Efficacy of Intra-articular Injection of a Newly Developed Plasma Rich in Growth Factor (PRGF) Versus Hyaluronic Acid on Pain and Function of Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Single-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial

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.

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.

Protective Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma on Cisplatin-Induced Nephrotoxicity in Adult Male Albino Rats: Histological and Immunohistochemical Study

Cisplatin is a potent antineoplastic drug that is used for treatment of many solid tumors. It has a wide range of adverse effects. Nephrotoxicity is the most common one of them. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous human plasma that activates the tissue regeneration through cell proliferation and differentiation. Study the role of PRP in amelioration of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity on the kidney of adult male albino rats by biochemical, morphometric, histological, and immunohistochemical studies. Thirty-five adult male albino rats were used. Thirty rats were included as experimental group and five were used to obtain the PRP. The experimental group was classified into as follows: control group which received 1mL of sterile saline by intraperitoneal injection (IP), cisplatin-treated group which received cisplatin 7.5 mg/kg IP in a single dose and cisplatin and PRP-treated group rats received cisplatin 7.5 mg/kg single IP dose followed by 1ml of PRP IP after 24 h of cisplatin injection. There was a significant increase in urea and creatinine levels in cisplatin-treated group in comparison to the control and the PRP groups. The kidneys of cisplatin-treated group showed distorted renal structure, where specimens of PRP-treated group revealed restoration of the classical appearance of the renal tissue similar to the control group. PRP has protective effects on renal structure and functions and it helps to ameliorate the histological changes induced by cisplatin.

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.

Current Progress of Platelet-Rich Derivatives in Cartilage and Joint Repairs

In recent years, several types of platelet concentrates have been investigated and applied in many fields, particularly in the musculoskeletal system. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is an autologous biomaterial, a second-generation platelet concentrate containing platelets and growth factors in the form of fibrin membranes prepared from the blood of patients without additives. During tissue regeneration, platelet concentrates contain a higher percentage of leukocytes and a flexible fibrin net as a scaffold to improve cell migration in angiogenic, osteogenic, and antibacterial capacities during tissue regeneration. PRF enables the release of molecules over a longer period, which promotes tissue healing and regeneration. The potential of PRF to simulate the physiology and immunology of wound healing is also due to the high concentrations of released growth factors and anti-inflammatory cytokines that stimulate vessel formation, cell proliferation, and differentiation. These products have been used safely in clinical applications because of their autologous origin and minimally invasive nature. We focused on a narrative review of PRF therapy and its effects on musculoskeletal, oral, and maxillofacial surgeries and dermatology. We explored the components leading to the biological activity and the published preclinical and clinical research that supports its application in musculoskeletal therapy. The research generally supports the use of PRF as an adjuvant for various chronic muscle, cartilage, and tendon injuries. Further clinical trials are needed to prove the benefits of utilizing the potential of PRF.

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.

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.

Relative Efficacy of Intra-articular Injections in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In younger patients and those without severe degenerative changes, the efficacy of intra-articular (IA) injections as a nonoperative modality for treating symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA)-related pain while maintaining function has become a subject of increasing interest.

PURPOSE

To assess and compare the efficacy of different IA injections used for the treatment of knee OA, including hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids (CS), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF), with a minimum 6-month patient follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar. Mean or mean change from baseline and standard deviation for outcome scores regarding pain and function were recorded at the 6-month follow-up and converted to either a 0 to 100 visual analog scale score for pain or a 0 to 100 Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score for function. A frequentist network meta-analysis model was developed to compare the effects of HA, CS, PRP, PRGF, and placebo on patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

All IA treatments except CS were found to result in a statistically significant improvement in outcomes when compared with placebo. PRP demonstrated a clinically meaningful difference in function-related improvement when compared with CS and placebo due to large effect sizes. Studies evaluating outcomes of PRGF reported significant improvement when compared with placebo due to large effect sizes, whereas a potential clinically significant difference was detected in the same comparison parameters in pain evaluation. With regard to improvements in pain, function, and both combined, PRP was found to possess the highest probability of efficacy, followed by PRGF, HA, CS, and placebo.

CONCLUSION

PRP yielded improved outcomes when compared with PRGF, HA, CS, and placebo for the treatment of symptomatic knee OA at a minimum 6-month follow-up. Further investigations evaluating different IA and other nonoperative treatment options for patients with knee OA are warranted to better understand the true clinical efficacy and long-term outcomes of nonsurgical OA management.

Role and Effectiveness of Intra-articular Injection of Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease that causes persistent joint pain and stiffness of mainly the large peripheral weight-bearing joints. It is a leading cause of functional disability and poor quality of life. Various modalities of therapy are recommended by different research organizations at different stages of OA including non-pharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical interventions. Intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid (HA) is widely used for over three decades in the treatment of OA. However controversies exist regarding its safety and efficacy, the number of injections and courses, type of preparation, duration of its effects, and combining it with other drugs or molecules. This study aimed to review the most recent data available in the published literature to address these.

Electronic databases like Medline, Embase, ProQuest, and Google Scholar were searched for articles using keywords, intraarticular injections, hyaluronic acid, and osteoarthritis knee. The review was carried out as per PRISMA guidelines.

Thirty-eight randomized control trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy and safety of intra-articular injection of HA were included in the systematic review. Out of the 38 studies, 22 (57.9%) were double-blind, eight (21%) single-blind, three (7.9%) non-blind, four (10%) with simple randomization, and one (2.7%) was open-labeled. Total 5,025 patients were included in these studies. The mean age of the patients was 60.28 years and the osteoarthritis grade of the knee joint was 1 to 3. HA was studied as a test preparation in 19 (50%) while in another 19 (50%) it was studied as a control. In 24 (63.2%) studies, HA was used as high molecular weight preparation in eight (21%) as low molecular weight preparation while in six studies the information was not available. HA was used as a standalone preparation in 31 studies, in two studies it was injected with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and with either low-level laser therapy (LLLT), triamcinolone (TA), betamethasone (CS), poly deoxyribonucleotide (PDRN) or dexamethasone (DX) in one study each. In the majority of the studies, HA was given as a single injection (52.6% studies) or weekly three injections (28.9% studies). In 13.2 %, it was given as weekly 5 injections and in 5.3% as weekly two injections.

IA-HA injections have a limited role in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis in those patients who do not have sufficient pain relief with topical or oral medication and physical therapy. It is safe and effective except for minor side effects such as local pain and swelling lasting for a few days. Severe allergic reactions are extremely rare. They provide adequate pain relief and functional improvement for up to six months irrespective of a number of injections and type of preparations used. The combination formulations with corticosteroids or PRP or MSCs show better results than HA alone. Combining HA with newer molecules such as peptides or diclofenac for sustained and disease-modifying effects requires more studies in the future.

Role of Platelets in Osteoarthritis-Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Role of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Osteoarthritis

Platelets are an essential component of hemostasis, with an increasing role in host inflammatory processes in injured tissues. The reaction between receptors and vascular endothelial cells results in the recruitment of platelets in the immune response pathway. The aim of the present review is to describe the role of platelets in osteoarthritis. Platelets induce secretion of biological substances, many of which are key players in the inflammatory response in osteoarthritis. Molecules involved in cartilage degeneration, or being markers of inflammation in osteoarthritis, are cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor α (TNFα), interleukins (IL), type II collagen, aggrecan, and metalloproteinases. Surprisingly, platelets may also be used as a treatment modality for osteoarthritis. Multiple randomized controlled trials included in our systematic review and meta-analyses prove the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as a minimally invasive method of pain alleviation in osteoarthritis treatment.

Autologous conditioned serum applications in the treatment of musculoskeletal diseases: a narrative review

Aim:

Autologous conditioned serum has been studied as a treatment option in musculoskeletal disorders and resulted in varying outcomes. This study aims to pool the current data on this matter.

Materials & methods:

Major databases were searched for the topics, and after screening the results, the final 21 papers (level of evidence I or II) were included.

Results & conclusion:

This study showed a major focus of the literature on the effectiveness of autologous conditioned serum in osteoarthritis, in which there is much high-quality evidence suggesting its safety and efficacy. Also, some of the available experiments are assessing its application in tendinopathies and radiculopathies which, despite positive results, recommend further evaluations on this topic.

Autologous conditioned serum (ACS) is a cell-free blood product rich in anti-inflammatory components; this study aims to provide a review of the available data on its clinical applications in musculoskeletal disorders. The most studied subject was joint diseases and mainly osteoarthritis, for which some high-quality papers suggested ACS to be an effective and safe option. A few papers assessed the effectiveness of ACS in soft tissue injuries like tendinopathies and plantar fasciitis, and also cervical and lumbar radiculopathies in human subjects; despite some positive results, a further high-quality investigation is required on this matter.

PRP Injections for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate effectiveness, in terms of patient-reported outcome measures, of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for knee osteoarthritis compared to placebo and other intraarticular treatments.

DESIGN

PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, as well as the gray literature were searched on January 17, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PRP injections with placebo or other injectable treatments, in any language, on humans, were included. Risk of bias was assessed following the Cochrane guidelines; quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-four RCTs, including 1403 knees in PRP groups and 1426 in control groups, were selected. WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index) score favored PRP, with a statistically and clinically significant difference versus placebo at 12-month follow-up (P = 0.02) and versus HA (hyaluronic acid) at 6-month (P < 0.001) and 12-month (P < 0.001) follow-ups. A clinically significant difference favoring PRP versus steroids was documented for VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) pain (P < 0.001), KOOS (Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) pain (P < 0.001), function in daily activities (P = 0.001), and quality of life (P < 0.001) at 6-month follow-up. However, superiority of PRP did not reach the minimal clinically important difference for all outcomes, and quality of evidence was low.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of platelet concentrates goes beyond its mere placebo effect, and PRP injections provide better results than other injectable options. This benefit increases over time, being not significant at earlier follow-ups but becoming clinically significant after 6 to 12 months. However, although substantial, the improvement remains partial and supported by low level of evidence. This finding urges further research to confirm benefits and identify the best formulation and indications for PRP injections in knee OA.

Effectiveness of intra-articular autologous-conditioned serum injection in knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis study

Aim

Knee osteoarthritis is a common disabling disorder, with no curative treatment. This study aims to assess autologous conditioned serum effectiveness in its treatment.

Materials & methods

Following a systematic search (2000-2020) on major databases and screening and filtering processes, eight articles were included in the final analyses. The pooled effect of visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) variables was evaluated before and after the intervention.

Results

The combined standardized mean difference for the global WOMAC score was -2.44 and the combined weighted mean difference was -22.92. The combined standardized mean difference for the VAS score was -3.77 and the combined weighted mean difference was -32.37 (p < 0.000).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis reported that the autologous conditioned serum can reduce pain and improve function (VAS and WOMAC outcome measures) in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Safety and efficacy of a single intra-articular injection of a novel enhanced protein solution (JTA-004) compared to hylan G-F 20 in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a randomized, double-blind, controlled phase II/III study

Background

New minimally invasive treatments are vital to delay joint replacement surgery in patients with knee osteoarthritis. This study was designed to select the most effective among three formulations of an enhanced protein solution containing clonidine, hyaluronic acid, and human plasma (JTA-004), and compare the safety and efficacy of intra-articular administration of the selected formulation with a reference treatment (hyaluronic acid) in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis patients.

Methods

In this two-stage, double-blind, phase II/III study conducted in 12 Belgian centers, 50–79-year-old patients with primary knee osteoarthritis were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive one dose of one of three JTA-004 formulations (differing in clonidine concentration [50 or 100 μg/ml] and volume [2 or 4 ml]) or the reference treatment (hylan G-F 20). Patients were evaluated using Western Ontario McMaster Universities (WOMAC®) Scores and the Short-Form health survey up to 6 months post-injection (Month 6). Drug consumption and safety were evaluated.

Results

Among 164 treated patients, 147 completed the study. The JTA-004 formulation containing 200 μg clonidine and 20 mg hyaluronic acid in 2 ml (JTA-200/2) was selected based on interim results at Month 6. The difference in adjusted mean change in WOMAC Pain Subscale Score from baseline (JTA-200/2 minus reference group) at Month 6 was − 9.49 mm; statistical superiority of JTA-200/2 over the reference was not demonstrated. No statistically significant differences in adjusted mean changes from baseline between JTA-200/2 and reference groups were observed for Pain, Physical Function and Stiffness Subscales WOMAC Scores, Total WOMAC Score, and Well-being Score at any timepoint, although JTA-200/2 induced larger improvements in WOMAC Scores than the reference. Statistically significantly larger improvements in WOMAC Pain Subscale Scores for JTA-004 versus the reference were observed in post-hoc analyses on pooled data from all JTA-004 formulations at Month 6 (p = 0.030) and Month 3 (p = 0.014). All JTA-004 formulations had clinically acceptable safety profiles.

Conclusions

This study provided preliminary evidence of the safety of intra-articular injection of JTA-004 in knee osteoarthritis patients. Phase III randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed to evaluate the efficacy of JTA-004 in knee osteoarthritis.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov/identifier NCT02740231;  clinicaltrialsregister.eu/identifier 2015–002117-30. Retrospectively registered 13/4/2016.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04750-3.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Clinical Trials

Background:

The effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for knee osteoarthritis and the effects of leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) versus leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) are still controversial.

Purpose:

To assess the effectiveness of different PRP injections through a direct and indirect meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods:

A systematic literature search of electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE) was performed to locate randomized controlled trials published through March 2019 that compared PRP with control treatment. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the evidence, and meta-regression analyses were conducted to determine the influence of trial characteristics. An indirect comparison was performed to assess the effects of LP-PRP and LR-PRP compared with hyaluronic acid (HA).

Results:

A total of 21 trials were included. A clinically important benefit for pain relief was seen for intra-articular PRP compared with intra-articular saline (standardized mean difference [SMD] = –1.38 [95% CI, –2.07 to –0.70]; P < .0001; I² = 37%) and corticosteroid solution injection (SMD = –2.47 [95% CI, –3.34 to –1.61]; P < .00001; I² = 47%). As a result of heterogeneity (I² = 89%), there was no conclusive effect compared with HA, even though the pooling effect provided clinically relevant pain relief (SMD = –0.59 [95% CI, –0.97 to –0.21]; P = .003). Indirect meta-analysis showed that there was no significant difference between LR-PRP and LP-PRP.

Conclusion:

PRP injections are beneficial for pain relief and functional improvement in knee osteoarthritis. Larger, randomized high-quality studies are needed to compare the effects of LP-PRP and LR-PRP.

The comparison effects of intra-articular injection of Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP), Plasma Rich in Growth Factor (PRGF), Hyaluronic Acid (HA), and ozone in knee osteoarthritis; a one year randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Our study compare the short and long-term efficacy of the intra articular injections (IAIs) of hyaluronic acid (HA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF), and ozone in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

In this randomized clinical trial, 238 patients with mild to moderate knee OA were randomized into 4 groups of IAIs: HA (3 doses weekly), PRP (2 doses with 3 weeks interval), PRGF (2 doses with 3 weeks interval), and Ozone (3 doses weekly). Our outcome measures were the mean changes from baseline (immediately from the first injections) until 2,6, and 12 months post intervention in scores of visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Lequesne index.

RESULTS

A total of 200 patients enrolled in the final analysis. The mean age of patients was 56.9 ± 6.3 years, and 69.5% were women. In 2 months follow up, significant improvement of pain, stiffness, and function were seen in all groups compared to the baseline, but the ozone group had the best results (P < 0.05). In 6 month follow up HA, PRP, and PRGF groups demonstrated better therapeutic effects in all scores in comparison with ozone (P < 0.05). At the end of the 12th month, only PRGF and PRP groups had better results versus HA and ozone groups in all scores (P < 0.05). Despite the fact that ozone showed better early results, its effects begin to wear off earlier than other products and ultimately disappear in 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Ozone injection had rapid effects and better short-term results after 2 months, but its therapeutic effects did not persist after 6 months and at the 6-month follow up, PRP,PRGF and HA were superior to ozone. Only patients in PRP and PRGF groups improved symptoms persisted for 12 months. Therefore, these products could be the preferable choices for long-term management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered in the Iranian Center of Clinical Trials ( www.irct.ir ) in 11/11/2017 with the following code: IRCT2017082013442N17.

Mesenchymal Stem Cells: A New Choice for Nonsurgical Treatment of OA? Results from a Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Objective

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common degenerative joint disease, causing joint pain, stiffness, and even disability. Guidelines recommend intra-articular injections as an alternative treatment to relieve OA symptoms for patients who demonstrate poor tolerability or compliance to oral administration of drugs. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are a potential treatment for of OA. We conducted this network meta-analysis to comprehensively compare the efficacy and safety between hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroids (GCs), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and MSCs.

Design

Systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. Data Sources. Relevant studies, published from January 2000 to January 2020, in the PubMed, Cochrane library, EMBASE, and CKNI databases.

Methods

Bayesian network and conventional meta-analyses were conducted. Pain relief, functional improvement, improvement in joint stiffness, and risk of adverse effects (AEs) were assessed.

Results

Twenty-five articles with 4642 patients were included. Overall, MSC therapy was the most effective treatment for pain relief (standardized mean difference compared with placebo = 3.61, 95% CI [1.87 to 5.35]). Both MSC and PRP therapies improved every symptom of OA effectively and have an advantage over HA and GCs which are recommended by guidelines. MSCs, PRP, HA, and GCs are tolerated well for patients in long-term treatment of OA compared with placebo.

Conclusions

The results show that MSCs relieve pain, stiffness, and dysfunction due to OA better than PRP, HA, and GCs and are not statistically correlated with greater safety concerns. More high-quality trials are needed to reconfirm the findings of this study, however, standardization of preparation of MSCs and PRP should be investigated in the future.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, meta-analysis of Level I RCTs.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PURPOSE

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

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of level 1 studies.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

The Cost-Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma Compared With Hyaluronic Acid Injections for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

To examine the cost-effectiveness of a series (total of 3 injections) of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in comparison to that of hyaluronic acid (HA) viscosupplementation for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Outcome data regarding the use of PRP or HA injections for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis were determined from the highest-quality data (Level I) available in the literature until 2015. Health utility values were then derived from these high-quality data. Costs were determined by examining typical charges for patients undergoing a series of either PRP or HA injections for the treatment of this condition at a large private orthopaedic practice. These health utility values and costs were used to create an expected-value decision analysis model.

RESULTS

The results of the model revealed that the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of a series of PRP injections was $8,635.23/QALY and that of a series of HA injections was $5,331.75/QALY. A series of PRP injections was associated with a higher initial cost than a series of HA injections (difference, $1,433.67); however, PRP was also more effective (higher utility value) than HA by 0.11 QALYs (0.69 vs 0.58, P = .0062) at 1 year. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the use of PRP injections as opposed to HA was $12,628.15/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a series of either PRP ($8,635.23/QALY) or HA ($5,331.75/QALY) injections for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis would be considered cost-effective (cost per QALY < $50,000), PRP injections were not more cost-effective than HA injections. However, PRP was significantly more effective at 1 year, and being associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,628.15/QALY when compared with HA, a series of PRP injections should be considered a reasonable and acceptable alternative to HA injections for the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, economic and decision analysis of Level I studies.

Efficacy of single high-molecular-weight versus triple low-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid intra-articular injection among knee osteoarthritis patients

Background

To compare intra-articular (IA) knee injections of a cross-linked high-molecular-weight hyaluronic acid (HMW-HA) with a linear low-molecular weight HA (LMW-HA) in terms of pain and functional improvement among knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

Methods

In this single-blinded RCT, the patients were randomly divided into two groups for HA injections. The first group received an HMW-HA (Arthromac) injection, while the other received three weekly LMW-HA (Hyalgan) injections. Pain and function were assessed using the outcome measures including WOMAC, Lequesne and VAS indices, once prior to injection, as well as 2 and 6 months after injections.

Results

A total of 90 patients were included. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics including age and sex between the two groups. Our analysis showed that total WOMAC, Lequesne and VAS mean scores remarkably improved at both follow-up time-points compared to the baseline measurements (p < 0.001). There was no significant superiority between the two therapeutic protocols according to our outcome measures at any time-point of follow-up. The only except was about the improvement in WOMAC stiffness subscale that was significantly higher in LMW-HA group compared to HMW-HA (p = 0.021). Moreover, no significant difference was observed in minor complications and injection-induced pain scores between the two groups.

Conclusion

This study proved that a single HMW-HA injection is as effective as multiple injections of LMW-HA counterparts in periods of 2 and 6 months follow-up.

This study protocol was registered in Iranian database of RCTs (IRCT; www.irct.ir) with the trial registration number IRCT20130523013442N24 and registration date 2018-07-13.

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.

Platelet-Rich Plasma-Derived Growth Factor vs Hyaluronic Acid Injection in the Individuals with Knee Osteoarthritis: A One Year Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed at performing a comparison between intra-articular injections of PRP-derived growth factor (PGRF) and hyaluronic acid regarding their effect on pain and patient's function in knee osteoarthritis, as well as their safety profiles.

METHODS

During our single-masked randomized clinical trial, the candidates with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis received two intra-articular injections of PRGF with 3 weeks apart or received three weekly injections of HA. The mean improvements from before treatment until the second, sixth, and twelfth months post-intervention in scores obtained by visual analog scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Lequesne index were our primary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 102 candidates were finally included in the study. Patients' mean age was 57.08±7.3 years old in the PRGF group compared to the mean age of 58.63±7.09 years old in HA patients. In the PRGF group, total WOMAC index decreased from 41.96±11.71 to 27.10±12.3 (P = 0.02), and from 39.71±10.4 to 32.41±11.8 in the HA group after 12 months (P > 0.05). Regarding the Lequesne index, pain, ADL, and global scores significantly decreased after 12 months in the PRGF group compared to the HA group (P<0.001). There was also a meaningful higher rate of satisfaction in the PRGF group compared to the HA group after 12 months of treatment (P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Besides significantly higher satisfaction belonging to the PRGF group, there was a statistically significant improvement in VAS score and global, pain, and ADL score of Lequesne by passing 12 months from injection in PRGF compared to HA.

What Is the Appropriate Price for Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis? A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Based on Evidence From Level I Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To identify the price of treatment at which platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is cost-effective relative to hyaluronic acid (HA) and saline solution intra-articular injections.

METHODS

A systemized review process of the PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE databases was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials comparing PRP with HA and saline solution with up to 1 year of follow-up. Level I trials that reported Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index Likert scores were included. These scores were converted into utility scores. Cost data were obtained from Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services fee schedules. Total costs included the costs of the injectable, clinic appointments, and procedures. The change in utility scores from baseline to 6 months and 1 year for the PRP, HA, and saline solution groups was divided by total cost to determine utility gained per dollar and to identify the price needed for PRP to be cost-effective relative to these other injection options.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. A total of 882 patients were included: 483 in the PRP group, 338 in the HA group, and 61 in the saline solution group. Baseline mean utility scores ranged from 0.55 to 0.57 for the PRP, HA, and saline solution groups. The 6-month gains in utility were 0.12, 0.02, and -0.06, respectively. The 12-month gains in utility from before injection were 0.14, 0.03, and 0.06, respectively. The lowest total costs for HA and saline solution were $681.93 and $516.29, respectively. For PRP to be cost-effective, the total treatment cost would have to be less than $3,703.03 and $1,192.08 for 6- and 12-month outcomes, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, PRP is cost-effective, from the payer perspective, at a total price (inclusive of clinic visits, the procedure, and the injectable) of less than $1,192.08 over a 12-month period, relative to HA and saline solution.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, systematic review.

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

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

Platelet Concentrates in Musculoskeletal Medicine

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

MRI Changes After Platelet Rich Plasma Injection in Knee Osteoarthritis (Randomized Clinical Trial)

Purpose

Few papers have studied the objective effects of PRP on cartilage. In this study, we investigated the effect of PRP on cartilage characteristics by special MRI sequencing in knee osteoarthritis (IRCT registration number: 2014020413442N6).

Patients and methods

In this double blind randomized clinical trial, patients with bilateral knees osteoarthritis-grade 1, 2, and 3 were included in the study. Each patient's knees were randomly allocated to either control or treatment groups. PRP was injected in two sessions with 4 week intervals in PRP group. The VAS (visual analog scale) and WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index) were utilized and MRI was performed for all patients, before, and 8 months after treatment. The MRI sequences taken were transverse 3D TRUFISP and coronal and sagittal fat saturated proton-density. Imaging was scored according to four cartilage characteristics.

Results

46 knees (from 23 patients) were included in this study. 23 knees in the case group and 23 knees in control group were studied. All patients were female with mean age of 57.57±5.9 years. Mean total WOMAC and VAS changes before and after treatment in control group were 11.61±8.5 and 1.3±1.1 respectively. In PRP group, mean total WOMAC and VAS changes showed better improvement with 20±12.3 and 3.2±1.6 respectively (P-value <0.05). In PRP group, all of the radiologic variables (patellofemoral cartilage volume, synovitis and medial and lateral meniscal disintegrity), with the exception of subarticular bone marrow abnormality, had significant improvement (P-value <0.05). In a comparison between the two groups, patellofemoral cartilage volume and synovitis had significantly changed in the PRP group (P-value <0.05).

Conclusion

In this study, in addition to the effect of PRP on VAS and WOMAC, there was a significant effect on radiologic characteristics (patellofemoral cartilage volume and synovitis). For further evaluation, a longer study with a larger sample size is recommended.

The influence of sample size and gender composition on the meta-analysis conclusion of platelet-rich plasma treatment for osteoarthritis

Objective

The magnitude of the therapeutic effects of intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on osteoarthritis (OA) is still under debate. The goal of this study that was a systematic review of randomised controlled trials ​of PRP injections for the treatment of OA was to elucidate the therapeutic efficacy of PRP.

Methods

Electronic databases of PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, EBSCO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ​were searched from inception to June 2018 for RCTs that compared PRP injections to controls in patients with OA. A random-effects approach was used to compile data and subgroups according to trial size (large trials versus small trials), patient profile (age and gender), and PRP preparation method was performed.

Results

Thirty trials met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. All results had unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Patients treated with PRP compared with control showed statistically relevant pain relief and function improvement at short term (standardised mean difference [SMD] ​= ​−0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.98 to −0.27, P ​= ​0.0006, SMD ​= ​−0.74, 95% CI: −1.11 to 0.36, P ​= ​0.0001, respectively), medium term (SMD ​= ​−0.53, 95% CI: −0.83 to −0.23, P ​= ​0.0006, SMD ​= ​−0.50, 95% CI: −0.75 to −0.25, P ​= ​0.0006), and long term (SMD ​= ​−0.69, 95% CI: −1.08 to −0.30, P ​= ​0.0006, SMD ​= ​−0.68, 95% CI: −0.1.09 to −0.27, P ​= ​0.001, respectively). A subgroup analysis of the data from large trials and from trials composed of less than 50% female patients revealed that therapeutic effects of the treatment are insignificant.

Conclusions

According to the currently available data, PRP injections are beneficial for pain relief and function improvement in patients with OA. This meta-analysis, however, demonstrated that the efficacy of PRP is related to sample size and gender composition. Thus, more randomised controlled trials of high quality and larger patient size, also including gender aspects, are required to understand this phenomenon.

The translational potential of this article

The translation potential of this meta-analysis is that provided another perspective to analyse the treatment effect of PRP for OA. In future research, phenotypes subpopulation and gender difference of OA patient should be considered for PRP treatment.

Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The use of biologic therapies for the management of knee osteoarthritis has increased, despite insufficient evidence of efficacy. Our aim was to complete a systematic review and analysis of reports utilizing the highest level-of-evidence evaluating: (1) platelet-rich plasma injections (PRPs); (2) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs); (3) adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs); and (4) amnion-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies evaluating PRP injections, BMSCs, ADSCs, and AMSCs in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Of 1009 studies identified within the last 5 years, 123 met inclusion criteria. A comprehensive analysis of all levels-of-evidence was performed, as well as separate analysis on level-of-evidence I studies. Level-of-evidence was determined by the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons classification system.

RESULTS

Although the majority of PRP reports demonstrated improvements in pain and/or function, others revealed no substantial improvements. Similar findings were noted for BMSCs, ADSCs, and AMSCs. Assessments of BMSC studies yielded majority with positive clinical results, although short-lived. Studies on ADSCs revealed improved clinical outcomes, but equivocal radiographic outcomes. Studies evaluating AMSCs demonstrated improvements in pain and function, and decreased radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

Despite some promising early results for PRP, BMSC, ADSC, and AMSC therapies, the majority of level-of-evidence I studies have multiple problems: small sample sizes, potentially inappropriate control cohorts, short-term follow-up, and so on. Despite the limitations, there still appears to be evidence justifying their use for knee osteoarthritis management. More high-level, larger human studies utilizing standardized protocols are needed.

The efficacy of electromyographic biofeedback on pain, function, and maximal thickness of vastus medialis oblique muscle in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this survey was to examine the effect of adding electromyographic biofeedback (EMGBF) to isometric exercise, on pain, function, thickness, and maximal electrical activity in isometric contraction of the vastus medialis oblique (VMO) muscle in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

In this clinical trial, 46 patients with a diagnosis of knee OA were recruited and assigned to two groups. The case group consisted of 23 patients with EMGBF-associated exercise, and the control group was made up of 23 patients with only isometric exercise. Data were gathered via visual analog scale (VAS) score, the Persian version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and Lequesne questionnaires, ultrasonography of the VMO, and surface electromyography of this muscle at baseline and at the end of the study. Variables were compared before and after the exercise program in each group and between the two groups.

RESULTS

At the end of the study, there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding measured variables. Only the VAS score was significantly less in the case group. Although all assessed parameters, except for VMO muscle thickness, were found to be improved significantly in each group, the degree of change was not significantly different between the two groups, except for VAS score. VMO muscle thickness did not change significantly after exercise therapy in either of the groups.

CONCLUSION

Isometric exercises accompanied by EMGBF and the same exercises without biofeedback for 2 months both led to significant improvements in pain and function of patients with knee OA. Real EMGBF was not superior to exercise without biofeedback in any of the measured variables, except for VAS score.

An investigation into the efficacy of intra-articular ozone (O2-O3) injection in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to review and pool the current literature on intra-articular ozone injection in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of three big databases was performed to identify all English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that evaluated the efficacy of intra-articular ozone injection vs a control injection for knee OA sufferers, using the following two measuring tools: pain VAS and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC).

RESULTS

A total of 428 patients in five RCTs were included, from which 53% (n=225) were in the ozone group and 47% in the control (hyaluronic acid [HA], dextrose, and air injection) group (n=203). The mean age of the patients in both groups was 64 years. Females were the majority. All studies had at least 2 months of follow-up (F/U). Mean difference (MD) between the groups for VAS in the first month was -0.23 with a P-value of 0.71 (negative value was in favor of ozone), whereas this difference in the third and sixth months reached 1.04 and 1.31, respectively, favoring the control group. These data demonstrated that control injection had a more prolonged pain relief period. A similar trend was seen regarding WOMAC scores; pooled results showed that ozone was slightly better than the control injections during the first month (MD =-7.84 [P=0.15]), but it declined to MD=2.55 and 8.23 at 2- to 3- and 4- to 6-month F/U, respectively, again in favor of control injections. Also, adverse events occurred homogeneously in both ozone (6/150 cases, 4%) and control groups (7/129 cases, 5.4%; P-value=0.31).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current meta-analysis, intra-articular ozone injection efficacy was significantly superior to placebo and slightly lower to other control injections with non-significant difference. Therefore, ozone could be recommended as an efficient non-surgical treatment, durable for at least 3-6 months, in mild or moderate knee OA management.

Adipose-Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells: Are They a Good Therapeutic Strategy for Osteoarthritis?

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a major cause of disability in elderly population around the world. More than one-third of people over 65 years old shows either clinical or radiological evidence of OA. There is no effective treatment for this degenerative disease, due to the limited capacity for spontaneous cartilage regeneration. Regarding the use of regenerative therapies, it has been reported that one option to restore degenerated cartilage are adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ASCs). The purpose of this review is to describe and compare the efficacy of ASCs versus other therapies in OA. Methods: Recent studies have shown that ASCs exert paracrine effects protecting against degenerative changes in chondrocytes. According to the above, we have carried out a review of the literature using a combination of osteoarthritis, stem cells, and regenerative therapies as keywords. Results: Conventional pharmacological therapies for OA treatment are considered before the surgical option, however, they do not stop the progression of the disease. Moreover, total joint replacement is not recommended for patients under 55 years, and high tibia osteotomy (HTO) is a viable solution to address lower limb malalignment with concomitant OA, but some complications have been described. In recent years, the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) as a treatment strategy for OA is increasing considerably, thanks to their capacity to improve symptoms together with joint functionality and, therefore, the patients’ quality of life. Conclusions: ASC therapy has a positive effect on patients with OA, although there is limited evidence and little long-term follow-up.

Intra-articular ozone or hyaluronic acid injection: Which one is superior in patients with knee osteoarthritis? A 6-month randomized clinical trial

Purpose

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease, imposing a great burden through pain and decreased function. There are many therapeutic modalities including non-pharmacologic choices and oral, topical, and intra-articular medications. New studies have shown promising results for ozone application in knee OA. Our aim was to compare the effects of ozone therapy versus hyaluronic acid (HA) intra-articular injection in knee OA patients.

Methods

In this randomized clinical trial, a total of 174 patients with more than 3 months of chronic pain or swelling in the knee joints along with consistent imaging findings were enrolled and randomly allocated into two groups of HA and ozone, which were planned to undergo 3 weekly injections of HA (Hyalgan®) and 10 mL of a 30 μg/mL ozone solution, respectively. Patients were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after the last injection for pain, stiffness, and function using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire.

Results

No major adverse events were detected in this study. Total WOMAC score decreased from 40.8±9.8 to 20.4±4.9 (p<0.01) in the ozone group and from 38.5±7.9 to 17.1±4.2 (p<0.01) in the HA group. A similar trend was observed in pain improvement according to VAS. Pain, stiffness, and function significantly improved in both the groups, but no between-group difference was found.

Conclusion

Although both ozone and HA can be effectively used for improving function and reducing pain in selected knee OA patients, neither of the two showed any superiority at 6-month follow-up.