Randomized controlled trial comparing hyaluronic acid, platelet-rich plasma and the combination of both in the treatment of mild and moderate osteoarthritis of the knee

Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate whether a combination of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) is more effective and safer than injection alone for treating KOA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE (PubMed), the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched for articles published until January 2024, and gray literature and bibliographic references were searched. All published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared pain, functional outcomes, and adverse events (AEs) associated with PRP + HA therapy vs. PRP or HA treatments. Two independent researchers extracted the pertinent data and evaluated the methodological quality following the PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcomes were pain, functional outcomes, and AEs. A fixed-effects model was used for data analysis in cases with low heterogeneity (P > 0.10 and I2 < 50%). Otherwise, a random effects model was used.

RESULTS

Ten RCTs involving 943 patients were included in the analysis. The statistical findings did not differ between the treatment of PRP + HA and PRP alone, while a discernible enhancement in treatment efficacy was observed when compared to HA monotherapy: the visual analog scale scores at 1- (mean difference[MD], -1.00; 95% CI: -1.37 - -0.62; P < .001), 6- (MD, -1.87; 95% CI: -3.46 - -0.28; P = .02), 12-months (MD, -2.07; 95% CI: -3.77 - -0.38; P = .02), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index total scores at 12-months (MD, -8.82; 95% CI: -14.48 - -3.16; P = .002). The incidence of adverse events was notably lower with PRP + HA than with HA alone (OR, 0.37; 95% CI: 0.19 - 0.69; P = .00) or PRP alone (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.30 - 0.87; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

PRP + HA therapy resulted in more pronounced pain and functional improvement in symptomatic KOA patients than HA treatments, and combination therapy may have higher clinical safety than PRP or HA monotherapy.

Chondroprotective Effects of a Single PRP Injection in a Spontaneous Osteoarthritis Model of Dunkin Hartley Guinea Pig: An Immunohistochemical Analysis

Purpose of the Study

The evaluation of anti-apoptotic and chondroprotective properties of a single injection of PRP using immunohistochemistry (IHC).

Methods

This was a placebo-controlled blinded experimental study. Ten healthy Dunkin Hartley guinea pigs were selected. One knee of each animal was injected with a single injection of PRP (Group A); the contralateral knee acted as a control and was injected with a single injection of normal saline (Group B). These groups were further divided into A3 and B3 based on the timeline of animal sacrifice (3 months) and A6 and B6 (6 months). The formalin-preserved articular cartilage blocks were subjected to IHC to stain Aggrecan, Caspase-3, and Collagen-2.

Results

The mean IHC score was significantly low for Caspase-3 (p-0.029) in intervention group (A3) in comparison to placebo control group (B3) pointing towards decreased apoptosis. The mean IHC values were significantly higher for Collagen II (p-0.011) for intervention group (A6) in contrast to control group (B6); values were also significantly low for Caspase-3 (p-0.029) in A6 as compared to B6. The mean Caspase-3 values were significantly higher in A6 as compared to A3 (p-0.029).

Conclusion

The impact of a solitary injection of PRP on upregulation of anabolic pathways inside cartilage is relatively slower as compared to its effect on downregulation of apoptotic pathways. Even a single PRP injection holds the potential to change cartilage microenvironment, but the effects are not long lasting.

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.

a comparison of intra-articular hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review

Introduction

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA), the most common chronic degenerative condition in an older population, accounts for many disabilities around the world. One of the most popular treatments is intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP).

Objective

Prior studies have found that both HA and PRP had a therapeutic effect on KOA. This study aims to perform a systematic review regarding whether PRP is superior to HA for KOA.

Method

We conducted a comprehensive literature search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines for prospective randomized control trials (pRCTs) in three international databases PubMed, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect from 2019-2022. Two researchers independently searched the reviews, extracted, and cross-checked the data. The disparity when choosing the literature was resolved by discussion. The modified Jadad was scale used to assess the quality of the included studies. Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool (RoB-2) was used for determininzg risk of bias.

Results

Twenty three studies were eligible for inclusion. Four pRCT with the highest Jadad score were selected as best evidence. Risk of bias assesment concluded two studies having a low risk of bias, one is high risk of bias, and the other possesses some concerns.. Three studies found no difference in patient-reported outcomes between PRP and HA group and one study concluded that PRP is more effective than HA in treating KOA.

Conclusion

Intra-articular injections of PRP and HA are effective interventions for KOA. However, there is not enough evidence of PRP superiority over HA.

Evaluation of single and multiple hyaluronic acid injections at different concentrations with high molecular weight in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis is severe progressive and most commonly diagnosed articular disease and its incidence is increasing around the world depending on age. This pathologic condition which limits daily activity of patients can be characterized by degeneration of cartilage and inflammation. Although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAII) agents and other analgesics are routinely used treatment options, the potential effects of intraarticular injections including hyaluronic acid (HA) have also been demonstrated by various studies. However, few studies compare the efficacy of a single high molecular weight (HMW) high dose and a triple HMW low dose. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of single high molecular weight (HMW) high dose (2 mL / 60 mg) and triple HMW low dose (2 mL /30 mg) intra-articular injection of HA in knee osteoarthritis (OA) patients by evaluating function and pain parameters during 12 months.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective clinical study that included and involved 128 patients. Group I (n=64) patients received triple 30 mg HA injections (SEMICAL®) with one-week intervals, while Group II (n=64) patients received a single 60 mg HA injection (SEMICAL®). Lequesne Index, WOMAC and VAS scores were recorded to assess pain and function during a 12-month period.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in characteristics of patient demographics. Our finding indicate that WOMAC, VAS score, and Lequesne Index values during follow-up visits exhibited a decrease, signifying improvement in the clinical condition. Notably, scores were significantly more favorable with the 30 mg of HA injection compared to the 60 mg of HA injection.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the triple low-dose injection of HMW HA is more effective in improving WOMAC, VAS scores and Lequesne Index values than a single high-dose injection.

Clinical Outcome of Multiple Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection and Correlation with PDGF-BB in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

(1) Background: Current treatments for knee osteoarthritis (KOA), such as intra-articular corticosteroids or hyaluronic acid (HA) injections, are controversial due to their ineffectiveness in preventing disease progression. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has become a promising and possible treatment for KOA. It is thought to enhance articular cartilage regeneration and reduce OA-related impairment. PRP contains growth factors such as PDGF-BB, which stimulates growth and inhibits joint damage. Based on numerous studies, after a certain amount of time, it was found that multiple PRP treatments reduced pain more than a single injection. This study evaluates the efficacy of multiple PRP (m-PRP) injections compared to multiple HA (m-HA) injections for KOA treatment, focusing on their correlation with PDGF-BB levels. (2) Methods: In this single-center, open-label, randomized, comparative clinical trial, 30 KOA patients received m-PRP and m-HA injections. VAS and WOMAC were used to evaluate clinical outcomes and PDGF-BB concentrations. (3) Results: The study analysis revealed a statistically significant reduction in pain indices. In both the m-PRP and m-HA groups after 12 weeks, m-PRP showed superior results. PDGF-BB concentrations also increased, with a strong negative correlation and statistical significance using Spearman's rho. (4) Conclusions: Multiple PRP injections are safe and associated with elevated PDGF-BB, reduced VAS and WOMAC scores, providing the potential for articular cartilage regeneration and inhibiting knee osteoarthritis progression.

Regenerative therapies for femoral head necrosis in the past two decades: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Regenerative techniques combined with core decompression (CD) are commonly used to treat osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). However, no consensus exists on regeneration therapy combined with CD that performs optimally. Therefore, we evaluated six regenerative therapies combined with CD treatment using a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases. Six common regeneration techniques were categorized into the following groups with CD as the control group: (1) autologous bone graft (ABG), (2) autologous bone graft combined with bone marrow aspirate concentrate (ABG + BMAC), (3) bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC), (4) free vascular autologous bone graft (FVBG), (5) expanded mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and (6) platelet-rich plasma (PRP). The conversion rate to total hip arthroplasty (THA) and progression rate to femoral head necrosis were compared among the six treatments.

RESULT

A total of 17 literature were included in this study. In the NMA, two of the six treatment strategies demonstrated higher response in preventing the progression of ONFH than CD: MSCs (odds ratio [OR]: 0.098, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0087-0.87) and BMAC (OR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.073-0.73). Additionally, two of the six treatment strategies were effective techniques in preventing the conversion of ONFH to THA: MSCs (OR: 0.062, 95% CI: 0.0038-0.40) and BMAC (OR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.1-0.074). No significant difference was found among FVBG, PRP, ABG + BMAC, ABG, and CD in preventing ONFH progression and conversion to THA (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our NMA found that MSCs and BMAC were effective in preventing ONFH progression and conversion to THA among the six regenerative therapies. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking value, MSCs ranked first, followed by BMAC. Additionally, based on our NMA results, MSCs and BMAC following CD may be necessary to prevent ONFH progression and conversion to THA. Therefore, these findings provide evidence for the use of regenerative therapy for ONFH.

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.

The Synergistic Effects of Hyaluronic Acid and Platelet-Rich Plasma for Patellar Chondropathy

Musculoskeletal disorders are increasingly prevalent worldwide, causing significant socioeconomic burdens and diminished quality of life. Notably, patellar chondropathy (PC) is among the most widespread conditions affecting joint structures, resulting in profound pain and disability. Hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have emerged as reliable, effective, and minimally invasive alternatives. Continuous research spanning from laboratory settings to clinical applications demonstrates the numerous advantages of both products. These encompass lubrication, anti-inflammation, and stimulation of cellular behaviors linked to proliferation, differentiation, migration, and the release of essential growth factors. Cumulatively, these benefits support the rejuvenation of bone and cartilaginous tissues, which are otherwise compromised due to the prevailing degenerative and inflammatory responses characteristic of tissue damage. While existing literature delves into the physical, mechanical, and biological facets of these products, as well as their commercial variants and distinct clinical uses, there is limited discussion on their interconnected roles. We explore basic science concepts, product variations, and clinical strategies. This comprehensive examination provides physicians with an alternative insight into the pathophysiology of PC as well as biological mechanisms stimulated by both HA and PRP that contribute to tissue restoration.

Efficacy and safety of corticosteroids, hyaluronic acid, and PRP and combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

There are many injectable treatments for knee osteoarthritis with different characteristics and effects, the aim is to understand which one can lead to better and safer results.

METHODS

The PRISMA principles were followed when doing the literature search. Web of Science databases, Embase, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and the Wanfang database were searched to identified randomized controlled trials that assessed the efficacy of corticosteroids (CSC), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), and combination therapy in treating KOA. Risk of bias was assessed using the relevant Cochrane tools (version 1.0). The outcome measure included the visual analog scale (VAS) score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) score, and treatment-related adverse events. The network meta-analysis was performed using STATA17 software and a Bayesian stratified random effects model.

RESULTS

Network meta-analysis using the Bayesian random-effects model revealed 35 studies with 3104 participants. PRP showed the best WOMAC score at a 3-month follow-up, followed by PRP + HA, HA, placebo, and CSC; PRP + HA scored the highest VAS, followed by PRP, CSC, HA, and placebo. PRP, CSC, HA, and placebo had the highest WOMAC scores six months following treatment; PRP + HA showed the best VAS scores. PRP showed the best WOMAC score at 12 months, followed by PRP + HA, HA, placebo, and CSC; The best VAS score was obtained with PRP, followed by PRP + HA, HA, and CSC. No therapy demonstrated a rise in adverse events linked to the treatment in terms of safety.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study found that PRP and PRP + HA were the most successful in improving function and alleviating pain after 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up. CSC, HA, PRP, and combination therapy did not result in an increase in the incidence of treatment-related side events as compared to placebo.

The Influence of Industry Affiliation on Randomized Controlled Trials of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Industry funding and corporate sponsorship have played a significant role in the advancement of orthopaedic research and technology. However, this relationship raises concerns for how industry association may bias research findings and influence clinical practice.

PURPOSE

To determine whether industry affiliation plays a role in the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating platelet-rich plasma (PRP).

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A search of the PubMed, Cochrane, and MEDLINE databases for RCTs published between 2011 and the present comparing PRP versus hyaluronic acid, corticosteroid, or placebo for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis was performed. To determine industry affiliation, the conflict of interest, funding, and disclosure sections of publications were assessed, and all authors were assessed through the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons disclosure database and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services open payments database. Studies were classified as industry affiliated (IA) or non-industry affiliated (NIA). The outcomes of each study were rated as favorable, analogous, or unfavorable according to predefined criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 37 studies (6 IA and 31 NIA) were available for analysis. Overall, 19 studies (51.4%) reported PRP as favorable compared with other treatment options, while 18 studies (48.6%) showed no significant differences between PRP and other treatment methods. There was no significant difference in qualitative conclusions between the IA and NIA groups, with the IA group having 3 favorable studies and 3 analogous studies and the NIA group having 16 favorable studies and 15 analogous studies (P = .8881). When comparing IA versus NIA studies using 6- and 12-month Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and International Knee Documentation Committee scores, there were no significant differences in outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrated that qualitative conclusions and outcome scores were found to not be associated with industry affiliation. Although the results of this study suggest that there is no influence of industry involvement on RCTs examining PRP, it is still necessary to carefully evaluate pertinent commercial affiliations when reviewing recommendations from studies before adopting new treatment approaches, such as the use of PRP for knee osteoarthritis.

Clinical Applications of PRP: Musculoskeletal Applications, Current Practices and Update

Musculoskeletal tissues are often subjected to deleterious effects stemming from traumatic injuries or degenerative pathologies, which can impede the body's natural repair response. The advent of regenerative medicine has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach in modern patient care. Among the interventions in this cutting-edge field, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and cell-based therapies, such as mesenchymal stem cells, have garnered significant attention. In this article, we endeavor to provide an overview of the current practices and recent developments in PRP therapy, with a particular emphasis on the clinical applications for musculoskeletal pathologies.

Efficacy and Safety of Hyaluronic Acid and Platelet-Rich Plasma Combination Therapy Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma Alone in Treating Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a chronic degenerative disease of the joint characterized by biochemical and biomechanical alterations of articular cartilage, degradation of the joint edge, and subchondral bone hyperplasia. Nowadays, intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has become a popular treatment modality for treating KOA. Each treatment can be used independently or in combination. However, the efficacy and safety of combination treatment are still inconclusive, and there is a lack of high-quality level 1 studies that support using combination therapy over PRP alone. Consequently, we conducted a systematic review to examine the effectiveness and safety of combining HA and PRP therapy versus using PRP therapy alone in KOA patients. Based on the most up-to-date evidence, the dual approach of PRP and HA therapy yields outcomes similar to PRP therapy alone in the short term, up to 12 months. Nonetheless, when considering longer-term results, particularly in the 24-month follow-up, dual therapy holds the potential to produce superior outcomes compared to PRP alone therapy. Additionally, in terms of safety, dual therapy has been associated with slightly fewer adverse events.

The efficacy of the leg swing and quadriceps strengthening exercises versus platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid combination therapy for knee osteoarthritis: A retrospective comparative study

The aim of this was to investigate the efficacy of physical exercise (leg swing and quadriceps strengthening exercises) versus platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) combination therapy. From January 2020 to August 2021, 106 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence Grade I-III knee osteoarthritis were divided into leg swing and quadriceps strengthening exercises (Group A) and intra-articular combination injections of PRP and HA (Group B) according to the treatment strategies. Patients in Group A received regular leg swing and quadriceps strengthening exercises for 3 months. Patients in Group B received 2 intra-articular combination injections of PRP (2 mL) and HA (2 mL) every 2 weeks. The primary outcome measures were the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score. Secondary outcomes included single leg stance test and functional activity by 2-minute walk test and time up and go test. All outcomes were evaluated at baseline and again 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The VAS and WOMAC scores were similar in both groups at 1 and 3 months after treatment (P > .05); however, Group A patients had significantly superior VAS and WOMAC scores than Group B patients at 6 and 12 months after treatment. For the single leg stance test, 2-minute walk test, and time up and go test, Group A patients were significantly superior to Group B throughout follow-up (P < .001). The leg swing and quadriceps strengthening exercises resulted in a significantly better clinical outcomes than the combined PRP and HA therapy, with a sustained lower pain score and improved quality of life, balance ability, and functional activity within 12 months.

Enhancing Pain Relief in Temporomandibular Joint Arthrocentesis: Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid Synergy

Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders present complex challenges in pain management and functional restoration. This review delves into the innovative approach of using platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) combination therapy in TMJ arthrocentesis to address these issues. The potential benefits of this approach are highlighted through an exploration of mechanisms, clinical studies, safety considerations, and future directions. PRP's regenerative properties and HA's lubrication and anti-inflammatory effects offer a comprehensive solution to multifactorial TMJ pain and dysfunction. Clinical studies reveal significant pain reduction, improved mobility, and enhanced satisfaction in patients treated with PRP and HA. Although mild and transient adverse effects have been reported, the safety profile remains favorable. While the evidence is promising, more extensive randomized controlled trials are needed to establish sustained efficacy and safety. As research evolves, collaborative efforts among clinicians and researchers are crucial in realizing the potential of PRP and HA combination therapy, ultimately providing a novel pathway to alleviate TMJ-related pain and enhance patient well-being.

Autologous microfragmented adipose tissue and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid show comparable clinical outcomes for symptomatic early knee osteoarthritis over a two-year follow-up period: a prospective randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The purpose of this prospective randomized clinical trial is to compare the clinical outcomes of three injections of leucocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) to a single dose of autologous microfragmented adipose tissue (AMAT) in patients with mild osteoarthritis at a two-year follow-up.

METHODS

Eighty symptomatic knees in fifty patients (mean age: 62.38 ± 11.88 years) with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 0 to 2 osteoarthritis were non blinded, randomly allocated into two equal groups. Group 1 consisted of 40 knees that received autologous LP-PRP + HA; Group 2 consisted of 40 knees treated with a single dose of AMAT injection. The outcomes were measured by Tegner, Marx, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, International Knee Documentation Committee, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 6 (T1), 12 (T2), and 24 (T3) months. Adverse events were recorded at each follow-up timepoint. To assess score differences among subjects of the same gender and age, a subgroup analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Both groups had significant clinical and functional improvement at 6, 12, and 24 months (p < 0.05). Comparing the two groups, the AMAT groups showed significantly higher pre-operative Marx score (3.35 ± 4.91 vs. 1.78 ± 3.91) and VAS score (5.03 ± 2.02 vs. 3.85 ± 1.68) (p < 0.05), higher VAS (3.89 ± 2.51 vs. 2.64 ± 2.00) at T2 and KOOS-ADL (79.60 ± 20.20 vs. 65.68 ± 23.62), and lower KOOS-Sports (50.30 ± 30.15 vs. 68.35 ± 30.39) at T3 (p < 0.05). No patient from either group had experienced major adverse effects. In the LP-PRP group 12 (30%) patients presented swelling, redness, and mild pain for one day after injection and two patients had synovitis for two days and required paracetamol and local ice. In AMAT group 5 (12.5%) patients had ecchymosis and bruising at the fat aspiration site for three days.

CONCLUSION

AMAT did not show significant superior clinical improvement compared with three LP-PRP combined with HA injections in terms of functional improvement at different follow-up points. Both procedures were safe with no major complications reporting good results at mid-term follow-up, improving knee function, pain, and quality of live regardless of age and gender.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I-Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial.

Efficacy of the combination therapy of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid on improving knee pain and dysfunction in patients with moderate-to-severe KOA: a protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

54% of patients with moderate-to-severe knee osteoarthritis (KOA) still reported persistent pain and functional loss after conservative treatment according to guidelines. As an emerging treatment, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been proven to significantly relieve pain and improve activity function in patients with mild-to-moderate KOA, either used alone or in combination with hyaluronic acid (HA). However, it is still unclear of its efficacy in moderate-to-severe KOA. This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy of PRP and the combination therapy of PRP and HA in patients with moderate-to-severe KOA and to explore the potential synergistic effect of PRP and HA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This triple-blind randomised controlled trial will involve a total of 162 participants with moderate-to-severe KOA from two study centres. Participants will be allocated randomly into three groups: the HA group, the PRP group and the combination (PRP+HA) group and, respectively, receive HA (2.5 mL)+saline (3 mL)/PRP (3 mL)+saline (2.5 mL)/PRP (3 mL)+HA (2.5 mL) intra-articular injection each week for 4 consecutive weeks. All of the injections will be performed under the guidance of ultrasound. The primary outcome is the change of Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index from baseline to 6 months, and secondary outcomes include the change of ultrasound images (suprapatellar bursa effusion and synovitis), Timed Up and Go test and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey. All outcomes will be evaluated at baseline and 1-month, 3-month and 6-month follow-ups. Data will be analysed on intention-to-treat principles and a per-protocol basis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This protocol was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University (reference number (2021)-02-231-02). The study results will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100050974.

Therapeutic potential and protection enhancement of mesenchymal stem cell against cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity using hyaluronic acid-chitosan nanoparticles as an adjuvant

A newly synthesized nanoplatform of hyaluronic acid and chitosan nanoparticles (HA/CNPs) was applied to improve the therapeutic efficacy and protection of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) against cisplatin (CDDP)-induced nephrotoxicity in rats. CDDP administration causes significant increases in levels of serum creatinine (SCr), urea, and KIM-1 coupled with significant albumin level falls, as indicative of acute renal dysfunction. Moreover, the level of the antioxidant enzyme (GSH) was significantly decreased, while the levels of lipid peroxidation (MDA) and inflammatory (IL-6) and apoptotic (caspase-3) markers were significantly increased, indicating a decline in the kidney's antioxidant defense and increased inflammation. In contrast, when rats were pre-treated with either MSCs or MSCs-HA/CNPs before receiving CDDP, the levels of SCr, urea, KIM-1, MDA, IL-6, and caspase-3 were significantly decreased with simultaneous significant rises in GSH and albumin, impelling a great improvement in the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory defenses of the kidney as well as its functions. Intriguingly, MSCs-HA/CNPs were more effective against caspase-3 than MSCs alone, revealing the high anti-apoptotic capability of HA/CNPs. This finding suggests that HA/CNPs could effectively protect MSCs from oxidative stress and apoptosis and thus increase their stability and longevity.

Intra-Articular Hyaluronic Acid in Osteoarthritis and Tendinopathies: Molecular and Clinical Approaches

Musculoskeletal diseases continue to rise on a global scale, causing significant socioeconomic impact and decreased quality of life. The most common disorders affecting musculoskeletal structures are osteoarthritis and tendinopathies, complicated orthopedic conditions responsible for major pain and debilitation. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) has been a safe, effective, and minimally invasive therapeutic tool for treating these diseases. Several studies from bedside to clinical practice reveal the multiple benefits of HA such as lubrication, anti-inflammation, and stimulation of cellular activity associated with proliferation, differentiation, migration, and secretion of additional molecules. Collectively, these effects have demonstrated positive outcomes that assist in the regeneration of chondral and tendinous tissues which are otherwise destroyed by the predominant catabolic and inflammatory conditions seen in tissue injury. The literature describes the physicochemical, mechanical, and biological properties of HA, their commercial product types, and clinical applications individually, while their interfaces are seldom reported. Our review addresses the frontiers of basic sciences, products, and clinical approaches. It provides physicians with a better understanding of the boundaries between the processes that lead to diseases, the molecular mechanisms that contribute to tissue repair, and the benefits of the HA types for a conscientious choice. In addition, it points out the current needs for the treatments.

A comparative study of the efficacy of intra-articular injection of different drugs in the treatment of mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) has a high clinical prevalence and frequently interferes with patients normal lives. In KOA patients, evidence suggests that intra-articular (IA) injection improves joint function and decreases discomfort. Several IA injection treatments are used in daily practice to improve symptomatic control of knee osteoarthritis, but their efficacy is frequently disputed.

METHODS

This network meta-analysis compares the efficacy of different IA injections for mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. Seven databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine disc, WanFang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched for randomized controlled trials published up to and including December 20, 2021, and final follow up indicators were used. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score change from baseline were the primary outcomes. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess the quality and risks of biases of papers. We calculated the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome. State (Version 15.1, Texas, USA) and SPSS (Version 20, Chicago, USA) was used in all statistical analyses, and Review Manager (version 5.4) was used in assessing the risks of biases.

RESULTS

Our study included 16 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1652 patients. platelet-rich plasma (PRP) IA injection therapy had the highest likelihood of being the best intervention in reducing WOMAC pain (surface under the cumulative ranking area [SUCRA] 84.7%), stiffness (SUCRA 95.1%), and function (SUCRA 98.5%) scores, according to the SUCRA. The best measures for lowering the WOMAC total and VAS scores were IA injection platelet-rich plasma-derived growth factor (SUCRA 84.9%) and hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma (SUCRA 84.9%). In the VAS score group, PRP outperformed hyaluronic acid (HA) (WMD 1.3, 95% CI 0.55-2.55) and corticosteroids (CS) (WMD 4.85, 95% CI 4.02-5.08), according to the forest map results. PRP also outperformed CS (WMD 14.76, 95% CI 12.11-17.41), ozone (WMD 9.16, 95% CI 6.89-11.43), and PRP + HA (WMD 2.18, 95% CI 0.55-3.81) in the WOMAC total score group. Furthermore, PRP outperforms other drugs in terms of reducing WOMAC function, stiffness, and function score.

CONCLUSION

In patients with mild to moderate KOA, IA injection PRP outperformed IA injection ozone, HA, CS, platelet-rich plasma-derived growth factor, and hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma in terms of pain, stiffness, and dysfunction.

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.

Synergistic effect of platelet rich plasma with hyaluronic acid injection following arthrocentesis to reduce pain and improve function in TMJ osteoarthritis

Increasing evidence supports the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, which effectively promotes cartilage repair. This study aimed to determine whether injection of PRP+HA following arthrocentesis reduces pain and improves maximum incisal opening. This was a single-blind, prospective, randomized control study. The patients were selected based on the Hegab classification: Group I: patients treated with arthrocentesis followed by a single PRP injection; Group II (Control): patients treated with arthrocentesis followed by a single HA injection; and Group III: patients treated with arthrocentesis followed by a single PRP+HA combination injection. The primary predictor variable was the medication used for injection. The primary outcome variables were the maximum voluntary mouth opening and pain index scores. The secondary outcome variable was joint sounds. All outcome variables were assessed and compared among the three groups at baseline and at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month intervals. Other variables, including patients' age and sex, were evaluated in relation to the patient outcomes. Injecting PRP+HA showed statistically significant improvement in the primary and secondary treatment outcomes over PRP or HA injection throughout the study period (P<0.005). Injection of PRP+HA following arthrocentesis had significant long-term clinical efficacy regarding pain relief that considered the main concern of both the patient and clinician.

Is the Combination of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid the Best Injective Treatment for Grade II-III Knee Osteoarthritis? A Prospective Study

Background

Knee osteoarthritis is a common disease with increasing incidence and prevalence in western countries. It can cause severe pain and functional limitations, thereby representing a threat for patients' quality of life and a burden for national health systems. Intra-articular injections with hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have been used for decades in order to reduce the symptoms caused by osteoarthritis. In recent years, a combination of HA and PRP has been introduced in clinical practice with the aim to minimize the clinical presentation of osteoarthritis and potentially delay articular degeneration.

Materials and Methods

Sixty cases with grade II-III knee osteoarthritis according to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification were included in a prospective study, focused on the evaluation of clinical and functional outcomes after intra-articular knee injections. Cases were randomly divided into three groups. Twenty cases (Group A) were injected with HA, 20 (Group B) had PRP, and the remaining 20 (Group C) received a combination of HA and PRP. Basal WOMAC score and VAS score were recorded before the treatment and repeated within 3 and 6 months after the treatment.

Results

At 6-month follow-up, Group C (PRP + HA) was the one with the lowest WOMAC and VAS mean values. It was also the only group that reported a reduction in the two values both in the first three months and in the following three months. No major complication was recorded.

Conclusion

The combination of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid can be effective in the treatment of grade II-III knee osteoarthritis in a short-to-mid-term scenario. It represents an innovative and valuable alternative to the administration of its two components alone.

Comparison of clinical efficiency between intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are non-surgical treatments for osteoarthritis (OA), but the comparison of their efficiency is still inconclusive.

Objectives

The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy of PRP and HA in the treatment of OA by meta-analysis and to explore the effects of different injection times and leukocyte concentration on the efficacy of PRP.

Design

Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted. The data were analyzed by Review Manager v5.4.1.

Data sources and methods

Articles were retrieved and screened from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. The outcome included the total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the visual analog scale (VAS), adverse events (AEs), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and the satisfaction rate.

Results

A total of 30 articles involving 2733 patients were included. The total WOMAC score and IKDC score of the PRP group were better than those of the HA group at the last follow-up time, while there was no significant difference in AEs, satisfaction rate, and VAS between the two groups. In our subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference between single-injection PRP and triple-injection PRP. Leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) was better than leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) in IKDC, but there was no significant difference between them in the other scores.

Conclusions

In the treatment of OA, compared with HA, PRP performed better in the improvement of the patient's function. There was no significant difference in VAS and AEs between the two groups, and the safety was comparable. LP-PRP looked to be superior to LR-PRP in functional recovery, but there appeared to be no significant difference in pain relief between them. There was no significant difference between single PRP and triple PRP in the subgroup analysis.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Gel Matrix (PRP-GM): Description of a New Technique

Several musculoskeletal conditions are triggered by inflammatory processes that occur along with imbalances between anabolic and catabolic events. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous product derived from peripheral blood with inherent immunomodulatory and anabolic properties. The clinical efficacy of PRP has been evaluated in several musculoskeletal conditions, including osteoarthritis, tendinopathy, and osteonecrosis. When used in combination with hyaluronic acid (HA), a common treatment alternative, the regenerative properties of PRP are significantly enhanced and may provide additional benefits in terms of clinical outcomes. Recently, a new PRP-derived product has been reported in the literature and is being referred to as "plasma gel". Plasma gels are obtained by polymerizing plasmatic proteins, which form solid thermal aggregates cross-linked with fibrin networks. Plasma gels are considered to be a rich source of growth factors and provide chemotactic, migratory, and proliferative properties. Additionally, clot formation and the associated fibrinolytic reactions play an additional role in tissue repair. There are only a few scientific articles focusing on plasma gels. Historically, they have been utilized in the fields of aesthetics and dentistry. Given that the combination of three products (PRP, HA, and plasma gel) could enhance tissue repair and wound healing, in this technical note, we propose a novel regenerative approach, named "PRP-HA cellular gel matrix" (PRP-GM), in which leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) is mixed with a plasma gel (obtained by heating the plasma up) and HA in one syringe using a three-way stopcock. The final product contains a fibrin-albumin network entangled with HA's polymers, in which the cells and biomolecules derived from PRP are attached and released gradually as fibrinolytic reactions and hyaluronic acid degradation occur. The presence of leukocytes, especially monocytes and macrophages, promotes tissue regeneration, as type 2 macrophages (M2) possess an anti-inflammatory feature. In addition, HA promotes the viscosuplementation of the joint and induces an anti-inflammatory response, resulting in pain relief. This unique combination of biological molecules may contribute to the optimization of regenerative protocols suitable for the treatment of degenerative musculoskeletal diseases.

Comparison of Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection in Knee Osteoarthritis: Do the Results Differ in Geriatric Patients? A Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

The intra-articular application of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid have gained popularity as treatment options for knee osteoarthritis. Although intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injections have been suggested to be superior to hyaluronic acid injections in the general population of patients with osteoarthritis, the effect of older age on both treatment options has not been thoroughly evaluated. Therefore, this study compared the results of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid injections in geriatric patients with knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

This study evaluated a total of 226 patients treated with intra-articular injections for knee osteoarthritis. The patients were divided into two groups: those who received platelet-rich plasma and those who received hyaluronic acid. All patients attended follow-up appointments at the 1st, 3rd, and 6th months.

RESULTS

After applying the exclusion criteria, this study included 202 patients. The clinical results revealed significant improvements in all parameters compared to the baseline assessments in both groups (p&lt;0.05). The inter-group comparisons indicated significantly lower pain in the hyaluronic acid recipients at the first and third months compared to those in patients receiving platelet-rich plasma (p&lt;0.05).

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid injections appear to be effective in patients with knee osteoarthritis. In the geriatric patient population, hyaluronic acid showed superior effects on pain compared to platelet-rich plasma, contrary to the results in the general population.

Is platelet-rich plasma better than hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

Due to the complicated surgical procedure of knee arthroplasty and low effectivity of hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, various studies highly recommend the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP). However, some studies also reported lower efficacy and limited use of PRP.

Aim

To analyze systematically the different randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effectiveness of HA vs. PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Material and methods

A systematic literature review was conducted using Medline and Central databases for RCTs about the comparison of HA vs. PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Studies were included as per the PICOS criteria and relevant event data were extracted. Risk of bias was analyzed and a random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled odds ratio and risk ratio using RevMan software.

Results

A total of 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis from year 2000 to 2021 including 613 patients. The current meta-analysis has a low risk of publication bias and we obtained the pooled odds ratio (OR) of 2.55 (95% CI: 1.35-4.84) with a τ ² value of 1.01, χ ² value of 52.79, I² value of 77%, Z value of 2.87 and p-value < 0.00001. The pooled risk ratio was 1.34 (95% CI: 1.09-1.65) with a τ ² value of 0.09, χ ² value of 73.48, I² value of 84%, Z value of 2.80 and p-value < 0.00001.

Conclusions

The current meta-analysis highly recommends the use of PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.

Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid versus platelet-rich plasma alone for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

To systematically evaluate the curative efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), comparing with platelet-rich plasma alone.

Methods

Cochrane Library, PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and Embase were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies regarding the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) comparing with platelet-rich plasma alone before January 15, 2022. The methodological quality of the ultimately included studies was assessed comprehensively, and meta-analysis was implemented using RevMan 5.3 software.

Results

Thirteen articles (9 RCTs, 4 cohort studies), including 1118 patients, were covered. There was no significant difference between the PRP + HA therapy and PRP-alone therapy in VAS scores at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months, WOMAC total scores at 3 months and KOOS at 1 month and 6 months. Compared with PRP-alone therapy, PRP + HA therapy was associated with significantly better improvement in VAS scores at 1 month, WOMAC total scores at 6 months, KOOS at 3 months, IKDC scores at 6 months and Lequesne index scores at 3 and 6 months. However, the smallest treatment effect of VAS scores, WOMAC total scores, KOOS and IKDC scores did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). However, PRP + HA therapy got a greater reduction in the rate of adverse events, compared with PRP-alone therapy.

Conclusion

The results of this meta-analysis indicated that PRP + HA therapy was not found to be superior to PRP-alone therapy in pain relief and function improvement for patients with KOA. However, combined PRP with HA injections was generally safer than PRP injections alone, by assessing the incidence of adverse events.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-022-03398-6.

Comparing efficacy of a single intraarticular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) combined with different hyaluronans for knee osteoarthritis: a randomized-controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Intraarticular plasma-rich platelet (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) have each been shown to be effective for treating knee osteoarthritis (OA). Evidence supporting the combination therapy is controversial. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of a single intraarticular PRP injection combined with different HAs in patients with knee OA.

METHODS

In this prospective randomized-controlled trial, 99 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 2 knee OA with average knee pain ≥ 30 mm on a 0-100 mm pain visual analog scale (VAS) were randomized into two groups. The PRP + Artz group received a single intraarticular HA (Artz, 2.5 ml, 10 mg/ml) followed by 3 ml PRP (n = 50). The PRP + HYAJOINT Plus group received a single intraarticular cross-linked HA (HYAJOINT Plus, 3 ml, 20 mg/ml) followed by 3 ml PRP (n = 49). All patients were evaluated before and at 1, 3 and 6 months after injections. The primary outcome was the VAS pain reduction from baseline at 6 months. Secondary outcome measures included Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Lequesne index, single leg stance (SLS) test and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Ninety-five patients were analyzed by intention-to-treat analysis. Both groups improved significantly in VAS pain, WOMAC, Lequesne index and SLS at 1, 3 and 6 months post intervention (p < 0.05). Between-group comparisons showed no significant differences at most follow-up time points, except better improvements in Lequesne index at 1 month (p = 0.003) and WOMAC-stiffness score at 6 months (p = 0.020) in the PRP + Artz group, and superiority in SLS at 1, 3 and 6 months in the PRP+ HYAJOINT Plus group (p < 0.001, p = 0.003 and p = 0.004). Additional Johnson-Neyman analyses showed that among the patients with baseline WOMAC-pain score > 8.5, WOMAC-function score > 21.7 and WOMAC-total score > 32.0, respectively, those treated with PRP + HYAJOINT Plus injections had better effects in WOMAC-pain, WOMAC-function and WOMAC-total scores than those treated with PRP + Artz at 3 months postinjection (p < 0.05). Both groups reported high satisfaction. No serious adverse events occurred during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

A single PRP injection combined with Artz or HYAJOINT Plus is effective and safe for 6 months in patients with knee OA. Both injection regimens are potential treatment options for knee OA. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04931719), retrospectively. Date of registration 18/6/2021.

NAME OF TRIAL REGISTRY

Comparing efficacy of single PRP combined with different hyaluronans for knee osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level 1.

Comparative Efficacy of the Stromal-Vascular Fraction Cells of Lipoaspirate and Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Gonarthrosis: Results of an Interim Analysis

The use of cell technologies, in particular the stromal-vascular fraction of adipose tissue, is a new direction in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the weight-bearing joints. Stromal-vascular fraction cells have anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects and are able to differentiate into connective tissue cells, including cartilage, tendons, and ligaments. Our clinical study showed the safety and good tolerability of intra-articular administration of autologous stromal-vascular fraction cells in 16 patients with severe manifestations of osteoarthritis. Single administration of stromal-vascular fraction cells led to more pronounced and stable (up to 12 months) clinical improvement in the main symptoms of the disease, including pain and functional activity of the affected joints, in comparison with intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid (10 patients of the comparison group).

A comprehensive review of intraarticular knee injection therapy, geniculate injections, and peripheral nerve stimulation for knee pain in clinical practice

The knee is the most common joint in adults associated with morbidity. Many pathologies are associated with knee damage, such as gout or rheumathoid arthritis, but the primary condition is osteoarthritis (OA). Not only can osteoarthritis cause significant pain, but it also can result in signficant disability as well. Treatment for this condition varies, starting off with oral analgesics and physical therapy to surgical total knee replacmenet. In the gamut of this various treatments, a conservative approach has included intra articular steroid injections. With time, researchers and clinicians determined that other components injected to the knee may additionally provide relief of this condition. In this investigation, we describe different types of knee injections such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), hyaluronic acid, stem cells, and prolotherapy. Additionally, we describe the role of geniculate knee injections, radiofrequency, and periopheral nerve stimulation. These treatments should be considered for patients with knee pain refractory to conservative therapies.

The Mechanism of Action between Pulsed Radiofrequency and Orthobiologics: Is There a Synergistic Effect?

Radiofrequency energy is a common treatment modality for chronic pain. While there are different forms of radiofrequency-based therapeutics, the common concept is the generation of an electromagnetic field in the applied area, that can result in neuromodulation (pulsed radiofrequency—PRF) or ablation. Our specific focus relates to PRF due to the possibility of modulation that is in accordance with the mechanisms of action of orthobiologics. The proposed mechanism of action of PRF pertaining to pain relief relies on a decrease in pro-inflammatory cytokines, an increase in cytosolic calcium concentration, a general effect on the immune system, and a reduction in the formation of free radical molecules. The primary known properties of orthobiologics constitute the release of growth factors, a stimulus for endogenous repair, analgesia, and improvement of the function of the injured area. In this review, we described the mechanism of action of both treatments and pertinent scientific references to the use of the combination of PRF and orthobiologics. Our hypothesis is a synergic effect with the combination of both techniques which could benefit patients and improve the life quality.

Are leukocyte-poor or multiple injections of platelet-rich plasma more effective than hyaluronic acid for knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained popularity as a treatment option for knee osteoarthritis; however, its efficacy remains controversial. The optimal leukocyte concentration and number of injections have not been well investigated. This study was, therefore, designed to provide clinical evidence on the leukocyte concentration and number of intra-articular injections of PRP via a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus databases were searched and RCTs comparing PRP and hyaluronic acid (HA) for treating knee osteoarthritis were included. Clinical outcomes, including visual analog scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and adverse reactions, were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 138 studies were screened, of which 21 level 1 RCTs (2086 knees; 1077 PRP and 1009 HA) were included. PRPs showed significant improvement in pain according to the VAS score compared to HA at 6 and 12 months, regardless of leukocyte concentration. Both single and multiple injections of PRP improved pain better than HA at 12 months. Regarding function, both single and multiple injections of leukocyte-poor PRP and leukocyte-rich PRP led to significantly better improvement in total WOMAC score compared with HA at 6 months. There was no significant difference in procedure-related knee pain or swelling between the PRP and HA groups. Leukocyte-rich PRP had a significantly higher odds ratio for procedure-related knee pain or swelling compared to HA (odds ratio, 3.3 [95% confidence interval, 1.1-10.2], P = .037).

CONCLUSION

Based on evidence from Level 1 studies, intra-articular injection of PRP improves pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis for up to 12 months and is superior to HA, regardless of leukocyte concentration or number of injections. The findings of this study support the routine clinical use of intra-articular injections of PRP for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, regardless of the type and frequency of PRP injection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Meta-analysis of level I studies.

Consensus Guidelines on Interventional Therapies for Knee Pain (STEP Guidelines) from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience

Knee pain is second only to the back as the most commonly reported area of pain in the human body. With an overall prevalence of 46.2%, its impact on disability, lost productivity, and cost on healthcare cannot be overlooked. Due to the pervasiveness of knee pain in the general population, there are no shortages of treatment options available for addressing the symptoms. Ranging from physical therapy and pharmacologic agents to interventional pain procedures to surgical options, practitioners have a wide array of options to choose from – unfortunately, there is no consensus on which treatments are “better” and when they should be offered in comparison to others. While it is generally accepted that less invasive treatments should be offered before more invasive ones, there is a lack of agreement on the order in which the less invasive are to be presented. In an effort to standardize the treatment of this extremely prevalent pathology, the authors present an all-encompassing set of guidelines on the treatment of knee pain based on an extensive literature search and data grading for each of the available alternative that will allow practitioners the ability to compare and contrast each option.

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.

Single Injection of Cross-Linked Hyaluronate in Knee Osteoarthritis: A 52-Week Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: to compare the 52-week effectiveness and safety between HYAJOINT Plus (HJP) and Durolane in knee osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. Methods: consecutive patients received a single injection of 3 mL HJP or Durolane. The primary outcome was a visual analog scale (VAS) pain measurement at 26 weeks post-injection. Secondary outcomes included other clinical, satisfaction, and safety assessments for 52 weeks. Results: 142 patients were equally randomized. At week 26, the HJP group had less VAS pain than the Durolane group (18.1 ± 9.5 versus 24.4 ± 14.0, p = 0.001). Both groups showed improvement in their VAS pain and stiffness scores, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and total scores for 52 weeks after injection (p < 0.001). However, the HJP group showed lower VAS pain and stiffness scores, reduced WOMAC pain and stiffness scores, a shorter Timed “Up & Go” (TUG) time, and a higher satisfaction score than the Durolane group for 39 weeks (p < 0.05). Only mild and self-limited adverse events occurred (40.8%). Conclusion: While a single injection of either HJP or Durolane is safe and effective for at least 52 weeks, HJP provided superior improvement in terms of VAS pain and stiffness scores, WOMAC pain and stiffness scores, and satisfaction score within 39 weeks of treatment.

Efficacy of Oxygen-Ozone Therapy and Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Context

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effect of the intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and oxygen-ozone therapy and provided an evidence-based methodology to treat KOA.

Method

Databases, including Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE, were searched. The retrieval period was before 2021. Two reviewers performed the process of screening and data extraction. Mean differences were calculated [95% confidence interval (CI)] with an inverse-variance method and fixed effect model. Meta-analysis was performed using the latest version of STATA version 16.

Results

A total of 12 studies out of 769 articles were evaluated. The mean difference of visual analog scale score between ozone and control groups in the first month after injection was -0.02 (MD, -0.02; 95% CI: -0.32, 0.28; P < 0.05). Mean differences of WOMAC pain, stiffness, and physical function score between baseline and after PRP were -3.53 (MD: -3.53; 95% CI: -4.04, -3.02; P = 0.00), -0.60 (MD: -0.60; 95% CI: -4.0 - 0.864, -0.34; P = 0.00), and -5.96 (MD: -5.96; 95% CI: -7.83, -4.09; P = 0.00).

Conclusions

Our results showed that to treat knee osteoarthritis, using PRP for a longer period of 6 - 12 months after the intervention shows better clinical results, while oxygen-ozone therapy has short-term results.

Efficacy of a Novel Intra-Articular Administration of Platelet-Rich Plasma One-Week Prior to Hyaluronic Acid versus Platelet-Rich Plasma Alone in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial

Recent studies have suggested that the combined injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) may have additive benefits for knee osteoarthritis over PRP alone, but there is insufficient evidence to support this combined injection. Moreover, the simultaneous injection of PRP and HA may offset the combined effect. Hence, the aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to assess their combined efficacy with a novel injection protocol. Forty-six study subjects with unilateral knee osteoarthritis were randomized to receive either a single-dose injection of HA (intervention group) or normal saline (control group) 1 week after a single-dose injection of leukocyte-poor PRP. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and static balance and the risk of falls measured by Biodex Balance System were, respectively, the primary and secondary outcome measures. Evaluations were performed at baseline, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-injection. The intervention group exhibited significant declines in WOMAC pain, stiffness, and total scores, as well as static balance, compared to the control group (p < 0.05). These randomized double-blind control trials, with novel protocol of intra-articular injection of PRP 1-week prior to HA, provide greater symptom relief and improve static balance compared to PRP alone in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Osteoarthritis of the Knee in Middle-age Athletes: Many Measures are Practiced, but Lack Sound Scientific Evidence

Osteoarthritis of the knee generally affects individuals from the fifth decade, the typical age of middle-age athletes. In the early stages, management is conservative and multidisciplinary. It is advisable to avoid sports with high risk of trauma, but it is important that patients continue to be physically active. Conservative management offers several options; however, it is unclear which ones are really useful. This narrative review briefly reports the conservative options for which there is no evidence of effectiveness, or there is only evidence of short-term effectiveness.

Infiltração intraarticular de plasma rico em plaquetas versus ácido hialurônico em pacientes com osteoartrose primária do joelho: Ensaio clínico randomizado com resultados preliminares

Objective  The present study aimed to compare the effects of intraarticular infiltration of platelet-rich plasma with those of hyaluronic acid infiltration in the treatment of patients with primary knee osteoarthritis.

Methods  A randomized clinical trial was conducted with 29 patients who received an intraarticular infiltration with hyaluronic acid (control group) or platelet-rich plasma. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale for pain and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire before and after the intervention. In addition, the posttreatment adverse effects were recorded. Categorical variables were analyzed using the chi-square and Fisher exact tests, whereas continuous variables were analyzed using the Student t test, analysis of variance, and the Wilcoxon test; all calculations were performed with the Stats package of the R software.

Results  An independent analysis of each group revealed a statistical difference within the first months, with improvement in the pain and function scores, but worsening on the 6 ^th month after the procedure. There was no difference in the outcomes between the groups receiving hyaluronic acid or platelet-rich plasma. There was no serious adverse effect or allergic reaction during the entire follow-up period.

Conclusion  Intraarticular infiltration with hyaluronic acid or platelet-rich plasma in patients with primary knee gonarthrosis resulted in temporary improvement of functional symptoms and pain. There was no difference between interventions.

Motor-Sparing Neural Ablation with Modified Techniques for Knee Pain: Case Series on Knee Osteoarthritis and Updated Review of the Underlying Anatomy and Available Techniques

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is ubiquitous. However, effective pain managements for patients with grades 3 or 4 KOA for whom conservative treatments are unsuccessful, but for whom surgery is not an option, remain lacking. This case series presented two motor-sparing interventional pain treatment modalities for five such patients. Three of the patients with a mean total WOMAC score of 41 underwent thermal radiofrequency (RF) ablation using a modified motor-sparing approach. One-week and four-week post-RF, the total score dropped to 27 (by 34%) and 19 (dropped 53.7%), respectively. Two other similar patients with a mean total WOMAC score 96 underwent chemical neurolysis using a motor-sparing approach with modified landmarks. The WOMAC score dropped to 58.5 (by 39.1%) and 49 (dropped by 49.0%), one-week and four-week postchemical neurolysis, respectively. A narrative review of the currently available approaches is also provided, with the conclusion that neural ablation using the modified landmarks approach may achieve better pain control and preserve the motor functions for patients with severe KOA for whom conservative treatment was unsuccessful and who are not candidates for surgery.

Management of osteoarthritis: From drug molecules to nano/micromedicines

With the change in lifestyle and aging of the population, osteoarthritis (OA) is emerging as a major medical burden globally. OA is a chronic inflammatory and degenerative disease initially manifesting with joint pain and eventually leading to permanent disability. To date, there are no drugs available for the definitive treatment of osteoarthritis and most therapies have been palliative in nature by alleviating symptoms rather than curing the disease. This coupled with the vague understanding of the early symptoms and methods of diagnosis so that the disease continues as a global problem and calls for concerted research efforts. A cascade of events regulates the onset and progression of osteoarthritis starting with the production of proinflammatory cytokines, including interleukin (IL)‐1β, IL‐6, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)‐α; catabolic enzymes, such as matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs)‐1, ‐3, and ‐13, culminating into cartilage breakdown, loss of lubrication, pain, and inability to load the joint. Although intra‐articular injections of small and macromolecules are often prescribed to alleviate symptoms, low residence times within the synovial cavity severely impair their efficacy. This review will briefly describe the factors dictating the onset and progression of the disease, present the current clinically approved methods for its treatment and diagnosis, and finally elaborate on the main challenges and opportunities for the application of nano/micromedicines in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Thus, future treatment regimens will benefit from simultaneous consideration of the mechanobiological, the inflammatory, and tissue degradation aspects of the disease.

This article is categorized under:

Nanotechnology Approaches to Biology > Nanoscale Systems in Biology

Implantable Materials and Surgical Technologies > Nanotechnology in Tissue Repair and Replacement

Intra-Articular Injection of Platelet-Rich Plasma Is More Effective than Hyaluronic Acid or Steroid Injection in the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective, Randomized, Triple-Parallel Clinical Trial

Purpose: To prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with hyaluronic acid (HA) and glucocorticosteroid (CS) control groups for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) in a randomized, triple-parallel, single-center clinical trial. Methods: A total of 75 patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups receiving a single injection of either leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (25 knees), hyaluronic acid (25 knees), or glucocorticosteroid (25 knees). The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score was collected at baseline and 6, 12, and 26 weeks after treatment. Results: After 6 weeks of PRP administration, a decrease in the mean WOMAC value was observed in all three study groups. Three months after administration, the greatest decrease in the mean WOMAC value was obtained in the PRP group. The results in the HA and CS groups were similar (p = 0.681). In the one-way analysis of variance and post hoc analysis using the HSD Tukey test, a significantly greater improvement was shown by comparing the PRP and CS groups (p = 0.001), and the PRP and HA groups (p = 0.010). After intra-articular injection of CS, the reduction in pain was greatest 6 weeks after administration, and the mean value was the lowest among all groups. During subsequent visits, the value of the pain subscale increased, and after 6 months, it was the highest among the studied groups. Using the Wilcoxon paired test, no PRP effect was found to reduce stiffness at the 6-month follow-up (p = 0.908). Functional improvement was achieved in all groups, i.e., a decrease in the value of this subscale 6 months after administration. The largest decrease was seen in the group that received PRP (p < 0.001) and then in the HA group. The smallest decrease among the investigated methods was shown in the CS group. Conclusions: Intra-articular injections of PRP can provide clinically significant functional improvement for at least 6 months in patients with mild to moderate KOA which is superior to HA or CS injections.

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.

The role of platelet-rich plasma in the mild and severe stages of atherosclerotic disease in mice

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has a high concentration of growth factors (GFs), which present a therapeutic wound healing effect. Despite having been correlated with an immunomodulatory function, the administration of PRP has not yet been investigated in atherosclerosis models. Aim: Evaluate the effect of lyophilized PRP on atherosclerosis in mice models through serum analysis. Methods: Animals received a high-fat diet for disease induction and a weekly PRP retro-orbital application. Effectiveness was evaluated by measuring inflammatory markers in plasma following the treatment of mice with either PRP or saline solution. Results: PRP was well characterized for platelet and GF concentrations; the atherosclerotic profile was established. Cytokine concentrations were altered after PRP applications. Conclusion: PRP could modulate the inflammatory pattern in the early stages of atherosclerosis.

Treating Knee Osteoarthritis With Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid Combination Therapy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are injectable treatments for knee osteoarthritis. The focus of previous studies has compared their efficacy against each other as monotherapy. However, a new trend of combining these 2 injections has emerged in an attempt to have a synergistic effect.

PURPOSE

To systematically review the clinical literature examining the combined use of PRP + HA.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using PubMed and Embase. The following search terms were used: knee osteoarthritis AND platelet rich plasma AND hyaluronic acid. The review was performed by 2 independent reviewers who applied the inclusion/exclusion criteria and independently extracted data, including methodologic scoring, PRP preparation technique, HA composition, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

RESULTS

A total of 431 articles were screened, 12 reviewed in full, and 8 included in the final analysis: 2 case series, 3 comparative, and 3 randomized studies. Average follow-up was 9 months. The modified Coleman Methodology Score was 38.13 ± 13.1 (mean ± SD). Combination therapy resulted in improved PROs in all studies. Of the comparative and randomized studies, 2 demonstrated that combination therapy was superior to HA alone. However, when PRP alone was used as the control arm (4 studies), combination therapy was not superior to PRP alone.

CONCLUSION

Combination therapy with PRP + HA improves PROs and is superior to HA alone but is not superior to PRP alone.