The impact of platelet-rich plasma on postoperative outcomes after spinal fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Effect of platelet-rich plasma on the acceleration of graft bone catabolism in lateral lumbar interbody fusion in a short-term assessment

This study aimed to demonstrate whether impregnating the graft bone with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) accelerates graft bone catabolism in lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF). Consecutive patients who underwent LLIF were assessed. Of the two spaces for bone grafts in the intervertebral cage, one space was filled with graft bone impregnated with PRP, and the other was filled with graft bone without PRP, which divided the graft bones into PRP and non-PRP groups. The mean Hounsfield units (HU) of the graft bone at the center of the cage space in the coronal and axial slices were measured using computed tomography (CT) images 1 week and 6 months after surgery. The delta value of HU from 1 week to 6 months after surgery was calculated for the PRP and non-PRP groups. We compared the delta values of the HU between the two groups. The PRP and non-PRP groups comprised 16 bone grafts. In the coronal slices, the HU value in the PRP group (delta value: 526.1 ± 352.2) tended to have a greater decrease at 6 months after surgery compared with that in the non-PRP group (delta value: 217.6 ± 240.4) (p = 0.065). In the axial slices, the HU value in the PRP group (delta value: 501.3 ± 319.6) was significantly decreased at 6 months after surgery compared with that in the non-PRP group (delta value: 159.2 ± 215.3) (p = 0.028). Impregnating the graft-bone with PRP accelerated graft bone catabolism in LLIF within 6 months after surgery.

Application of platelet-rich plasma in spinal surgery

With the aging of the population and changes in lifestyle, the incidence of spine-related diseases is increasing, which has become a major global public health problem; this results in a huge economic burden on the family and society. Spinal diseases and complications can lead to loss of motor, sensory, and autonomic functions. Therefore, it is necessary to identify effective treatment strategies. Currently, the treatment of spine-related diseases includes conservative, surgical, and minimally invasive interventional therapies. However, these treatment methods have several drawbacks such as drug tolerance and dependence, adjacent spondylosis, secondary surgery, infection, nerve injury, dural rupture, nonunion, and pseudoarthrosis. Further, it is more challenging to promote the regeneration of the interstitial disc and restore its biomechanical properties. Therefore, clinicians urgently need to identify methods that can limit disease progression or cure diseases at the etiological level. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP), a platelet-rich form of plasma extracted from venous blood, is a blood-derived product. Alpha granules contain a large number of cytokines, such as platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), epidermal growth factor, platelet factor 4 (PF-4), insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1), and transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β). These growth factors allow stem cell proliferation and angiogenesis, promote bone regeneration, improve the local microenvironment, and enhance tissue regeneration capacity and functional recovery. This review describes the application of PRP in the treatment of spine-related diseases and discusses the clinical application of PRP in spinal surgery.

The efficacy of platelet-rich plasma applicated in spinal fusion surgery: A meta-analysis

Objective

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of the application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in spinal fusion surgery on the fusion rate of the spine.

Methods

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct databases was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) or observational cohort studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of PRP in spinal fusion. Data on final fusion rate, changes in the visual analog scale (VAS), estimated blood loss (EBL), and operative time was collected from the eligible studies for meta-analysis. Patients were divided into PRP and non-PRP groups according to whether PRP was used during the spinal fusion procedure.

Results

According to the selection criteria, 4 randomized controlled trials and 8 cohort studies with 833 patients and 918 levels were included. The outcomes indicated that PRP application is associated with a lower fusion rat (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: (0.43, 0.89), P = 0.009) at final follow-up (>24 months). Subgroup analysis showed a lower rate of spinal fusion in the PRP group compared to the non-PRP group (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: (0.21, 0.58), P < 0.001) when spinal fusion was assessed using only anterior-posterior radiographs. When the bone graft material was a combination of autologous bone + artificial bone, the spinal fusion rate was lower in the PRP group than in the non-PRP group (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: (0.16, 0.71), P = 0.004). The PRP and non-PRP groups showed no significant differences in VAS changes at the 24th postoperative month (WMD = 0.36, 95% CI: (−0.37, 1.09), P = 0.33); Application of PRP does not reduce the estimated blood loss (WMD = −86.03, 95% CI: (−188.23, 16.17), P = 0.10). In terms of operation time, using PRP does not prolong operation time (WMD = −3.74, 95% CI: (−20.53, 13.04), P = 0.66).

Conclusion

Compared with bone graft fusion alone, PRP cannot increase the rate of spinal fusion. Inappropriate methods of spinal fusion assessment or mixing PRP with artificial/allograft bone may have been responsible for the lower rate of spinal fusion in the PRP group.

Systematic Review Registration

doi: 10.37766/inplasy2022.5.0055

Is Platelet-Rich Plasma Effective in Enhancing Spinal Fusion? Systematic Overview of Overlapping Meta-Analyses

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

We performed this systematic overview on overlapping meta-analyses that analyzed the role of platelet-rich plasma(PRP) in enhancing spinal fusion and identify which study provides the current best evidence on the topic and generate recommendations for the same.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects till October-2020 for meta-analyses that analyzed the role of PRP in spinal fusion procedures. Methodological quality assessment was made using Oxford Levels of Evidence, AMSTAR scoring, and AMSTAR 2 grades. We then utilized the Jadad decision algorithm to identify the study with highest quality to represent the current best evidence to generate recommendations.

RESULTS

3 meta-analyses fulfilling the eligibility criteria were included. The AMSTAR scores of included studies varied from 5-8(mean:6.3) and all included studies had critically low reliability in their summary of results due to their methodological flaws according to AMSTAR 2 grades. The current best evidence showed that utilization of PRP was not associated with significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes such as Visual Analog Score for pain compared to the standard fusion procedure. Moreover, PRP was found to be associated with lower fusion rates.

CONCLUSION

Based on this systematic overview, the effectiveness of PRP as a biological agent in augmenting spinal fusion is limited. Current evidence does not support the use of PRP as an adjuvant to enhance spinal fusion.