Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Rotator Cuff Repair: Are We Adhering to the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics?

Injection therapy in professional footballers

BACKGROUND

Injection therapy offers a minimally invasive approach for symptomatic relief that allows concurrent training, limiting time loss and providing a faster recovery. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence to support it, and there are controversies about its use. The present narrative review aims to present the available scientific literature on injection therapies in professional footballers (PF), highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of its use in the most common injuries.

METHODS

The authors searched and reviewed contemporary literature on injection therapies in PF in electronic databases, summarizing them in a narrative review.

RESULTS

Injection therapies such as hyaluronic acid and PRP have shown an adequate safety profile that allows their use. Current evidence suggests that hyaluronic acid injections are a valid option for managing symptomatic cartilage injuries. At the same time, PRP injections have failed to prove beneficial in treating muscle injuries and should be avoided until further evidence proves the opposite. Yet, PRP may have potential use in partial ACL injuries, anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament injuries (ankle syndesmosis), and fifth metatarsal fractures and needs further study. Due to the long-term health repercussions, other injection therapies should be preferred over corticosteroids in PF.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a paucity of evidence on the use and benefits of injection therapies in PF despite its extensive use among physicians. Viscosupplementation may have a role in improving symptomatic cartilage injuries. In contrast, PRP injection therapy needs further high-quality clinical trials to assess its role in PF sports injuries.

Bone Marrow Stimulation for Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Bone marrow stimulation (BMS) has been proposed to augment healing at the time of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) by creating several bone marrow vents in the footprint of the rotator cuff, allowing mesenchymal stem cells, platelets, and growth factors to cover the area as a "crimson duvet."

PURPOSE

To perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the outcomes after BMS and a control for those undergoing ARCR.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A literature search of 3 databases was performed based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RCTs comparing BMS and a control for ARCR were included. Clinical outcomes were compared, and a P value <.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 7 RCTs with 576 patients were included. Overall, 18.8% of patients treated with BMS and 21.0% of patients treated with a control had a retear (I2 = 43%; P = .61). With BMS, the mean Constant score was 88.2, and with the control, the mean Constant score was 86.7 (P = .12). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (94.3 vs 93.2, respectively; P = .31) or visual analog scale score (0.9 vs 0.9, respectively; P = .89).

CONCLUSION

The level 1 evidence in the literature did not support BMS as a modality to improve retear rates or clinical outcomes after ARCR.

Lysholm and KOOS QoL Demonstrate High Responsiveness in Patients Undergoing Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

There have been a large number of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to assess outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR).

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose was to determine which PROMs are being commonly used in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to assess patients undergoing ACLR and to compare the responsiveness between them. It was hypothesized that the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score would be the most commonly used and responsive PROM among patients undergoing ACLR.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis. Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed, and relevant studies were extracted from the PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science databases. The inclusion criteria were English-language RCTs reporting on PROMs after ACLR. For articles meeting our inclusion criteria for responsiveness analysis (≥2 PROMs reported, 1 year minimum follow-up, and reported pre- and postoperative PROM means and standard deviations), the responsiveness between PROMs was compared using effect size (ES) and relative efficiency (RE).

RESULTS

A total of 108 articles met the inclusion criteria, comprising 9034 patients (mean age, 29.9 years; mean body mass index, 24.3; mean follow-up time, 36.1 months). There were 34 PROMs identified. The top 3 most commonly reported PROMs were the IKDC (n = 68; 63.0%), Lysholm (n = 65; 60.2%), and Tegner (n = 47; 43.5%) scores. The 2 PROMs with the highest ES were the ACL-Quality of Life (QoL) (3.37) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) QoL (2.07) scores. Compared with other PROMs, Lysholm and KOOS QoL scores had the greatest RE values. The Lysholm score had a greater RE than the KOOS Pain (RE, 1.17), KOOS Symptoms (RE, 1.22), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (RE, 1.42), KOOS Sport/Recreation (RE, 1.55), KOOS QoL (RE, 1.41), and Tegner (RE, 2.89) scores. KOOS QoL had a greater RE than the IKDC (RE, 1.32), KOOS Pain (RE, 1.60), KOOS Symptoms (RE, 2.12), KOOS ADL (RE, 3.03), KOOS Sport/Recreation (RE, 1.27), and Tegner (RE, 2.06) scores.

CONCLUSION

The IKDC score is the most commonly reported PROM in RCTs after ACLR; however, the Lysholm and KOOS QoL scores demonstrated the highest responsiveness in patients undergoing ACLR compared with other PROMs.

ASES and UCLA Are Responsive Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multiple patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to assess shoulder function, but it is unknown which are the most effective.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to report the multiple PROMs used after rotator cuff repair (RCR) and to compare the responsiveness between them. It was hypothesized that the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff PROM would be the most responsive and commonly used in patients undergoing RCR.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and PRISMA-Searching extension guidelines via PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase (Elsevier), and Web of Science (Clarivate). Patient and study characteristics were extracted. From the studies that met inclusion criteria for responsiveness analysis (≥2 PROMs reported, 1-year minimum follow-up, and pre- and postoperative PROM means and standard deviations reported), the authors compared the responsiveness between PROM instruments using effect size and relative efficiency (RE) if a PROM could be compared with another in ≥10 articles.

RESULTS

A total of 252 studies met inclusion criteria (32,072 patients; mean age, 59.6 years; mean body mass index, 28.7; mean follow-up time, 27.8 months). Range of motion was reported in 131 (52%) studies and imaging findings were reported in 123 (49%) studies. There were 67 PROM instruments identified; the most commonly used were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) (n = 183; 73%), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (n = 163; 65%), and Constant (n = 118; 47%) scores. The 3 PROMs with the highest effect sizes were the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (2.51), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (2.42), and ASES (2.00) scores. Overall, UCLA and ASES scores were the most responsive PROMs. The ASES PROM was more responsive than the VAS (RE, 1.70), Constant (RE, 2.76), Simple Shoulder Test (RE, 1.67), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (RE, 2.14) scores. The UCLA PROM was more responsive than the ASES (RE, 1.03), VAS (RE, 3.66), Constant (RE, 1.72), and Simple Shoulder Test (RE, 1.66) scores.

CONCLUSION

ASES and UCLA scores were the most responsive PROMs after RCR. The authors recommend widespread adoption of ASES and UCLA scores for clinical and research standardization; however, the UCLA PROM requires in-person range of motion and strength testing, which is a practical limitation and barrier to long-term follow-up.

Responsiveness of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Large Knee Articular Cartilage Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Cartilage transplantation is commonly used to treat large (>4 cm2) articular cartilage defects of the knee. The 2 most common transplants are osteochondral allograft transplantation and autologous chondrocyte implantation. Several patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been used to determine the efficacy of treatment, but it is unknown which measures are the most effective.

PURPOSE

To report the multiple PROMs used after large knee articular cartilage transplantation surgery and to compare the responsiveness between them.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search of the PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science databases was performed. A total of 181 articles met inclusion criteria. Patient and study characteristics were extracted, including pre- and postoperative means for PROMs. From the articles that met inclusion criteria for responsiveness analysis (2+ PROMs reported, 1-year minimum follow-up, reported pre- and postoperative means and standard deviations; n = 131), the authors compared the responsiveness between PROM instruments using effect size and relative efficiency (RE) if a PROM could be compared with another in ≥10 articles.

RESULTS

A total of 10,015 patients (10,093 knees; mean age, 34.8 years; mean body mass index, 26.1) were included in this study. The mean follow-up time was 58.3 months (range, 1.5-247.2 months), imaging findings were reported in 80 articles (44.2%), patient satisfaction was reported in 39 articles (21.5%), and range of motion was reported in 10 articles (5.5%). There were 58 unique PROM instruments identified, with the most used being the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score (n = 118; 65.2%), followed by Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) Pain (n = 58; 32.0%), KOOS Sport and Recreation (n = 58; 32.0%), KOOS Quality of Life (n = 57; 31.5%), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (n = 57; 31.5%), and KOOS Symptoms (n = 57; 31.5%). Overall, IKDC was found to have the greatest effect size (1.68) and the best responsiveness of the other PROMs, which include KOOS Pain (RE, 1.38), KOOS Symptoms (RE, 3.06), KOOS Activities of Daily Living (RE, 1.65), KOOS Sport and Recreation (RE, 1.44), Lysholm (RE, 1.76), and Tegner (RE, 1.56).

CONCLUSION

The IKDC is the most responsive PROM after large knee articular cartilage transplantation surgery. The IKDC score is recommended for assessing outcomes after cartilage transplantation surgery.

Comparative efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection versus PRP combined with vitamin C injection for partial-thickness rotator cuff tears: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal approach for managing partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCT) remains controversial. Recent studies related to PTRCTs have shown that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection might be an effective treatment option. Despite the role of vitamin C in collagen synthesis and its antioxidant properties, the effects of combined PRP and vitamin C treatment on rotator cuff repair are not well understood. This study investigated the effect of combined treatment of PRP and vitamin C treatment on PTRCTs.

METHODS

One hundred-ten patients with PTRCTs were randomly allocated to two groups and underwent subacromial injections of either (A) normal saline and platelet-rich plasma or (B) vitamin C and platelet-rich plasma. The Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and visual analog scale were used to evaluate the outcomes before, 1 month after, and 3 months after injection.

RESULTS

At the 3-month follow-up, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of ASES and Constant scores. Although a slight difference favoring group B was noted in functional scores and pain reduction, this difference was not statistically significant. However, both groups demonstrated significant pain reduction over time (p-value < 0.001). Additionally, the enhancement of ASES and Constant scores in both groups was statistically significant (p-value < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, both PRP injection alone and PRP combined with vitamin C led to significant reductions in pain and enhancements in function scores over time (p < 0.001), suggesting the effectiveness of PRP as a non-surgical treatment for PTRCTs within 3 months. While PRP alone showed significant benefits, further research is required to ascertain if the combination therapy offers statistically significant advantages over PRP alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration code: IRCT20230821059205N1.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Level of Evidence

Level I, systematic review of RCTs.

The effect of platelet-rich fibrin, platelet-rich plasma, and concentrated growth factor in the repair of full thickness rotator cuff tears

BACKGROUND

Rotator cuff lesions rank among the prevalent causes of shoulder pain. Combining surgical interventions with growth factors, scaffolds, and stem cell therapies can effectively decrease the likelihood of rotator cuff repair recurrence. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP), platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), and concentrated growth factor (CGF), isolated from blood and rich in growth factors, have a critical role in cell migration, cell proliferation, and angiogenesis during the tissue regeneration process. Investigations have further substantiated the beneficial impact of PRP and PRF on the biomechanical and histologic attributes of the tendon-bone interface. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of CGF compared with PRF and PRP in the repair of rotator cuff lesions as a new treatment strategy.

METHODS

Incision was performed on both shoulder regions of 21 adult rabbits. After 8 weeks, both shoulders of the rabbits were repaired by suturing. PRF and CGF were administered to 2 separate groups along with the repair. Tissues were collected for biomechanical measurements and histologic evaluations.

RESULTS

Histologically, CGF, PRF, and PRP showed similar results to the healthy control group. The level of improvement was significant in the PRF and PRP groups. In the PRF group, the distribution of Ki67 (+), CD31 (+), and CD34 (+) cells was determined intensely in the tendon-bone junction regions. Apoptotic cells increased significantly in the repair group compared with the healthy group, whereas fewer apoptotic cells were found in the PRF-, PRP-, and CGF-applied groups. In the biomechanical results, no statistical difference was recorded among the groups.

CONCLUSION

The use of PRF, PRP, and CGF in rotator cuff repair shows promise in shortening the treatment period and preventing the recurrence of rotator cuff lesions.

Randomized Controlled Trials on Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis Poorly Adhere to the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics (MIBO) Guidelines: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) treatment for knee osteoarthritis has grown exponentially over the past decade; however, its scientific evaluation is highly variable. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons addressed the need for the standardization of orthobiologics studies by publishing the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics (MIBO) guidelines in May 2017. In total, the MIBO guidelines are divided into 12 categories, encompassing 23 checklist items.

HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze how well randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PRP interventions for knee osteoarthritis adhered to the MIBO guidelines. We hypothesized that most articles would report <80% of the MIBO criteria.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were used to perform a systematic review in the PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science databases. Inclusion criteria included English-language RCTs that assessed PRP interventions for knee osteoarthritis and reported beginning patient enrollment in June 2017 or later. The original 23 MIBO checklist items were separated and modified into a 44-point checklist. Adherence was determined by calculating the total percentage of checklist items that each article adequately and clearly reported from the 44-point checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 25 RCTs (2356 patients) were included in this study. The weighted mean age was 57.7 ± 4.4 years, with 42.9% being male. On average, only 53.1% ± 10.4% (range, 31.8%-77.3%) of the 44-point MIBO checklist items were reported per article. No articles had adherence rates ≥80%, 5 (20.0%) had rates between 60% and 79.9%, and 20 (80.0%) had rates ≤59.9%. Categories fluctuated in adherence, with "Intervention" having the greatest adherence (100.0%) and "Activation" having the lowest (14.0%). Additionally, 4 (33.3%) categories had adherence rates ≥80%, 0 had rates from 60% to 79.9%, and 8 (66.7%) had rates ≤59.9%.

CONCLUSION

The overall mean adherence to MIBO guidelines by RCTs on PRP interventions for knee osteoarthritis was 53.1%. To increase the reproducibility, improve transparency, and assess the treatment efficacy of future PRP studies, reporting of MIBO guidelines should be improved.

Editorial Commentary: Biologic Augmentation of Rotator Cuff Repair: Platelet-Rich Plasma May Be of Significant Benefit, Whereas Atelocollagen Cannot Be Recommended

The field of orthobiologics continues to advance at a rapid pace and theoretically holds some promise to augment the biologic healing response in rotator cuff repair (RCR). However, the clinical evidence for use of substances such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for RCR remains inconclusive. Atelocollagen, as a synthetic collagen substitute, has been proposed as another alternative to provide more collagen substrate for healing, but outcomes data with this technique is lacking. In contrast, (biologic) PRP has been well studied, does not show adverse outcomes, and has been shown to improve healing of large to massive tears, as well as RCR outcomes. As biologic augmentation options continue to push the envelope on indications, due diligence is required to carefully examine options for safety and efficacy. Evolutions in RCR should also continue to motivate sports medicine surgeons and researchers to seek out further innovations to improve patient outcomes. That said, PRP outcome improvement for RCR is not definitive and requires further study. RCR can humble even the best of surgeons and demands that we continue to look for ways to improve outcomes.

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.

Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Low Back Pain

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) has a high economic burden and is strongly related to the degenerative process of the spine, especially in the intervertebral disc and of the facet joints. Numerous treatment modalities have been proposed for the management of LBP, and the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as an innovative therapeutic option for degenerative disease of the spine. The present study aims to evaluate the efficacy of PRP injections in managing low back pain.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations, a registered at PROSPERO Systematic Reviews Platform, under number CRD42021268491. The PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched to identify relevant articles, along with hand searching to identify gray literature articles, with no language restrictions. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), nonrandomized trials (NRTs), and case series (CSs) with more than 10 patients were considered eligible. The quality assessment and the risk of bias of the randomized clinical trials were evaluated using the RoB II tool. An evaluation of the description of the preparation methods was performed using an adapted version of the MIBO checklist.

RESULTS

An electronic database search resulted in 2324 articles, and after the exclusion of noneligible articles, 13 RCTs and 27 NRTs or CSs were analyzed. Of the 13 RCTs, 11 found favorable results in comparison to the control group in pain and disability, one showed no superiority to the control group, and one was discontinued because of the lack of therapeutic effect at eight-week evaluation. Description of the PRP preparation techniques were found in almost all papers. The overall risk of bias was considered high in 2 papers and low in 11. An adapted MIBO checklist showed a 72.7% compliance rate in the selected areas.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we analyzed articles from English, Spanish and Russian language, from large databases and grey literature. PRP was in general an effective and safe treatment for degenerative LPB. Positive results were found in almost studies, a small number of adverse events were related, the risk of bias of the RCTs was low. Based on the evaluation of the included studies, we graded as level II the quality of the evidence supporting the use of PRP in LBP. Large-scale, multicenter RCTs are still needed to confirm these findings.

Collagen and platelet-rich plasma in partial-thickness rotator cuff injuries. Friends or only indifferent neighbours? Randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Partial-thickness rotator cuff injuries (PTRCI) are the sum of degenerative, overload, and microtrauma processes. An external supply of collagen and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) could potentially counteract the deterioration of degenerative tendinopathy. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of collagen with PRP, PRP alone, and collagen alone in the treatment of PTRCI.

METHODS

Ninety patients with PTRCI were randomised and treated with ultrasound-guided injections into the shoulder bursa every consecutive week: Group A - collagen with PRP (n = 30), Group B - collagen alone (n = 30), and Group C - PRP alone (n = 30). Primary outcomes were pain intensity measured in control points on a numeric rating scale (NRS), QuickDash, and EQ-5D-5L questionnaires at the initial assessment (IA) and control assessments after 6 (T1), 12 (T2), and 24 (T3) weeks, respectively.

RESULTS

No statistical differences were found between groups in primary outcomes, although there was a trend towards improvement in Groups A and C (opposite to Group B) between T2 and T3. The following parameters were also observed: rotator cuff discontinuity (n = 3, one case in each group) and rotator cuff regeneration (n = 22 in Group A, n = 20 in Group B, and n = 23 in Group C).

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapy of collagen and PRP in PTRCI presents similar effectiveness to monotherapies with collagen or PRP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was prospectively registered on the NCT Trial Center (identification number: NCT04492748 ) on 30.07.2020.