Comparison of Efficiency Between Corticosteroid and Platelet Rich Plasma Injection Therapies in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

Corticosteroid injections for knee osteoarthritis offer clinical benefits similar to hyaluronic acid and lower than platelet-rich plasma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Intra-articular corticosteroid (CS) injections for knee osteoarthritis (OA) management are endorsed by several scientific societies, while the use of hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is more controversial. Aim of the study was to quantify and compare the clinical effectiveness of CS injections with respect to HA and PRP in patients with knee OA.

Methods

The search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science following the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the comparison of CS injections and HA or PRP injections for the treatment of knee OA were included. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was used to interpret the clinical relevance of the improvements at different follow-ups up to 12 months. The study quality was assessed using the Cochrane RoB-2 tool and the GRADE guidelines.

Results

Thirty-five RCTs were included (3348 patients). The meta-analysis comparing CS and HA revealed no difference in terms of WOMAC improvement, while HA showed superior VAS pain improvement at long-term follow-up (P = 0.011), without reaching the MCID. PRP offered a superior WOMAC improvement compared to CS at short- (P = 0.002), mid- (P < 0.001, exceeding the MCID), and long-term (P < 0.001, exceeding the MCID) follow-ups. PRP offered a superior VAS improvement at mid- (P < 0.001, exceeding the MCID) and long-term (P = 0.023) follow-ups.

Conclusion

CS injections for knee OA offer similar results to HA and PRP only at short term, while there is an overall superiority of PRP at longer follow-ups. This difference is not only statistically significant but also clinically relevant in favour of PRP.

The varying clinical effectiveness of single, three and five intraarticular injections of platelet-rich plasma in knee osteoarthritis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the variations in clinical effectiveness among patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis who underwent intra-articular administration of platelet-rich plasma using single, triple, or quintuple injections.

METHODS

One hundred twenty patients with grade I-III knee osteoarthritis were randomly assigned to three groups: PRP1 group, who received a single injection of platelet-rich plasma; PRP3 group, who received three PRP injections one week apart; PRP5 group, who received five PRP injections one week apart. The patients' conditions were evaluated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index-VA3.1 version (WOMAC-VA3.1) at baseline and 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks 52 weeks follow up.

RESULTS

Out of the total participants, 106 patients (30 males and 76 females) completed the study. The primary outcome measure, WOMAC pain score, registered significant improvements across all groups when compared to pre-treatment levels. However, the application of 3 and 5 injections of platelet-rich plasma was substantially more effective than that of a single injection in reducing knee pain and stiffness, as well as enhancing physical function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. No statistically discernable difference was observed between PRP3 and PRP5 at all follow-up intervals, and there was no discernable difference between 3 and 5 PRP injections either. Mild side effects occurred in all three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of three or five injections of platelet-rich plasma is safe, substantially more effective than single injections, and leads to remarkable clinical improvement by significantly reducing knee pain, improving joint stiffness, and enhancing physical function in patients with grade I-III knee osteoarthritis. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in the efficacy of three or five injections. Therefore, we recommend using three injections of PRP in the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis of grade I-III.

The Efficacy of Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection Versus Corticosteroid Injection in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Prospective Comparative Analysis

Background Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is the most typical cause of knee pain and impairment worldwide. It is typified by slow and progressive degeneration of the articular cartilage of the knee joint. Although KOA is being managed with a variety of therapies, the comparison of the effectiveness of different intra-articular injections in KOA treatment in Pakistan is still not thoroughly investigated. Therefore, the purpose of this current study is to compare the efficacy of intra-articular administration of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroids (CSs) in the treatment of KOA. Methods This prospective comparative study was performed among one hundred patients diagnosed with KOA in Benazir Bhutto Hospital, Rawalpindi, for one year from April 2022 to March 2023. Specified inclusion and exclusion criteria were employed for patient enrollment. Patients were divided into two equal groups through simple random sampling. Group A patients received an intra-articular injection of PRP solution whereas group B patients received an intra-articular injection of CSs. Informed consent and ethical approval were also acquired prior to data collection. A self-designed proforma based on interviews was used to collect data. The data analysis in Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, IBM Corp., Version 25.0, Armonk, NY) was carried out via descriptive statistics and an independent t-test. Results Women (N=71, 71%) had a higher prevalence of KOA than men (N=29, 29%). The means of study variables like age, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score were 56.10 ± 8.70 years, 8.08 ± 1.6, and 70.08 ± 8.76 respectively. The frequency of KOA on the right side was 62% (N=62) while it was 38% (N=38) on the left side. In the study population, 69% (N=69) patients had grade II KOA, and 31% (N=31) patients had grade III KOA. At the first-month, second-month, and third-month follow-up visits, there were statistically significant differences in the mean scores of the WOMAC and VAS between the study groups. However, at the first-month follow-up visit, mean scores of VAS and WOMAC were lower in group B than in group A while these were lower in group A as compared to group B, at the second-month and third-month follow-up appointments. Conclusions Intra-articular infiltration of both PRP and CSs was efficacious in the treatment of KOA-related pain and functional limitations; however, overall improvement in the PRP group was higher than CS group.

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.

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.

Three Doses of Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy Are More Effective Than One Dose of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of a single dose of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with multiple doses of PRP therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from database inception to May 2022; in addition, the gray literature and bibliographic references were searched. Only randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of a single dose versus multiple doses of PRP for KOA were included. Literature retrieval and data extraction were conducted by 3 independent reviewers. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on type of study, research subjects, intervention, outcome, language, and availability of data. Pooled analyses of visual analog scale (VAS) scores, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index scores, and adverse events were conducted.

RESULTS

Seven studies (all randomized controlled trials) of high methodologic quality involving 575 patients were included. The ages of the patients included in this study ranged from 20 to 80 years, and the sex ratio was balanced. Triple-dose PRP therapy resulted in significantly better VAS scores compared with single-dose PRP therapy at 12 months (P < .0001), with no significant change in VAS scores between double-dose PRP and single-dose PRP at 12 months. Regarding adverse events, double-dose (P = .28) and triple-dose (P = .24) therapy showed no significant differences in safety from single-dose therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is a paucity of large high-quality Level I studies, current best evidence suggests that 3 doses of PRP for KOA are more effective than 1 dose of PRP at providing pain relief up to 1 year after administration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, systematic review of Level II studies.

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.

Current Status and Advancements in Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as a treatment modality has been around for the last four decades, but only truly gained popularity over the last 10 to 15 years in medicine, in a variety of fields ranging from regenerative medicine to infertility treatment. It has gained popularity, especially in treating musculoskeletal conditions where the bulk of research has been performed and published. There is level I evidence available supporting its efficacy in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), epicondylitis, bursitis, compressive neuropathy, plantar fasciitis, muscular injuries and osteochondral lesions. Most published research with regards to PRP has been focused on knee OA (limited research in shoulder, elbow, and foot and ankle OA), lateral epicondylitis and carpal tunnel syndrome, whereas spinal and hand conditions have limited research available. Tendinopathies and partial tendon tears have conflicting evidence available, with level I evidence supporting PRP's use in rotator cuff tendinopathies and tears, with contradictory level I evidence discouraging its use in patella and Achilles tendinopathies and tears. The available evidence regarding the use of PRP continues to produce conflicting results, but despite this, there is an ongoing increase in the popularity and use of PRP in patients with musculoskeletal conditions.

What are the unsupervised exercise adherence rates in clinical trials for knee osteoarthritis? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Exercise is an effective intervention for knee osteoarthritis (OA), and unsupervised exercise programs should be a common adjunct to most treatments. However, it is unknown if current clinical trials are capturing information regarding adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the extent and quality of reporting of unsupervised exercise adherence in clinical trials for knee OA.

METHODS

Reviewers searched five databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Medline (OVID), EMBASE and Cochrane). Randomized controlled trials where participants with knee OA engaged in an unsupervised exercise program were included. The extent to which exercise adherence was monitored and reported was assessed and findings were subgrouped according to method for tracking adherence. The types of adherence measurement categories were synthesized. A quality assessment was completed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scores.

RESULTS

Of 3622 abstracts screened, 176 studies met criteria for inclusion. PEDro scores for study quality ranged from two to ten (mean=6.3). Exercise adherence data was reported in 72 (40.9%) studies. Twenty-six (14.8%) studies only mentioned collection of adherence. Adherence rates ranged from 3.7 to 100% in trials that reported adherence. For 18 studies (10.2%) that tracked acceptable adherence, there was no clear superiority in treatment effect based on adherence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical trials for knee OA do not consistently collect or report adherence with unsupervised exercise programs. Slightly more than half of the studies reported collecting adherence data while only 40.9% reported findings with substantial heterogeneity in tracking methodology. The clinical relevance of these programs cannot be properly contextualized without this information.

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.

Comparative Efficacy of Intra-Articular Injection, Physical Therapy, and Combined Treatments on Pain, Function, and Sarcopenia Indices in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is associated with a high risk of sarcopenia. Both intra-articular injections (IAIs) and physical therapy (PT) exert benefits in KOA. This network meta-analysis (NMA) study aimed to identify comparative efficacy among the combined treatments (IAI+PT) in patients with KOA. Seven electronic databases were systematically searched from inception until January 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the effects of IAI+PT vs. IAI or PT alone in patients with KOA. All RCTs which had treatment arms of IAI agents (autologous conditioned serum, botulinum neurotoxin type A, corticosteroids, dextrose prolotherapy (DxTP), hyaluronic acid, mesenchymal stem cells (MSC), ozone, platelet-rich plasma, plasma rich in growth factor, and stromal vascular fraction of adipose tissue) in combination with PT (exercise therapy, physical agent modalities (electrotherapy, shockwave therapy, thermal therapy), and physical activity training) were included in this NMA. A control arm receiving placebo IAI or usual care, without any other IAI or PT, was used as the reference group. The selected RCTs were analyzed through a frequentist method of NMA. The main outcomes included pain, global function (GF), and walking capability (WC). Meta-regression analyses were performed to explore potential moderators of the treatment efficacy. We included 80 RCTs (6934 patients) for analyses. Among the ten identified IAI+PT regimens, DxTP plus PT was the most optimal treatment for pain reduction (standard mean difference (SMD) = -2.54) and global function restoration (SMD = 2.28), whereas MSC plus PT was the most effective for enhancing WC recovery (SMD = 2.54). More severe KOA was associated with greater changes in pain (β = -2.52) and WC (β = 2.16) scores. Combined IAI+PT treatments afford more benefits than do their corresponding monotherapies in patients with KOA; however, treatment efficacy is moderated by disease severity.

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.

Intra-articular platelet-rich plasma vs. corticosteroid injections efficacy in knee osteoarthritis treatment: a systematic review

Osteoarthritis (OA) affects the entire joint structure. The most injured joints are the hands, knees, and hips. OA is a common disease all over the world, and a cause of disability in the elderly; hence, medicine is facing a steady challenge to find effective therapeutics to relieve the pain, improving symptoms for a better quality of life for patients.

Purpose

To compare the results, in the recent literature, of intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroids (CSs) in osteoarthritic knees at early and mid-term postinjection.

Methods

A PubMed and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) database search was performed. Initial screening yielded 108 randomized controlled trials, 17 results, and 17 others were added after updates. The final review includes nine randomized control trials, with outcome evaluating of knee OA by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Osteoarthritis Index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scale Index, and Visual Analog Scale.

Results

PRP and CS intra-articular injections both are safe and effective treatments in knee OA for alleviating pain, and improving symptoms. It seems that PRP injections have prolonged and shown better improvement in some studies. However, the results do not prefer one method over the other.

Conclusion

Up till now, it is not easy to draw firm conclusions about prioritizing PRP or CS injections for knee OA treatment due to the limitation of this review.

Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: An Updated Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Use of "orthobiologics" continues to expand for patients who have knee osteoarthritis (OA). We sought to perform a systemic review of biologic therapies relative to comparative groups, including the following: (1) platelet-rich plasma (PRP); (2) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs); (3) adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs); and (4) amniotic-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs). We assessed the following: (1) study methodologies; (2) cell preparations and formulations; (3) patient-reported outcome scores (PROMs); and (4) structural changes.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were queried (2013-2021) to conduct a systematic review of biologic therapies for knee OA, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eighty-two studies were included: PRP (51); BMSC (15); ADSC (11); and AMSC (5). Study evaluations were made using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. PROMs included the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and the Visual Analog Scale. Structural change evaluations included ultrasounds, radiographs, or magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

PRP comprised a majority of the studies (n = 51), most with "fair" to "good" Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Studies had variable cell preparations and formulations, with comparison study results leading to inconsistent PROMs, and structural changes. A limited number of studies were included for BMSC, ADSC, and AMSC, all with similar findings to PRP.

CONCLUSION

Available literature evaluating "orthobiologics" for knee OA remain nonsuperior to comparison cohorts. Higher level studies with larger sample sizes and improved methodologies are warranted to suggest differences. Despite a growth of "orthobiologics" in clinics, this updated systematic review highlights the uncertain efficacy for use in knee OA.

Effects of Intra-articular Platelet Rich Plasma on Cartilage Thickness, Clinical and Functional Outcomes in Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis of the knee is one of the most common degenerative diseases and the fourth leading cause of years lived with disability at the global level. This study assessed the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in osteoarthritis of knees as to changes in cartilage thickness and clinical and functional outcomes.

METHODS

Thirty participants with Kellgren-Lawrence grade two and grade three osteoarthritis knee who satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled in this prospective interventional study after taking written informed consent. Each participant received three doses of two ml intraarticular platelet-rich plasma at an interval of seven days. Clinical assessment was determined using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) on Day 0, Day 90, and Day 180. Cartilage thickness (femoral and trochlear cartilage) was measured pre (Day 0) and post-PRP (Day 180) under ultrasound guidance.

RESULTS

The mean VAS score for pain was 7.4 before treatment which changed to 5.3 (p= <0.0001) on Day 90 and 3.37 (p= <0.0001) on Day 180 post-PRP. The mean total KOOS was 19.16 ± 10.73 before treatment which improved to 37.42 ± 9.88 (p= <0.0001) and 49.98 ± 8.82 (p= <0.0001) at 90 days, and 180 days post-injection, respectively. The mean cartilage thickness (femoral and trochlear cartilage) improved from baseline (day 0) to final follow-up on day 180, which was statistically significant and implied cartilage repair following PRP administration.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the efficacy of PRP in the management of osteoarthritis knee by improvement in pain, joint stiffness, and activities of daily living, as well as aids in the repair and regeneration of articular cartilage.

The Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Symptoms and Structural Changes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) usage in orthopedics continues to rise, despite guidelines suggesting non-superiority to comparative cohorts. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on PRP efficacy using two clinical assessments: (1) Visual Analog Scale and (2) Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. We assessed consistency and clinical relevancy by determining study heterogeneity (eg, sample sizes, ages, body mass index, arthritic severities, etc.). Comparative cohorts were: (A) hyaluronic acid (HA); (B) corticosteroid (CS); (C) normal saline (NS); and (D) exercise therapy. We performed sub-analyses of structural changes assessed on ultrasound, radiograph, or magnetic resonance imaging .

METHODS

We utilized PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases up to December 1, 2021, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic-Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Twenty-four studies met criteria, with comparisons to: HA (n = 11); CS (n = 6); NS (n = 5); and exercise therapy (n = 3). Seven studies assessed structural changes. Evaluations utilized a methodological scoring system. I² statistics and forest plots pooled analyses and delineated study results.

RESULTS

PRP led to Visual Analog Scale and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index improvements in most studies when compared to HA, CS, and NS (P ≤ .05). Comparison to exercise therapy resulted in inconclusive findings (P ≥ .05). However, substantial heterogeneity (I² ≥ 76%) was reported due to study variability. No differences were found when assessing structural changes or cartilage thickness by magnetic resonance imaging (standardized mean difference -0.01 [-0.19, 0.18], P = .91).

CONCLUSIONS

PRP may be associated with pain and functional improvements but was not clinically relevant (inconsistent study- and patient-metrics). In addition, PRP did not confer superiority when assessing knee-related structural changes.

Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Platelet-Rich Plasma With Intra-Articular Corticosteroid Injections in Patients With Bilateral Knee Osteoarthritis

Introduction

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) intra-articular injections have gained popularity and are suggested to be more effective and longer lasting than corticosteroid or visco-supplementation therapy. There are few studies comparing PRP with corticosteroid injections and none comparing PRP in patients with bilateral knee osteoarthritis with the patient acting as their own control.

Methods

We performed a double-blind randomized controlled trial including 29 patients (58 knees) with radiologically confirmed mild-to-moderate bilateral knee osteoarthritis. They were randomized to receive an intra-articular PRP injection into one knee and a methylprednisolone injection with a local anesthetic into the contralateral knee. The primary outcome was measured using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) before the treatment and at six weeks, three months, and six months. Secondary outcome was measured pain with the visual numerical pain rating scale (VNS).

Results

Corticosteroids and PRP were both effective in improving pain, stiffness, and function at all time points, with maximal improvements at six weeks and three months. PRP scored slightly better than steroid injections at six months; nevertheless, there was no statistically significant difference between corticosteroids and PRP injections (F_2,139=0.173, p=0.84). The secondary outcome also delivered the same result with improvement at all time points but no statistically significant difference (F_2,139=0.168, p=0.85).

Conclusions

Both corticosteroids and PRP interventions are effective in improving pain, stiffness, and function in patients with bilateral knee osteoarthritis up to six months with no statistically significant difference between the two.

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.

The aging athlete

Aging athletes, those 60 years and older, are a growing population of mature, active individuals who value sports and exercise participation throughout their lifespan. Although recommendations for younger and masters athletes have been extrapolated to this population, there remains a paucity of specific guidelines, treatment algorithms, and considerations for aging athletes. The benefits of living an active lifestyle must be weighed against the risks for unique cardiovascular, metabolic, and musculoskeletal injuries requiring diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. In this article, we review the unique cardiovascular and muscular physiology of aging athletes and how it influences the risk of specific medical conditions. We also discuss general prevention and treatment strategies. Finally, we identify areas of future research priorities and emerging treatments.

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 use of intra-articular platelet rich plasma for the symptomatic management of osteoarthritis of the knee: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Osteoarthritis of the knee is a chronic inflammatory condition resulting in significant patient disability, with intra-articular platelet rich plasma (PRP) injections having shown potential to improve symptomatic outcomes. This retrospective cohort pilot study aimed to observe whether PRP injections were beneficial in the symptomatic management of knee osteoarthritis in an Australian population, based on patient reported outcomes. An additional aim was to observe for an association between the number of injections and patient characteristics, such as body mass index, age, sex and radiologically determined severity of the disease.

METHODS

The cohort was drawn from those who attended Ballarat Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine for PRP injections and who had completed the appropriate pre- and post-injection Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire. WOMAC scores were analysed to observe for any difference following a course of PRP injections.

RESULTS

The data suggest that the use of PRP improved patient reported WOMAC scores. Additionally, it was shown that two injections had a greater effect than one injection, with a third injection providing no further benefit. Finally, there was an association with lower WOMAC scores post PRP therapy amongst male participants compared to female participants.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest two PRP injections are optimal for the symptomatic management of knee osteoarthritis, identifying a need for further prospective research in this Australian population.

Comparative effectiveness of nonsurgical interventions in the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To find out, based on the available recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs), if the nonsurgical interventions commonly used for knee osteoarthritis patients are valid and quantify their efficiency.

METHODS

The database of MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for RCTs evaluating nonsurgical treatment strategies on patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. A Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis was performed. The primary outcome was the mean change from baseline in the Western Ontario and McMaster university (WOMAC) total score at 12 months. Raw mean differences with 95% credibility intervals were calculated. Treatments were ranked by probabilities of each treatment to be the best.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials assessed 7 strategies with WOMAC at 12 months: injection of platelet rich plasma (PRP), corticosteroids, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), hyaluronic acid, ozone, administration of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs with or without the association of physiotherapy. For treatment-specific effect size, a greater association with WOMAC decrease was found significantly for MSCs (mean difference, -28.0 [95% CrI, -32.9 to -22.4]) and PRP (mean difference, -19.9 [95% CrI, -24.1 to -15.8]). Rank probabilities among the treatments indicated that MSCs had a much higher probability (P = .91) of being the best treatment compared with other treatments, while PRP ranked as the second-best treatment (P = .89).

CONCLUSION

In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, the outcomes of treatments using MSCs and PRP for the management of knee osteoarthritis were associated with long-term improvements in pain and function. More high quality RCTs would be needed to confirm the efficiency of MSCs and PRP for the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Single versus multi-dose intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma in early stages of osteoarthritis of the knee: A single-blind, randomized, superiority trial

Objectives

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of single, double, and triple doses of intra-articular (IA) platelet rich plasma (PRP) in early stages of osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee.

Patients and methods

This single-blind, randomized, superiority trial included a total of 180 knees of 90 patients (22 males, 68 females; mean age: 47.9 years; range, 36 to 60 years) with bilateral OA knee of Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 1-2 between May 2017 and December 2018. The patients were randomized (30 in each group) to receive single, double, or triple doses of IA PRP (two weeks apart in repeat injections). The outcome measures were Visual Analog Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee Score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, and Tegner Lysholm Knee Score. The assessor of outcome was blinded. The scores were collected before intervention and at six weeks, three months, six months, and one year after the intervention.

Results

All patients completed the study. All three groups were comparable with respect to demographic and disease characteristics. All four scores were comparable among the three groups before intervention and at six weeks, three months, and six months. However, at one-year follow-up, the three-dose group showed superiority to others in terms of all four scores. All three groups showed improvement until six months and deterioration thereafter, which was only marginal in the three-dose group. All groups showed a statistically significant improvement of scores compared to baseline scores at one year. There were no major complications.

Conclusion

The IA administration of three doses of PRP yields superior outcome to single and double doses at the end of one year. Repeat doses are probably needed to sustain the benefit achieved at one year.

Intra-articular Injection of Type I Atelocollagen to Alleviate Knee Pain: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Collagen disruption is one of the underlying causes of knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis and/or diverse cartilage defects. Atelocollagen is a type of collagen that lacks telopeptides and thus has reduced antigenicity. The intra-articular injection of type I atelocollagen supplements collagen levels in the disrupted articular cartilage. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effects of the intra-articular injection of atelocollagen for the management of knee pain.

DESIGN

Two hundred patients with osteoarthritis, chondromalacia, or other cartilage defects were randomly assigned to receive a 3-mL intra-articular injection of atelocollagen (BioCollagen group) or saline (Placebo group). Clinical improvement was evaluated over a 24-week period using the 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS), the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36).

RESULTS

VAS scores were significantly better in the BioCollagen group as compared with the Placebo group at 24 weeks. More patients in the BioCollagen group reported exceeding 20% and 40% VAS improvements. The WOMAC and SF-36 scores were also significantly improved from baseline after the intra-articular injection of atelocollagen; although, the differences between the BioCollagen and Placebo groups were not significant. There were no unexpected or severe adverse events reported for either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that an intra-articular injection of atelocollagen effectively alleviates knee pain, as intended. Therefore, the intra-articular injection of atelocollagen can be considered an alternative solution to controlling knee pain due to osteoarthritis and diverse cartilage defects.

Platelet-Rich Plasma and Stem Cell Injections in the Treatment of Arthritis of the Knee

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and stem cell (SC) injections have become increasingly common in the treatment of knee arthritis. This systematic review was performed to answer the following questions: (1) What effects does intraarticular PRP injection have in the setting of knee arthritis? (2) What effects does intra-articular SC injection have in the setting of knee arthritis? (3) What adverse events have been reported in the literature from PRP injections for knee arthritis? (4) What adverse events have been reported in the literature from SC injections for knee arthritis? [Orthopedics. 2021;44(6):376-383.].

Comparison between intra-articular infiltrations of placebo, steroids, hyaluronic and PRP for knee osteoarthritis: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Regarding the efficacy of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid and corticosteroids, current evidence is controversial. The superiority of one technique over another is questioned and debates are ongoing. The purpose of the present study was to compare and investigate the efficacy of these intra-articular infiltrations in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). A Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted comparing patient outcomes at 3, 6 and 12-months of follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA extension statement for reporting systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions. All the RCTs comparing the outcomes of two or more intra-articular infiltrations of interest for knee OA were considered for inclusion. The outcomes of interest were the WOMAC and VAS scores. The network meta-analyses were performed using the STATA routine for Bayesian hierarchical random-effects models.

RESULTS

Data from 30 RCTs (3463 patients) were collected. At 3-months follow-up, PRP showed the best WOMAC scores, followed by the Placebo, CCS and HA. At 6-months follow-up, PRP showed the best WOMAC scores, followed by HA, CCS and Placebo. At 12-months follow-up, PRP showed the best WOMAC scores, followed by the Placebo, HA and CCS. At 3-months follow-up, the PRP showed the best VAS scores, followed by CCS, HA and Placebo. At 6-months follow-up, PRP showed the best VAS scores, followed by CCS, Placebo and HA. At 12-months follow-up, the PRP showed the best VAS scores, followed by CCS, Placebo and HA.

CONCLUSION

Intra-articular injections of PRP demonstrated the best overall outcome compared to steroids, hyaluronic acid and placebo for patients with knee osteoarthrosis at 3, 6 and 12-months follow-up. Among CCS, hyaluronic acid and placebo, no discrepancies were detected.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Bayesian network meta-analysis of RCTs.

Correlation between pain severity and levels of anxiety and depression in osteoarthritis patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative musculoskeletal disease that causes articular damage and chronic pain, with a prevalence of up to 50% in individuals >60 years of age. Patients suffering from chronic painful conditions, including OA, also frequently report anxiety or depression. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess the correlation between pain severity and depressive and anxious symptomatology in OA patients.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using four databases (PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science) from inception up to 14th January of 2020. We included original articles evaluating pain severity and anxiety and/or depression severity in OA-diagnosed patients. Detailed data were extracted from each study, including patients' characteristics and pain, anxiety, and depression severity. When available, the Pearson correlation coefficient between pain and depression severity and pain and anxiety severity was collected and a meta-analysis of random effects was applied.

RESULTS

This systematic review included 121 studies, with a total of 38085 participants. The mean age was 64.3 years old and subjects were predominantly female (63%). The most used scale to evaluate pain severity was the Western Ontario and the McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, while for anxiety and depression, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale was the most used. The meta-analysis showed a moderate positive correlation between pain severity and both anxious (r = 0.31, p < 0.001) and depressive symptomatology (r = 0.36, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate a significant correlation between pain and depression/anxiety severity in OA patients, highlighting the need for its routine evaluation by clinicians.

Intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injections versus intra-articular corticosteroid injections for symptomatic management of knee osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are the mainstay of treatment for symptomatic management in knee osteoarthritis (OA), particularly in the UK. IA platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are a promising alternative, but no systematic reviews to date have compared them to the current standard of care, IA CS injections. We aim to investigate the effect of IA PRP injections versus IA corticosteroid injections for the symptomatic management of knee OA.

Methods

All published trials comparing IA PRP and CS injections for knee OA were included. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of Science were searched through June 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. A random effects model was used to calculate standardized mean difference with 95% confidence interval in WOMAC/VAS score (or subscores), comparing IA PRP to CS injections across studies.

Results

Included were eight studies and 648 patients, 443 (68%) were female, mean age 59 years, with a mean BMI of 28.4. Overall, the studies were considered at low risk of bias. Compared with CS injections, PRP was significantly better in reducing OA symptoms (pain, stiffness, functionality) at 3, 6 and 9 months post-intervention (P < 0.01). The greatest effect was observed at 6 and 9 months (− 0.78 (− 1.34 to − 0.23) standard mean deviations (SMD) and − 1.63 (− 2.14 to − 1.12) SMD respectively). At 6 months, this equates to an additional reduction of 9.51 in WOMAC or 0.97 on the VAS pain scales. At 6 months PRP allowed greater return to sporting activities than CS, measured by the KOOS subscale for sporting activity, of magnitude 9.7 (− 0.45 to 19.85) (P = 0.06). Triple injections of PRP, generally separated by a week, were superior to single injections over 12 months follow-up (P < 0.01).

Conclusions

IA-PRP injections produce superior outcomes when compared with CS injections for symptomatic management of knee OA, including improved pain management, less joint stiffness and better participation in exercise/sporting activity at 12 months follow-up. Giving three IA-PRP, with injections separated by a week, appears more effective than 1 IA-PRP injection.

Prospero trial registration number

CRD42020181928.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04308-3.

Efficacy of different platelet-rich plasma injections in the treatment of mild-moderate knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different numbered sets of injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of mild-moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A comprehensive search in three databases of Cochrane Library, Embase, and PubMed was conducted to find relevant articles that investigated the efficacy of PRP injection therapies in the treatment of mild-moderate knee OA through August 2020. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and function scores were the primary outcomes and visual analogue scale (VAS) was the secondary outcome. The pooled improvements amongst different injection therapies were compared.

RESULTS

No significant differences in the improvement of WOMAC pain were observed amongst 1-, 2-, and 3-injection therapies at 3- (P = .26) and 6-month (P = .13) follow-ups. For a 12-month follow-up, the difference amongst different therapies reached borderline significance (P = .05) in which 3-injection therapy had a significantly better improvement than 2-injection therapy (P = .02) and reached borderline significance compared with 1-injection (P = .07). However, no significant differences in the improvement of VAS scores were observed amongst three injection therapies for all the follow-up visits (P > .05). For WOMAC function score, 3-injection therapy performed significantly better than 1-injection (P < .00001) or 2-injection therapy (P < .0001) only at 12-month follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrated that 3-injection therapy of PRP in the treatment of mild-moderate knee OA had the best efficacy in pain relief and function improvement compared with 1- and 2-injection therapies.

Efficacy and Safety of Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma in Osteoarthritis Knee: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) is a common disease in aged adults. Intra-articular (IA) injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy is an effective minimally invasive treatment for KOA. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with placebo or other conservative treatments.

Methods

We conducted a meta-analysis to identify relevant articles from online register databases such as PubMed, Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcomes were the visual analogue scale (VAS) score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score. The secondary outcome was the adverse event rate.

Results

A total of 895 articles were identified, of which 23 randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria were determined as eligible. Compared with placebo, PRP had a lower VAS score and higher IKDC subjective score at the 6^th month after treatment and significantly less WOMAC score during the follow-up period. Compared with oral NSAIDs, PRP gained a lower WOMAC score at the 6^th month after treatment. The VAS score decreased after treatment when reaching PRP and CS. As compared to the HA, the VAS score, WOMAC score, and IKDC subjective score all revealed better PRP results. There were no significant differences in adverse event rates comparing PRP versus placebo or HA. Different PRP applications did not show significant differences in VAS score in the 1^st month and WOMAC score in the 3^rd month after treatment.

Conclusion

To compare with the conservative treatments mentioned above, PRP is more effective in relieving symptoms. There were no significant differences between triple PRP application and single PRP application in short-term curative effect.

Treatment of knee osteoarthritic pain with platelet-rich plasma: a systematic review of clinical studies

Introduction: Knee osteoarthritis is a degenerative joint disease that is secondary to degradation of articular cartilage, reformation of subchondral bone through degradation and proliferation as well as presence of synovitis. Materials & methods: This systematic review was conducted and reported as per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Results: A total of 30 of the 48 comparators showed statistically significant superiority with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) compared with a control, while the other 16 comparators showed no significant difference between PRP and the comparator. Conclusion: We can only recommend PRP for patients with early-stage osteoarthritis (I or II) and who are aged below 65, based on our findings. Based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) recommendations, while studies reviewed were randomized controlled studies, and therefore, high grade, due to variance in imprecision, risk of bias and inconsistency among the 37 studies, it would be reasonable to rate this paper as subjectively moderate.

Using intra-articular allogenic lyophilized growth factors in primary knee osteoarthritis: a randomized pilot study

Objective: Investigating the safety in addition to clinical and structural efficacy of allogenic lyophilized growth factors (L-GFs) in patients with symptomatic primary knee osteoarthritis. Design: A prospective, open-label pilot study. A total of 31-patients randomized into non-intervention and intervention groups. Materials & methods: The intervention group received two intra-articular doses at baseline and after 2-months. Post-injection complications were documented, and the efficacy was assessed by Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores and ultrasonography. Results: One dropout from the intervention group. The percentage of improvement of mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index-scores and ultrasonography-detected effusion were statistically significant in the intervention group compared with the non-intervention. A brief, mild, post-injection pain was reported by all intervention group. Conclusion: This study provides the safety of intra-articular injection of allogenic L-GFs in knee osteoarthritis. The conclusion of efficacy was limited by small sample size and lack of control injection. Clinical trial registration: NCT04331327 (ClinicalTrials.gov, retrospectively registered).

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

Background:

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

Purpose:

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

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusion:

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

Impact of the numbers of injections of platelet rich plasma on the clinical outcomes in patients with knee osteoarthritis: A protocol for an updated network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Two published meta-analyses have investigated the effects of the number of injections of platelet rich plasma (PRP) on clinical outcomes in knee osteoarthritis patients, however conflicting findings were generated.

METHODS

We will systematically search PubMed, Embase, and China National Knowledgement Infrastructure (CNKI) to capture additional eligible studies. After screening citations, extracting essential data, assessing the risk of bias, we will use RevMan software and Open BUGS to perform head-to-head and network meta-analysis of pain alleviation and improvement of joint functionality, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Knee joint osteoarthritis (KOA) is the main cause of joint degeneration in elderly, which seriously reduces patients quality of life. Although intra-articular PRP has been extensively prescribed to treat KOA, a definitive conclusion about the appropriate number of injections has not yet been generated in published meta-analyses. The present updated network meta-analysis will comprehensively answer this question.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We will communicate our findings through participating in academic conferences or submiting it to be considered for publication in peer reviewed scholar journal.

INPLASY REGISTRATION NUMBER

We registered this protocol in International Plateform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (INPLASY) platform and obtained an identifier of INPLASY2020110043 (https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2020-11-0043/).

Editorial Commentary: Intra-Articular Injections for Painful Knee Osteoarthritis: What Is the Current Treatment Paradigm?

Intra-articular corticosteroids are useful for acute and short-term pain relief, whereas hyaluronic acid is useful for a longer-term treatment effect for patients with knee osteoarthritis. More rigorous research using homogeneous preparations and techniques and randomizing larger numbers of knee osteoarthritis patients are warranted before recommending any wider acceptance of platelet-rich plasma and stem cell therapies. This is of utmost importance, especially with several new injectables such as anti-nerve growth factor antibodies, Wnt pathway inhibitors, and capsaicin showing promise to enter the market soon.

Intra-Articular Injections of Hyaluronic Acid or Steroids Associated With Better Outcomes Than Platelet-Rich Plasma, Adipose Mesenchymal Stromal Cells, or Placebo in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical effects of hyaluronic acid (HA), steroids, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), or adipose mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC) injections in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials with OA of the knee that compared HA, steroids, PRP, adipose MSC, or their combination with placebo or in head-to-head combination were identified from the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases up to June 30, 2019. We performed a network meta-analysis of the relevant literature to determine whether there was benefit from HA, steroids, PRP, or adipose MSC treatment as compared with placebo.

RESULTS

A total of 43 trials covering 5554 patients were included. Steroids were ranked most likely to be effective for the management of pain or function, with adipose MSC and multiple PRP appearing least likely to be effective. Although no significant difference was observed among the 6 interventions, except for single PRP with respect to adverse effects, steroids and HA exhibited a lower rate of AEs compared with the placebo. In view of severe adverse effects, only single PRP was superior to placebo. Direct pairwise meta-analysis for pain relief showed that HA was superior to placebo or single PRP, but steroids had a significantly worse effect than single PRP. In addition, direct pairwise meta-analysis for adverse effects favored steroids in comparison to HA.

CONCLUSIONS

The ranking statistics like surface under the cumulative ranking curve values of our network meta-analysis support the use of steroids and HA for appropriate patients with knee OA. For pain relief and AEs, steroids are most likely the best treatment, followed by HA. Single PRP, multiple PRP, and adipose MSC interventions do not result in a relevant reduction of joint pain nor improvement of joint function compared with placebo. However, treatment effect differences were small and potentially not clinically meaningful, indicating that other factors, such as cost and patient preferences, may be more important in patients with knee OA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

meta-analysis of non-homogenous randomized controlled trials, Level II.

Efficacy of Autologous Conditioned Serum (ACS), Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP), Hyaluronic Acid (HA) and Steroid for Early Osteoarthritis Knee: A Comparative Analysis

BACKGROUND

Intra-articular injection therapy constituting corticosteroids, viscosupplements and blood-derived products are considered to have a key role in non-operative management of osteoarthritis knee. While corticosteroids and viscosupplements have proven short-term efficacy in early osteoarthritis; orthobiologics are gaining increased attention in osteoarthritis management. The aim of present study was thus to compare two commonly used biologics (platelet-rich plasma/PRP and autologous conditioned serum/ACS) to each other and to established therapies.

METHODS

After required institutional clearances, all patients presenting with early primary osteoarthritis knee who had failed initial conservative management and received only unilateral knee injection were included. Patients in the PRP group were compared to the other groups (comprising the HA/hyaluronic acid group, steroid group, and a matched cohort who had been administered ACS for the same indication earlier). Clinical outcome was evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) questionnaire and Visual Analogue scale (VAS) pre-injection and at 6 months.

RESULTS

ACS and PRP did not have any significant difference in terms of either WOMAC score (p = 0.154) or VAS score at 6 months (p = 0.850). The scores for both these orthobiologics were better than the control groups (HA group and Steroid group). Between the two control groups, HA group had better VAS scores as compared to the Steroid group (p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The clinical outcomes following intra-articular injection of ACS and PRP are better than controls (HA and steroid), but a difference between the two orthobiologics could not be demonstrated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3b.

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

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

Injections of concentrated bone marrow aspirate as treatment for Discogenic pain: a retrospective analysis

Background

There are an overwhelming number of patients suffering from low back pain (LBP) resulting from disc pathology. Although several strategies are being developed pre-clinically, simple strategies to treat the large number of patients currently affected is still needed. One option is to use concentrated bone marrow aspirate (cBMA), which may be effective due to its intrinsic stem cells and growth factors.

Methods

Thirty-three patients who received intradiscal injections of cBMA to relieve LBP were followed up based on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) scores. Patients were also subdivided into those with a pre-injection NRS > 5 and pre-injection NRS ≤ 5. The proportion of patients demonstrating at least 50% improvement (and 95% confidence intervals) from baseline at five follow-up visits for each outcome was evaluated.

Results

At least 50% improvement in NRS was observed for 13.8, 45.8, 41.1, 23.5, and 38.9% of patients across five follow-up visits, out to 1 year. When stratified by high (> 5) versus low (≤ 5) baseline NRS scores, the values were 14.3, 45.5, 71.4, 22.2, and 44.4% among those with high baseline pain, and 13.3, 46.2, 20.0, 25.0, and 33.3% among those with low baseline pain. The 50% improvement rates across visits were 4.3, 28.6, 30.0, 22.2, and 30.8% for SF-36, and 4.2, 26.7, 36.4, 55.6, and 30.8% for ODI.

Conclusions

Intradiscal cBMA injections may be effective to reduce pain and improve function. Patients with relatively higher initial pain may have potential for greatest improvement.

Comparison of the Clinical Effectiveness of Single Versus Multiple Injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Reports have concluded that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an effective and safe biological approach in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, no consensus has been established regarding the number of injections required to observe a therapeutic effect.

Purpose

To compare the clinical effectiveness reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of single versus multiple PRP injections in the treatment of knee OA.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted for RCTs published between 1970 and 2019 that compared the effect of single versus multiple PRP injections on pain and functionality in patients with knee OA. Searched databases included MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. A data extraction form was designed to obtain bibliographic information of the study as well as patient, intervention, comparison, and outcomes of interest data. A random-effects model was used to pool quantitative data from the primary outcomes.

Results

We included 5 clinical trials with a low-moderate risk of bias that reported data for 301 patients. Meta-analysis showed that, at 6 months after the intervention, single and multiple (double or triple) injections had similar pain improvement, with no significant differences (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.61 [95% CI, -1.09 to 2.31]; I ² = 97%; P = .48). A significant improvement in knee functionality was observed in favor of multiple injections (SMD, 2.29 [95% CI, 0.45-4.12]; I ² = 97%; P = .01). Subanalysis showed that the significant improvement was only evident for the results of single versus triple injections (SMD, 3.12 [95% CI, 0.64-5.60]; I ² = 97%; P = .01).

Conclusion

According to our results, a single injection was as effective as multiple PRP injections in pain improvement; however, multiple injections seemed more effective in joint functionality than a single injection at 6 months. We consider that the available evidence is still insufficient, and future research on this specific topic is needed to confirm our results.