Current Trends in Orthobiologics: An 11-Year Review of the Orthopaedic Literature

Review of Dohan Eherenfest et al. (2009) on "Classification of platelet concentrates: From pure platelet-rich plasma (P-PRP) to leucocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF)"

This classic discusses the original publication of Dohan Eherenfest et al. on "Classification of platelet concentrates: from pure platelet-rich plasma (P-PRP) to leucocyte- and platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF)", in which the authors propose four categories of platelet concentrates depending on their leucocyte and fibrin content (P-PRP, leucocyte- and platelet-rich plasma (L-PRP), pure platelet-rich fibrin (P-PRF), and L-PRF) to group a "jungle" of products in which the term platelet-rich plasma (PRP) was used indistinctly. They were able to identify common factors such as: (1) the use of anticoagulants and immediate centrifugation of the blood after its collection; (2) most preparation techniques allowed platelet concentrate preparation within an hour; (3) the centrifugation aimed to separate the blood in layers that would allow the extraction of specific fractions; and (4) the product was activated with thrombin or calcium chloride. The reviewed manuscript has been listed among the most cited PRP articles in regenerative medicine, with more than 800 citations, driving current scientific research and clinical practise by categorising L-PRP and P-PRP (now, leucocyte-poor PRP). The classification has also opened the door to understanding intrinsic biological mechanisms between platelets, leukocytes, fibrin, and growth factors, which will later be considered for studying the proliferation and differentiation of cells in different tissues affected by PRP. Since the initial classification of platelet concentrates, several other classification systems have been proposed and published in the current literature such as platelet, activation, white blood cell (PAW), Mishra, platelet, leucocyte, red blood cells, and activation (PLRA), dose of platelet, efficiency, purity, and activation (DEPA), method, activation, red blood cells, spin, platelets, image guidance, leukocytes, and light activation (MARSPILL), etc. These classifications have identified important aspects of PRP that affect the biological composition and, ultimately, the indications and outcomes. To date, there is still a lack of standardisation in sample preparation, cohort heterogeneity, and incomplete reporting of sample preparation utilised, leading to a lack of clarity and challenging researchers and clinicians.

Stable Housekeeping Genes in Bone Marrow, Adipose Tissue, and Amniotic Membrane-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal Cells for Orthopedic Regenerative Medicine Approaches

The therapeutic effect of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) has been described for a variety of disorders, including those affecting musculoskeletal tissues. In this context, the literature reports several data about the regenerative effectiveness of MSCs derived from bone marrow, adipose tissue, and an amniotic membrane (BMSCs, ASCs, and hAMSCs, respectively), either when expanded or when acting as clinical-grade biologic pillars of products used at the point of care. To date, there is no evidence about the superiority of one source over the others from a clinical perspective. Therefore, a reliable characterization of the tissue-specific MSC types is mandatory to identify the most effective treatment, especially when tailored to the target disease. Because molecular characterization is a crucial parameter for cell definition, the need for reliable normalizers as housekeeping genes (HKGs) is essential. In this report, the stability levels of five commonly used HKGs (ACTB, EF1A, GAPDH, RPLP0, and TBP) were sifted into BMSCs, ASCs, and hAMSCs. Adult and fetal/neonatal MSCs showed opposite HKG stability rankings. Moreover, by analyzing MSC types side-by-side, comparison-specific HKGs emerged. The effect of less performant HKG normalization was also demonstrated in genes coding for factors potentially involved in and predicting MSC therapeutic activity for osteoarthritis as a model musculoskeletal disorder, where the choice of the most appropriate normalizer had a higher impact on the donors rather than cell populations when compared side-by-side. In conclusion, this work confirms HKG source-specificity for MSCs and suggests the need for cell-type specific normalizers for cell source or condition-tailored gene expression studies.

An Update on Orthobiologics: Cautious Optimism

Orthobiologics are rapidly growing in use given their potential to augment healing for multiple musculoskeletal conditions. Orthobiologics consist of a variety of treatments including platelet-rich plasma and stem cells that provide conceptual appeal in providing local delivery of growth factors and inflammation modulation. The lack of standardization in nomenclature and applications within the literature has led to a paucity of high-quality evidence to support their frequent use. The purpose of this review was to describe the current landscape of orthobiologics and the most recent evidence regarding their use.

Why and how to use the body's own stem cells for regeneration in musculoskeletal disorders: a primer

Background

Recently, the management of musculoskeletal disorders with the patients' own stem cells, isolated from the walls of small blood vessels, which can be found in great numbers in the adipose tissue, has received considerable attention. On the other hand, there are still misconceptions about these adipose-derived regenerative cells (ADRCs) that contain vascular-associated pluripotent stem cells (vaPS cells) in regenerative medicine.

Methods

Based on our previous publications on this topic, we have developed a concept to describe the significance of the ADRCs/vaPS cells in the field of orthobiologics as briefly as possible and at the same time as precisely as possible.

Results

The ADRCs/vaPS cells belong to the group of orthobiologics that are based on autologous cells. Because the latter can both stimulate a patient’s body's localized self-healing power and provide new cells that can integrate into the host tissue during the healing response when the localized self-healing power is exhausted, this group of orthobiologics appears more advantageous than cell-free orthobiologics and orthobiologics that are based on allogeneic cells. Within the group of orthobiologics that are based on autologous cells, enzymatically isolated, uncultured ADRCs/vaPS cells have several advantages over non-enzymatically isolated cells/microfragmented fat as well as over uncultured bone marrow aspirate concentrate and cultured cells (adipose-derived stem cells, bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells).

Conclusions

The use of ADRCs/vaPS cells can be seamlessly integrated into modern orthopedic treatment concepts, which can be understood as the optimization of a process which—albeit less efficiently—also takes place physiologically. Accordingly, this new safe and effective type of treatment is attractive in terms of holistic thinking and personalized medicine.