Article

The efficacy of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review with quantitative synthesis.

The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.19). 12/2013; 29(12):2037-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2013.09.006
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the available Level I and Level II literature on platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as a therapeutic intervention in the management of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA).
A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and www.clinicaltrials.gov was performed to identify all randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies that evaluated the clinical efficacy of PRP versus a control injection for knee OA. A random-effects model was used to evaluate the therapeutic effect of PRP at 24 weeks by use of validated outcome measures (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index, visual analog scale for pain, International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, and overall patient satisfaction).
Six Level I and II studies satisfied our inclusion criteria (4 randomized controlled trials and 2 prospective nonrandomized studies). A total of 577 patients were included, with 264 patients (45.8%) in the treatment group (PRP) and 313 patients (54.2%) in the control group (hyaluronic acid [HA] or normal saline solution [NS]). The mean age of patients receiving PRP was 56.1 years (51.5% male patients) compared with 57.1 years (49.5% male patients) for the group receiving HA or NS. Pooled results using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index scale (4 studies) showed that PRP was significantly better than HA or NS injections (mean difference, -18.0 [95% confidence interval, -28.8 to -8.3]; P < .001). Similarly, the International Knee Documentation Committee scores (3 studies) favored PRP as a treatment modality (mean difference, 7.9 [95% confidence interval, 3.7 to 12.1]; P < .001). There was no difference in the pooled results for visual analog scale score or overall patient satisfaction. Adverse events occurred more frequently in patients treated with PRP than in those treated with HA/placebo (8.4% v 3.8%, P = .002).
As compared with HA or NS injection, multiple sequential intra-articular PRP injections may have beneficial effects in the treatment of adult patients with mild to moderate knee OA at approximately 6 months. There appears to be an increased incidence of nonspecific adverse events among patients treated with PRP.
Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.

4 Followers
 · 
208 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction. We investigated the use of autologous bone marrow concentrate (BMC) with and without an adipose graft, for treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Methods. Treatment registry data for patients who underwent BMC procedures with and without an adipose graft were analyzed. Pre- and posttreatment outcomes of interest included the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS), the numerical pain scale (NPS), and a subjective percentage improvement rating. Multivariate analyses were performed to examine the effects of treatment type adjusting for potential confounding factors. The frequency and type of adverse events (AE) were also examined. Results. 840 procedures were performed, 616 without and 224 with adipose graft. The mean LEFS score increased by 7.9 and 9.8 in the two groups (out of 80), respectively, and the mean NPS score decreased from 4 to 2.6 and from 4.3 to 3 in the two groups, respectively. AE rates were 6% and 8.9% in the two groups, respectively. Although pre- and posttreatment improvements were statistically significant, the differences between the groups were not. Conclusion. BMC injections for knee OA showed encouraging outcomes and a low rate of AEs. Addition of an adipose graft to the BMC did not provide a detectible benefit over BMC alone.
    BioMed Research International 01/2014; 2014:370621. DOI:10.1155/2014/370621 · 2.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The convincing background of the recent studies, investigating the different potentials of platelet-rich plasma, offers the clinician an appealing alternative for the treatment of cartilage lesions and osteoarthritis. Recent evidences in literature have shown that PRP may be helpful both as an adjuvant for surgical treatment of cartilage defects and as a therapeutic tool by intra-articular injection in patients affected by osteoarthritis. In this review, the authors introduce the trophic and anti-inflammatory properties of PRP and the different products of the available platelet concentrates. Then, in a complex scenario made of a great number of clinical variables, they resume the current literature on the PRP applications in cartilage surgery as well as the use of intra-articular PRP injections for the conservative treatment of cartilage degenerative lesions and osteoarthritis in humans, available as both case series and comparative studies. The result of this review confirms the fascinating biological role of PRP, although many aspects yet remain to be clarified and the use of PRP in a clinical setting has to be considered still exploratory.
    05/2015; 2015:1-19. DOI:10.1155/2015/542502
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The number of adults with osteoarthritis in the United States is expected to nearly double from 21.4 million in 2005 to 41.1 million by 2030. As a result, medical costs and associated comorbidity will exponentially increase in the coming decades. In the past decade, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have emerged as a novel treatment for degenerative joint disease. PubMed (from 1990 to 2013) was searched to identify relevant studies. Reference lists of included studies were also reviewed. Clinical review. Level 3. We identified 9 animal and 7 human studies investigating the use of MSCs in the treatment of osteoarthritis, with varying levels of support for this therapy. While MSCs have shown potential for improving function and decreasing inflammation in animal studies, translation to patients is still in question. There is a great deal of heterogeneity in treatment methods. Standardizing the manufacturing and characterization of MSCs will allow for better comparisons.
    Sports Health A Multidisciplinary Approach 01/2015; 7(1):38-44. DOI:10.1177/1941738114529727