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: 3.21). 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.

9 Followers
 · 
153 Reads
  • Source
    • "In the same year, Sanchez et al.[16]conducted a multicenter, double-blinded clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 3 consecutive weekly intra-articular PRGF versus HA injections in 176 patients. PRGF was found to be superior to HA in alleviating knee symptoms in mild to moderate OA.The following study establishes the supremacy of PRP over a placebo: In 2013, Khosbin et al.[17]conducted a systematic review of 577 patients included from six level I and level II studies to evaluate the clinical efficacy of PRP versus a control injection for knee OA. The therapeutic effect was evaluated using validated outcome measures - WOMAC index, VAS score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form and overall patient satisfaction. "

    Preview · Article · Jan 2015
  • Source
    • "Two recent trials of HA versus PRP injections for knee OA demonstrated the superiority of PRP [12] [13]. However, PRP is less effective for patients with more severe OA [11]. Injection of autologous stem cells into the knee is a potentially promising treatment for moderate to severe OA. "
    [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.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2014 · BioMed Research International

  • No preview · Article · Jun 2014 · Muscles
Show more