least to reduce peri- and postoperative care and health-care costs.

Meta-analysis Comparing Platelet-Rich Plasma vs Hyaluronic Acid Injection in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of PRP and HA in KOA patients were retrieved from each database from the establishment date to April 2018. Outcome measurements were the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS), International Knee Documentation Committee, and Lequesne Index scores and adverse events. The pooled data were evaluated with Review Manager 5.3.5.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs (N = 1,314) were included in our meta-analysis. The present meta-analysis indicated that PRP injections reduced pain more effectively than HA injections in patients with KOA at six and 12 months of follow-up, as evaluated by the WOMAC pain score; the VAS pain score showed a significant difference at 12 months. Moreover, better functional improvement was observed in the PRP group, as demonstrated by the WOMAC function score at three, six, and 12 months. Additionally, PRP injections did not display different adverse event rates compared with HA injections.

CONCLUSION

In terms of long-term pain relief and functional improvement, PRP injections might be more effective than HA injections as a treatment for KOA. The optimal dosage, the timing interval and frequency of injections, and the ideal treatment for different stages of KOA remain areas of concern for future investigations.

Systemic Review: Is an Intradiscal Injection of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Lumbar Disc Degeneration Effective?

Current studies evaluating the outcomes of intradiscal platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in degenerative disc disease (DDD) are limited. The purpose of this review was to determine if an intradiscal injection of PRP for degenerative discs results in a statistically significant improvement in clinical outcomes. A systematic review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Level I-IV investigations of intradiscal PRP injections in DDD were sought in multiple databases. The Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS) was used to analyze the methodological quality of the study. Only the outcome measurements used by more than 50% of the studies were included in the data analysis. The study heterogeneity and nature of evidence (mostly retrospective, non-comparative) precluded meta-analysis. Pre and post-injection pain visual analog scales (VAS) were compared using two sample Z-tests. Five articles (90 subjects, mean age 43.6 ± 7.7 years, mean follow-up 8.0 ± 3.6 months) were analyzed. Four articles were level IV evidence and one article was level II. Mean MCMS was 56.0 ± 10.3. There were 43 males and 37 females (10 unidentified). Pain VAS significantly improved following lumbar intradiscal PRP injection (69.7 mm to 43.3 mm; p<0.01). Two patients (2.2%) experienced lower extremity paresthesia after treatment. One patient (1.1%) underwent re-injection. No other complications were reported. In conclusion, intradiscal injection of PRP for degenerative discs resulted in statistically significant improvement in VAS with low re-injection and complication rates in this systematic review. It is unclear whether the improvements were clinically significant given the available evidence. The low level of evidence available (level IV) does not allow for valid conclusions regarding efficacy; however, the positive results suggest that further higher-quality studies might be of value.

Intervertebral Disc Repair: Current Concepts

STUDY DESIGN

Review article.

OBJECTIVE

A review of the literature on current strategies utilized in intervertebral regeneration and repair efforts.

METHODS

A review of the literature and analysis of the data to provide an updated review on current concepts of intervertebral disc repair and regeneration efforts.

RESULTS

Multiple regenerative strategies for intervertebral disc regeneration are being employed to reduce pain and improve quality of life. Current promising strategies include molecular therapy, gene therapy, cell-based therapy, and augmentation with biomaterials. Multiple clinical trials studying biologic, cell-based, and scaffold-based injectable therapies are currently being investigated.

CONCLUSION

Low back pain due to intervertebral disc disease represents a significant health and societal burden. Current promising strategies include molecular therapy, gene therapy, cell-based therapy, and augmentation with biomaterials. To date, there are no Food and Drug Administration-approved intradiscal therapies for discogenic back pain, and there are no large randomized trials that have shown clinically significant improvement with any investigational regenerative treatment. Multiple clinical trials studying biologic, cell-based, or scaffold-based injectable therapies are being currently investigated.

Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Treating Low Back Pain: A Review of the Current Literature

Low back pain (LBP) is a common problem encountered by physicians. It is a considerable cause of morbidity and socioeconomic loss and is one of the most expensive musculoskeletal disorders. Conventional treatments include bed rest, analgesics, therapeutic exercises, lumbar or caudal epidural corticosteroids, and surgery. Several new biological therapies are being investigated for use in LBP and one of these is platelet-rich plasma (PRP). In this article, we summarize the current literature published on PRP concerning its composition, classification, and application in LBP. We believe our review will prove useful to clinicians and academics alike, interested in new developing therapies for LBP.

Injections of concentrated bone marrow aspirate as treatment for Discogenic pain: a retrospective analysis

Background

There are an overwhelming number of patients suffering from low back pain (LBP) resulting from disc pathology. Although several strategies are being developed pre-clinically, simple strategies to treat the large number of patients currently affected is still needed. One option is to use concentrated bone marrow aspirate (cBMA), which may be effective due to its intrinsic stem cells and growth factors.

Methods

Thirty-three patients who received intradiscal injections of cBMA to relieve LBP were followed up based on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) scores. Patients were also subdivided into those with a pre-injection NRS > 5 and pre-injection NRS ≤ 5. The proportion of patients demonstrating at least 50% improvement (and 95% confidence intervals) from baseline at five follow-up visits for each outcome was evaluated.

Results

At least 50% improvement in NRS was observed for 13.8, 45.8, 41.1, 23.5, and 38.9% of patients across five follow-up visits, out to 1 year. When stratified by high (> 5) versus low (≤ 5) baseline NRS scores, the values were 14.3, 45.5, 71.4, 22.2, and 44.4% among those with high baseline pain, and 13.3, 46.2, 20.0, 25.0, and 33.3% among those with low baseline pain. The 50% improvement rates across visits were 4.3, 28.6, 30.0, 22.2, and 30.8% for SF-36, and 4.2, 26.7, 36.4, 55.6, and 30.8% for ODI.

Conclusions

Intradiscal cBMA injections may be effective to reduce pain and improve function. Patients with relatively higher initial pain may have potential for greatest improvement.

Treatment of symptomatic degenerative intervertebral discs with autologous platelet-rich plasma: follow-up at 5-9 years

Aim: This study assessed pain and function at 5-9 years postinjection in a subset of patients who received intradiscal platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for moderate-to-severe lumbar discogenic pain. Patients & methods: All patients received injections of intradiscal PRP in a previous randomized controlled trial. Data on pain, function, satisfaction, and need for surgery were collected at one time point of 5-9 years postinjection and compiled with existing data. Results: In comparison to baseline, there were statistically significant improvements in pain and function (p < 0.001). All improvements were clinically significant. Six patients had undergone surgery during the follow-up period. Conclusion: This subset of patients demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvements in pain and function at 5-9 years postinjection.

Overview on Percutaneous Therapies of Disc Diseases

Low back pain is an extremely common pathology affecting a great share of the population, in particular, young adults. Many structures can be responsible for pain such as intervertebral discs, facet joints, nerve roots, and sacroiliac joints. This review paper focuses on disc pathology and the percutaneous procedures available to date for its treatment. For each option, we will assess the indications, technical aspects, advantages, and complications, as well as outcomes reported in the literature and new emerging trends in the field.

Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Low Back Pain: a Comprehensive Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Back pain is a growing problem worldwide, incurring enormous economic costs and disability. Current treatment modalities often provide adequate relief but fail to address underlying conditions. Regenerative cellular modalities aim to restore anatomical function in degenerative conditions which may cause low back pain. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) consists of an increased concentration of autologous platelets suspended in a small amount of plasma. PRP can be administered via injection or topically and is prepared using various techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

While a unifying mechanism of action is not well understood, biochemical and cellular changes involved in inflammation and mechanical structure have been detected in both in vitro and in vivo studies. At a higher level, PRP injection research utilizing animal models and patient data have provided insights into pain relief, chondroprotection, and factors that impact the therapy's efficacy. Recently, a small number of studies have promoted PRP injection as a relatively safe means of treating patients with degenerative disc disease who have failed other means of managing their lower back pain. PRP injections for sacroiliac joint-related pain are not an accepted or common treatment modality; the evidence for their efficacy remains to be seen outside of small RCTs and case reports. A small number of prospective trials have suggested there may be some benefit to using PRP injection in the treatment of pain or functional decline caused by facet joint arthropathy. These commonly used modalities require further study to improve quality of evidence and to investigate the safety and efficacy of PRP injections for various common causes of chronic low back.

Discogenic Back Pain: Literature Review of Definition, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Discogenic back pain is multifactorial; hence, physicians often struggle to identify the underlying source of the pain. As a result, discogenic back pain is often hard to treat—even more so when clinical treatment strategies are of questionable efficacy. Based on a broad literature review, our aim was to define discogenic back pain into a series of more specific and interacting pathologies, and to highlight the need to develop novel approaches and treatment strategies for this challenging and unmet clinical need. Discogenic pain involves degenerative changes of the intervertebral disc, including structural defects that result in biomechanical instability and inflammation. These degenerative changes in intervertebral discs closely intersect with the peripheral and central nervous systems to cause nerve sensitization and ingrowth; eventually central sensitization results in a chronic pain condition. Existing imaging modalities are nonspecific to pain symptoms, whereas discography methods that are more specific have known comorbidities based on intervertebral disc puncture and injection. As a result, alternative noninvasive and specific diagnostic methods are needed to better diagnose and identify specific conditions and sources of pain that can be more directly treated. Currently, there are many treatments/interventions for discogenic back pain. Nevertheless, many surgical approaches for discogenic pain have limited efficacy, thus accentuating the need for the development of novel treatments. Regenerative therapies, such as biologics, cell‐based therapy, intervertebral disc repair, and gene‐based therapy, offer the most promise and have many advantages over current therapies. © 2019 The Authors. JBMR Plus Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research

Platelet-rich plasma in the management of chronic low back pain: a critical review

Low back pain (LBP) is now regarded as the first cause of disability worldwide and should be a priority for future research on prevention and therapy. Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is an important pathogenesis of LBP. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous blood concentrate that contains a natural concentration of autologous growth factors and cytokines and is currently widely used in the clinical setting for tissue regeneration and repair. PRP has great potential to stimulate cell proliferation and metabolic activity of IVD cells in vitro. Several animal studies have shown that the injection of PRP into degenerated IVDs is effective in restoring structural changes (IVD height) and improving the matrix integrity of degenerated IVDs as evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and histology. The results of this basic research have shown the great possibility that PRP has significant biological effects for tissue repair to counteract IVD degeneration. Clinical studies for evaluating the effects of the injection of PRP into degenerated IVDs for patients with discogenic LBP have been reviewed. Although there was only one double-blind randomized controlled trial, all the studies reported that PRP was safe and effective in reducing back pain. While the clinical evidence of tissue repair of IVDs by PRP treatment is currently lacking, there is a great possibility that the application of PRP has the potential to lead to a feasible intradiscal therapy for the treatment of degenerative disc diseases. Further large-scale studies may be required to confirm the clinical evidence of PRP for the treatment of discogenic LBP.

Current concepts for lumbar disc herniation

PURPOSE

To present the pathophysiology, biology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and current treatment options for lumbar disc herniation.

METHODS

A thorough literature search was undertaken in PubMed and Google Scholar to summarize the current knowledge and future perspectives on lumbar disc herniation.

RESULTS

Several changes in the biology of the intervertebral disc are thought to contribute to disc herniation; nevertheless, the exact inciting event leading to disc herniation is yet to be discovered. Non-operative treatments have stood the test of time as the first-line treatment for most patients with lumbar disc herniation; however, operative treatment remains the current gold standard, with minimally invasive endoscopic microdiscectomy techniques showing best results with respect to postoperative pain and function.

CONCLUSIONS

The exact event leading to disc herniation remains unclear. Non-operative treatments should be the first-line treatment for most patients with lumbar disc herniation. Operative treatment remains the current gold standard, with minimally invasive endoscopic microdiscectomy techniques showing best results with respect to postoperative pain and function. Regenerative medicine is promising.

Leaping the hurdles in developing regenerative treatments for the intervertebral disc from preclinical to clinical

Chronic back and neck pain is a prevalent disability, often caused by degeneration of the intervertebral disc. Because current treatments for this condition are less than satisfactory, a great deal of effort is being applied to develop new solutions, including regenerative strategies. However, the path from initial promising idea to clinical use is fraught with many hurdles to overcome. Many of the keys to success are not necessarily linked to science or innovation. Successful translation to clinic will also rely on planning and awareness of the hurdles. It will be essential to plan your entire path to clinic from the outset and to do this with a multidisciplinary team. Take advice early on regulatory aspects and focus on generating the proof required to satisfy regulatory approval. Scientific demonstration and societal benefits are important, but translation cannot occur without involving commercial parties, which are instrumental to support expensive clinical trials. This will only be possible when intellectual property can be protected sufficiently to support a business model. In this manner, commercial, societal, medical, and scientific partners can work together to ultimately improve patient health. Based on literature surveys and experiences of the co-authors, this opinion paper presents this pathway, highlights the most prominent issues and hopefully will aid in your own translational endeavors.

Is exclusion of leukocytes from platelet-rich plasma (PRP) a better choice for early intervertebral disc regeneration?

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is becoming a promising strategy to treat early intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) in clinics. Pure PRP without leukocytes (P-PRP) may decrease the catabolic and inflammatory changes in the early degenerated intervertebral discs. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of P-PRP on nucleus pulposus-derived stem cells (NPSCs) isolated from early degenerated intervertebral discs in vitro.

Methods

NPSCs isolated from early degenerated discs of rabbits were treated with P-PRP or leukocyte-platelet-rich PRP (L-PRP) in vitro, followed by measuring cell proliferation, stem cell marker expression, inflammatory gene expression, and anabolic and catabolic protein expression by immunostaining, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, Western blot, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Results

Cell proliferation was induced by P-PRP in a dose-dependent manner with maximum proliferation at 10% P-PRP dose. P-PRP induced differentiation of NPSCs into active nucleus pulposus cells. P-PRP mainly increased the expression of anabolic genes and relative proteins, aggrecan (AGC), collagen types II (Col II), while L-PRP predominantly increased the expression of catabolic and inflammatory genes, matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1), MMP-13, interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), IL-6, tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), and protein production of IL-1β and TNF-α.

Conclusions

Leukocytes in PRP activate inflammatory and catabolic effects on NPSCs from early degenerated intervertebral discs. Hence, P-PRP may be a more suitable therapeutic strategy for early IDD.

Platelet-rich plasma injections: an emerging therapy for chronic discogenic low back pain

Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections have been investigated in recent years as an emerging therapy for various musculoskeletal conditions, including lumbar degenerative disc disease. Although PRP has received increasing attention from medical science experts, comprehensive clinical reports of its efficacy are limited to those treating knee osteoarthritis and epicondylitis. Use of PRP is gaining popularity in the area of degenerative disc disease, but there is a clear need for reliable clinical evidence of its applications and effectiveness. In this article, we review the current literature on PRP therapy and its potential use in the treatment of chronic discogenic low back pain, with a focus on evidence from clinical trials.

Lumbar Disc Herniation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Substantial advancements have been made in the cause, diagnosis, imaging, and treatment options available for patients with lumbar disc herniation (LDH). We examined the current evidence and highlight the concepts on the frontline of discovery in LDH.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are a myriad of novel etiologies of LDH detailed in recent literature including inflammatory factors and infectious microbes. In the clinical setting, recent data focuses on improvements in computer tomography as a diagnostic tool and non-traditional injection options including tumor necrosis alpha inhibitors and platelet-rich plasma. Operative treatment outcomes have focused on minimally invasive endoscopic approaches and demonstrated robust 5-year post-operative outcomes. Advances in the molecular etiology of LDH will continue to drive novel treatment options. The role of endoscopic treatment for LDH will continue to evolve. Further research into10-year outcomes will be necessary as this surgical approach continues to gain widespread popularity.

The use of lumbar epidural injection of platelet lysate for treatment of radicular pain

Background

Epidural steroid injections (ESI) are the most common pain management procedure performed in the US, however evidence of efficacy is limited. In addition, there is early evidence that the high dose of corticosteroids used can have systemic side effects. We describe the results of a case series evaluating the use of platelet lysate (PL) epidural injections for the treatment of lumbar radicular pain as an alternative to corticosteroids.

Methods

Registry data was obtained for patients (N = 470) treated with PL epidural injections presenting with symptoms of lumbar radicular pain and MRI findings that were consistent with symptoms. Collected outcomes included numeric pain score (NPS), functional rating index (FRI), and a modified single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) rating.

Results

Patients treated with PL epidurals reported significantly lower (p < .0001) NPS and FRI change scores at all time points compared to baseline. Post-treatment FRI change score means exceeded the minimal clinically important difference beyond 1 month. Average modified SANE ratings showed 49.7% improvement at 24 months post-treatment. Twenty-nine (6.3%) patients reported mild adverse events related to treatment.

Conclusion

Patients treated with PL epidurals reported significant improvements in pain, exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for FRI, and reported subjective improvement through 2-year follow-up. PL may be a promising substitute for corticosteroid.

Treatment of chronic low back pain - new approaches on the horizon

Back pain is the second leading cause of disability among American adults and is currently treated either with conservative therapy or interventional pain procedures. However, the question that remains is whether we, as physicians, have adequate therapeutic options to offer to the patients who suffer from chronic low back pain but fail both conservative therapy and interventional pain procedures before they consider surgical options such as discectomy, disc arthroplasty, or spinal fusion. The purpose of this article is to review the potential novel therapies that are on the horizon for the treatment of chronic low back pain. We discuss medications that are currently in use through different phases of clinical trials (I–III) for the treatment of low back pain. In this review, we discuss revisiting the concept of chemonucleolysis using chymopapain, as the first drug in an intradiscal injection to reduce herniated disc size, and newer intradiscal therapies, including collagenase, chondroitinase, matrix metalloproteinases, and ethanol gel. We also review an intravenous glial cell-derived neurotrophic growth factor called artemin, which may repair sensory nerves compressed by herniated discs. Another new drug in development for low back pain without radiculopathy is a subcutaneous monoclonal antibody acting as nerve growth factor called tanezumab. Finally, we discuss how platelet-rich plasma and stem cells are being studied for the treatment of low back pain. We believe that with these new therapeutic options, we can bridge the current gap between conservative/interventional procedures and surgeries in patients with chronic back pain.

Intervertebral Disk Degeneration and Repair

Intervertebral disk (IVD) degeneration is a natural progression of the aging process. Degenerative disk disease (DDD) is a pathologic condition associated with IVD that has been associated with chronic back pain. There are a variety of different mechanisms of DDD (genetic, mechanical, exposure). Each of these pathways leads to a final common result of unbalancing the anabolic and catabolic environment of the extracellular matrix in favor of catabolism. Attempts have been made to gain an understanding of the process of IVD degeneration with in Vitro studies. These models help our understanding of the disease process, but are limited as they do not come close to replicating the complexities that exist with an in Vivo model. Animal models have been developed to help us gain further understanding of the degenerative cascade of IVD degeneration In Vivo and test experimental treatment modalities to either prevent or reverse the process of DDD. Many modalities for treatment of DDD have been developed including therapeutic protein injections, stem cell injections, gene therapy, and tissue engineering. These interventions have had promising outcomes in animal models. Several of these modalities have been attempted in human trials, with early outcomes having promising results. Further, increasing our understanding of the degenerative process is essential to the development of new therapeutic interventions and the optimization of existing treatment protocols. Despite limited data, biological therapies are a promising treatment modality for DDD that could impact our future management of low back pain.

What is the clinical evidence on regenerative medicine in intervertebral disc degeneration?

PURPOSE

This review aims to explore and summarize the current clinical evidence about the use of regenerative medicine such as mesenchymal stem cells or platelet-rich plasma in intervertebral disc regeneration, in order to clarify the state of art of these novel approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a research of the available literature about regenerative medicine strategies aiming to prevent intervertebral disc degeneration. All preclinical trials and in vitro studies were excluded. Only clinical trials were critically analysed.

RESULTS

The manuscript selection produced a total of 7 articles concerning the use of regenerative therapies in intervertebral disc degeneration, covering the period between 2010 and 2016. Articles selected were 4 about the injection of mesenchymal stem cells-related results and 3 using platelet-rich plasma. The total population of patients treated with regenerative medicine strategies were 104 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Regenerative medicine, such as the use of mesenchymal stem cells or platelet-rich plasma, in intradiscal disc degeneration has shown preclinical and clinical positive results. Randomized clinical trials studying the potential of MSCs intradiscal injection have not been conducted, and PRP effect has been studied only preliminarily. Additional more powered high-quality studies are needed to really appreciate the long-term safety and efficacy of regenerative medicine approaches in IDD.