Platelet-rich therapy in the treatment of patients with hip fractures: a single centre, parallel group, participant-blinded, randomised controlled trial

Advances with Platelet-Rich Plasma for Bone Healing

Despite significant advances in the understanding and delivery of osteosynthesis, fracture non-union remains a challenging clinical problem in orthopaedic surgery. To bridge the gap, basic science characterization of fracture healing provides a platform to identify and target biological strategies to enhance fracture healing. Of immense interest, Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a point of care orthobiologic that has been extensively studied in bone and soft tissue healing given its relative ease of translation from the benchtop to the clinic. The aim of this narrative review is to describe and relate pre-clinical in-vitro and in-vivo findings to clinical observations investigating the efficacy of PRP to enhance bone healing for primary fracture management and non-union treatment. A particular emphasis is placed on the heterogeneity of PRP preparation techniques, composition, activation strategies, and delivery. In the context of existing data, the routine use of PRP to enhance primary fracture healing and non-union management cannot be supported. However, it is acknowledged that extensive heterogeneity of PRP treatments in clinical studies adds obscurity; ultimately, refinement (and consensus) of PRP treatments for specific clinical indications, including repetition studies are warranted.

Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Although numerous studies have reported the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in promoting and enhancing bone healing, many orthopedic physicians remain skeptical of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of fractures. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of PRP in the treatment of fractures.

Methods

We search for research on PRP treatment of fractures in Pubmed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane libraries. Two independent reviewers assessed included studies and met to develop a consensus on included studies. We also assessed the risk of bias using Review Manager 5.3 software.

Results

The present meta-analysis included 10 randomized controlled trials (RCT) containing 652 patients. In the fixed-effect meta-analysis of 10 RCTs, 8 RCTs found that fracture patients benefited from PRP treatment. The use of PRP reduced the time of fracture healing in 4 RCTs. Three RCTs found that PRP adjuvant therapy enhanced bone mineral density in the fracture trace and reduced the time of bone regeneration in mandibular fractures patients (standardized mean difference (SMD) = −1.99, 95%confidence interval (CI) = −2.64–−1.35). And 3 RCTs found that PRP adjuvant therapy decreased the risk of revision surgery in fracture patients (SMD = 1.83, 95%CI = 1.10–3.04).

Conclusion

PRP adjuvant therapy is beneficial for the treatment of fracture patients, particularly those with mandibular fractures, and decreased the risk of revision surgery in fracture patients.

The role of Platelet Rich Plasma and other orthobiologics in bone healing and fracture management: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Treatment of large bone defects and fracture healing complications (delayed and non-union) presents a substantial challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Given that bone healing requires mechanical stability as well as a favourable biological microenvironment, orthobiologics such as Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) may have a significant clinical role to play.

AIMS

To perform a systematic review of the available literature to assess the clinical effect of PRP, with or without other orthobiologics, on bone healing.

METHOD

Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Clinical studies of any evidence, assessing effect of PRP with or without other orthobiologics on bone healing, were included. A qualitative analysis was carried out on the clinical and radiological outcomes reported.

RESULT

27 articles with 1631 patients (mean age = 43.56, 57.1% male, mean follow-up = 17.27 months) were included in the qualitative. Of the 27 studies, 13 dealt with fracture complications (delayed or non-unions), 7 with acute fracture healing, 4 with tibial osteotomies and lengthening procedures and 3 with lumbar spine pathology. 18/27 studies showed a clinical benefit of PRP, 8/27 showed no significant effect, and 1/27 showed a worse outcome with PRP.

CONCLUSION

Our review suggests PRP may play a clinical role in bone healing but further randomised controlled trials (RCTs) using standardised outcomes should be performed to establish its efficacy.

Platelet-Rich Plasma for Bone Fracture Treatment: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence in Preclinical and Clinical Studies

Background: Recently, there is an increasing interest in the therapeutic potential of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for bone fracture treatment. Nevertheless, the effect of PRP for bone fracture treatment remains controversial and is still a matter of discussion. Therefore, we performed a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PRP injection for treatment of bone fracture. Methods: The main bibliographic databases, including Medline, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library, were comprehensively searched for studies focusing on the application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on bone fracture treatment. All relevant articles were screened for eligibility and subdivided into the preclinical and clinical studies. Data were extracted and presented systematically. Results: Finally, twenty-six in vitro preclinical studies (basic studies), nine in vivo preclinical studies (animal studies), and nine clinical studies, met the selection criteria, and were included in the present systematic review. Preclinical studies showed an overall positive effect of PRP on osteoblast-like cells in vitro and bone healing in animal models. The most used treatment for bone fracture in animal and clinical studies is fixation surgery combined with PRP injection. The clinical studies reported PRP shortened bony healing duration, and had no positive effect on improving the healing rate of closed fractures. However, the results of functional outcomes are controversial. Additionally, compared with control group, PRP would not increase the rate of postoperative wound infection. Conclusion: The present systematic review confirmed the continuing interests of PRP as an additional treatment for bone fracture. Preclinical studies highlighted the potential value of PRP as promising therapy for bone fracture. However, the preclinical evidence did not translate into a similar result in the clinical studies. In addition, types of fractures and procedures of PRP preparation are heterogeneous in enrolled studies, which might result in controversial results. Meanwhile, characteristics of PRP, such as platelet concentration, the numbers of leukocytes, still need to be determined and further research is required.

Effect of platelet-rich plasma on fracture healing

Bone has the ability to completely regenerate under normal healing conditions. Although fractures generally heal uneventfully, healing problems such as delayed union or nonunion still occur in approximately 10% of patients. Optimal healing potential involves an interplay of biomechanical and biological factors. Orthopedic implants are commonly used for providing the necessary biomechanical support. In situations where the biological factors that are needed for fracture healing are deemed inadequate, additional biological enhancement is needed. With platelets being packed with granules that contain growth factors and other proteins that have osteoinductive capacity, local application of platelet concentrates, also called platelet-rich plasma (PRP) seems an attractive biological to enhance fracture healing. This review shows an overview of the use PRP and its effect in enhancing fracture healing. PRP is extracted from the patient's own blood, supporting that its use is considered safe. Although PRP showed effective in some studies, other studies showed controversial results. Conflicts in the literature may be explained by the absence of consensus about the preparation of PRP, differences in platelet counts, low number of patients, and absence of a standard application technique. More studies addressing these issues are needed in order to determine the true effect of PRP on fracture healing.

Retrograde intramedullary nail fixation compared with fixed-angle plate fixation for fracture of the distal femur: the TrAFFix feasibility RCT

BACKGROUND

Fractures of the distal femur are an increasingly common injury; the optimal management of these injuries remains controversial. The two interventions used in UK practice are intramedullary fixation, with a locked retrograde nail, and extramedullary fixation, with a fixed angle plate.

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the feasibility of a definitive trial and included a process evaluation to understand the generalisability and likely success of a future trial.

DESIGN

A multicentre, parallel, two-arm, randomised controlled feasibility trial with an embedded process evaluation. Treatment with a plate or nail was allocated in a 1 : 1 ratio, stratified by centre and chronic cognitive impairment. Surgeons were not blinded, but participants were not told their allocation.

SETTING

Seven NHS hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients aged ≥ 18 years with a fracture of the distal femur who the attending surgeon believed would benefit from internal fixation were potentially eligible. Patients were excluded if they had a loose arthroplasty requiring revision or a femoral deformity or arthroplasty that precluded nail fixation. The sample was recruited between 29 September 2016 and 31 August 2017. Consent was obtained from the patient or appropriate consultee before enrolment.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomised to receive fixation of their distal femur fracture with either a proximally and distally locked retrograde nail that spanned the diaphysis of the femur or an anatomical distal femoral locking plate with at least one locked screw distal to the fracture. Reduction and supplemental fixation were at the surgeon's discretion.

OUTCOMES

The primary outcome measures for this study were the recruitment rate and the completion rate of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version (EQ-5D-5L), at 6 weeks and 4 months. Additional measurements included baseline characteristics, measures of social support and self-efficacy, disability rating index, dementia quality-of-life measures and a radiographical assessment of any malunion. Participants' and staff views were obtained, at interview, for the process evaluation.

RESULTS

The process evaluation showed that surgeon-related factors, principally confidence with both technologies and a lack of individual equipoise, were key barriers to recruitment. A total of 23 participants were randomised and analysed (nail, n = 11; plate, n = 12). The recruitment rate was estimated as 0.42 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.62] participants per centre per month, lower than the prespecified feasibility threshold of 1.0 participants per centre per month. Data completeness of the EQ-5D-5L was estimated at 65% (95% CI 43% to 83%).

CONCLUSIONS

This feasibility study has challenged many of the assumptions that underpinned the development of proposed definitive trial protocol. A modified protocol is proposed that would be feasible given the recruitment rate observed here, which is equal to that reported in the similar FixDT trial [Health Technology Assessment (HTA) 11/136/04: Costa ML, Achten J, Hennings S, Boota N, Griffin J, Petrou S, et al. Intramedullary nail fixation versus locking plate fixation for adults with a fracture of the distal tibia: the UK FixDT RCT. Health Technol Assess 2018;22(25)], which delivered to target and budget.

FUTURE WORK

A definitive trial with a modified design is recommended, including an internal pilot to confirm initial recruitment rate assumptions.

REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN92089567.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 51. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Funding was also supported by the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.

Biomedical research models in the science of fracture healing - Pitfalls & promises

Development of intervention strategies to stimulate fracture healing has long been a focus of musculoskeletal research. Considerable investment in empirical research has led to the discovery of several genes and signaling pathways that are involved in skeletal development and regeneration. However, there are currently very few biologic interventions that can efficiently be used to enhance fracture healing in clinical practice. This translational barrier is due in part to experimental barriers to mechanism discovery. Animal models, biomechanical models, finite element models, and mathematical models are a few examples of models that aid in the discovery of mechanisms. Understanding the advantages, limitations, and specialized uses of each model type is critical to our ability to interpret mechanistic insights from such research and to help bridge the translation gap between pre-clinical research and clinical practice. In this review, we look at specific modeling methods used in the study of the fracture healing mechanism. We also discuss the strength and limitations to translation of each method, hopefully leading to a better understanding of how we can use models to advance the study of fracture healing.

Knee Fix or Replace Trial (KFORT): a randomized controlled feasibility study

AIMS

The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting a full-scale, appropriately powered, randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing internal fracture fixation and distal femoral replacement (DFR) for distal femoral fractures in older patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seven centres recruited patients into the study. Patients were eligible if they were greater than 65 years of age with a distal femoral fracture, and if the surgeon felt that they were suitable for either form of treatment. Outcome measures included the patients' willingness to participate, clinicians' willingness to recruit, rates of loss to follow-up, the ability to capture data, estimates of standard deviation to inform the sample size calculation, and the main determinants of cost. The primary clinical outcome measure was the EuroQol five-dimensional index (EQ-5D) at six months following injury.

RESULTS

Of 36 patients who met the inclusion criteria, five declined to participate and eight were not recruited, leaving 23 patients to be randomized. One patient withdrew before surgery. Of the remaining patients, five (23%) withdrew during the follow-up period and six (26%) died. A 100% response rate was achieved for the EQ-5D at each follow-up point, excluding one missing datapoint at baseline. In the DFR group, the mean cost of the implant outweighed the mean cost of many other items, including theatre time, length of stay, and readmissions. For a powered RCT, a total sample size of 1400 would be required with 234 centres recruiting over three years. At six months, the EQ-5D utility index was lower in the DFR group.

CONCLUSION

This study found that running a full-scale trial in this country would not be feasible. However, it may be feasible to undertake an international multicentre trial, and our findings provide some guidance about the power of such a study, the numbers required, and some challenges that should be anticipated and addressed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1408-1415.

Platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of bone defects: from pre-clinical rational to evidence in the clinical practice. A systematic review

PURPOSE

The treatment of large bone defects represents a significant challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. In recent years, biologic agents have also been used to further improve bone healing. Among these, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is the most exploited strategy. The aim of the present study was to systematically review the available literature to identify: 1) preclinical in-vivo results supporting the rational of PRP use for bone healing; 2) evidence from the clinical practice on the actual clinical benefit of PRP for the treatment of fractures and complications such as delayed unions and non-unions.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed on the application of PRP in bone healing, using the following inclusion criteria: pre-clinical and clinical reports of any level of evidence, written in English language, published in the last 20 years (1996-2016), on the use of PRP to stimulate long-bone defect treatment, with focus on fracture and delayed/non-unions healing.

RESULTS

The search in the Pubmed database identified 64 articles eligible for inclusion: 45 were preclinical in-vivo studies and 19 were clinical studies. Despite the fact that the overall pre-clinical results seem to support the benefit of PRP in 91.1 % of the studies, a more in depth analysis underlined a lower success rate, with a positive outcome of 84.4 % in terms of histological analysis, and even lower values considering radiological and biomechanical results (75.0 % and 72.7 % positive outcome respectively). This was also mirrored in the clinical literature, where the real benefit of PRP use to treat fractures and non-unions is still under debate.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the available literature presents major limitations in terms of low quality and extreme heterogeneity, which hamper the possibility to optimize PRP treatment and translate it into a real clinical benefit despite positive preclinical findings on its biological potential to favour bone healing.

Quality of life after hip fracture in the elderly: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

With an increasing ageing population, hip fractures have become a major public health issue in the elderly. It is important to examine the health status (HS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of the elderly faced with the epidemic of hip fractures.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an overview of reported HS and HRQOL in elderly patients with a hip fracture.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search was performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane, PsycINFO, Pubmed, and Google Scholar in July 2014. Studies which reported the HS or HRQOL based on standardised questionnaires in patients older than 65 years with a hip fracture were considered eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

After inspecting the 2725 potentially eligible studies, 49 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. All included studies were randomised controlled trials or prospective cohort studies. The methodological quality of the studies was moderate. Patients' functioning on the physical, social, and emotional domains were affected after a hip fracture. The HS and HRQOL of the majority of patients recovered in the first 6 months after fracture. However, their HS did not return to prefracture level. Mental state, prefracture functioning on physical and psychosocial domains, comorbidity, female gender, nutritional status, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, and complications were factors associated with HS or HRQOL. Treatment with total hip arthroplasty or hemi-arthroplasty provided better HS than treatment with internal fixation with displaced femoral neck fractures. Supportive psychotherapy in "low-functioning" patients, (home) rehabilitation programmes and nutritional supplementation appeared to have beneficial effects on HS.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimizing nutrition intake, (home) rehabilitation programmes, and the possibility for psychological counselling in patients with difficulties in the psychosocial dimensions would be recommended after hip fracture surgery. Besides HS questionnaires like EQ-5D and SF-36, adequate measurements like the WHOQOL-Bref or ICECAP-O are warranted in future studies regarding hip fracture surgery and postoperative treatment options.

The Targon Femoral Neck hip screw versus cannulated screws for internal fixation of intracapsular fractures of the hip

We compared a new fixation system, the Targon Femoral Neck (TFN) hip screw, with the current standard treatment of cannulated screw fixation. This was a single-centre, participant-blinded, randomised controlled trial. Patients aged 65 years and over with either a displaced or undisplaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were eligible. The primary outcome was the risk of revision surgery within one year of fixation.

A total of 174 participants were included in the trial. The absolute reduction in risk of revision was of 4.7% (95% CI 14.2 to 22.5) in favour of the TFN hip screw (chi-squared test, p = 0.741), which was less than the pre-specified level of minimum clinically important difference. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcome measures.

We found no evidence of a clinical difference in the risk of revision surgery between the TFN hip screw and cannulated screw fixation for patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:652–7.

Outcome assessment after hip fracture: is EQ-5D the answer?

Objectives

To study the measurement properties of a joint specific patient reported outcome measure, a measure of capability and a general health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tool in a large cohort of patients with a hip fracture.

Methods

Responsiveness and associations between the Oxford Hip Score (a hip specific measure: OHS), ICEpop CAPability (a measure of capability in older people: ICECAP-O) and EuroQol EQ-5D (general health-related quality of life measure: EQ-5D) were assessed using data available from two large prospective studies. The three outcome measures were assessed concurrently at a number of fixed follow-up time-points in a consecutive sequence of patients, allowing direct assessment of change from baseline, inter-measure associations and validity using a range of statistical methods.

Results

ICECAP-O was not responsive to change. EQ-5D was responsive to change from baseline, with an estimated standardised effect size for the two datasets of 0.676 and 0.644 at six weeks and four weeks respectively; this was almost as responsive to change as OHS (1.14 at four weeks). EQ-5D correlated strongly with OHS; Pearson correlation coefficients were 0.74, 0.77 and 0.70 at baseline, four weeks and four months. EQ-5D is a moderately good predictor of death at 12 months following hip fracture. Furthermore, EQ-5D reported by proxies (relatives and carers) behaves similarly to self-reported scores.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that a general HRQOL tool such as EQ-5D could be used to measure outcome for patients recovering from hip fracture, including those with cognitive impairment.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:69–75.

The Warwick Hip Trauma Evaluation One -an abridged protocol for the WHiTE One Study: An embedded randomised trial comparing the X-bolt with slidinghip screw fixation in extracapsular hip fractures

Fractures of the proximal femur are one of the greatest challenges facing the medical community, constituting a heavy socioeconomic burden worldwide. Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment for patients with unstable trochanteric proximal femoral fractures. The recognised treatment alternatives are extramedullary fixation usually with a sliding hip screw and intramedullary fixation with a cephalomedullary nail. Current evidence suggests that best results and lowest complication rates occur using a sliding hip screw. Complications in these difficult fractures are relatively common regardless of type of treatment. We believe that a novel device, the X-Bolt dynamic plating system, may offer superior fixation over a sliding hip screw with lower reoperation risk and better function. We therefore propose to investigate the clinical effectiveness of the X-bolt dynamic plating system compared with standard sliding hip screw fixation within the framework of a the larger WHiTE (Warwick Hip Trauma Evaluation) Comprehensive Cohort Study. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:206-9.