Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma and plasma for symptomatic treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a double-blinded placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has a still conflicting efficacy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA) and might be a minimally invasive and safe treatment alternative. The potential benefit of only plasma (non-enriched) has never been investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and plasma to improve pain and function in participants with KOA over 24 weeks.Methods
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 3 groups (n = 62): PRP (n = 20), plasma (n = 21) and saline (n = 21). Two ultrasound-guided knee injections were performed with a 2-week interval. The primary outcome was visual analog scale 0-10 cm (VAS) for overall pain at week 24, with intermediate assessments at weeks 6 and 12. Main secondary outcomes were: KOOS, OMERACT-OARSI criteria and TUGT.Results
At baseline, 92% of participants were female, with a mean age of 65 years, mean BMI of 28.0 Kg/m2and mean VAS pain of 6.2 cm. Change in pain from baseline at week 24 were -2.9 (SD 2.5), -2.4 (SD 2.5) and -3.5 cm (SD 3.3) for PRP, plasma and saline, respectively (p intergroup = 0.499). There were no differences between the three groups at weeks 6 and 12. Similarly, there were no differences between groups regarding secondary outcomes. The PRP group showed higher frequency of adverse events (65% versus 24% and 33% for plasma and saline, respectively, p = 0.02), mostly mild transitory increase in pain.Conclusions
PRP and plasma were not superior to placebo for pain and function improvement in KOA over 24 weeks. The PRP group had a higher frequency of mild transitory increase in pain.Trial registration
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03138317 , 03/05/2017.
SUBMITTER: Dorio M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8461850 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThere has been much debate regarding the use of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as symptomatic treatment for knee osteoarthritis. The objective of this consensus was to develop guidelines for PRP injections in knee osteoarthritis according to the French National Authority for Health recommendations.MethodsFifteen physicians from different French-speaking countries (10 rheumatologists, 4 specialists in rehabilitation and sports medicine and 1 radiologist) were selected for their expertise in the areas of PRP and osteoarthritis. A comprehensive literature review was conducted on Medline including all published therapeutic trials, open studies, meta-analysis and systematic reviews focusing on the effects of PRP in knee OA, as well as fundamental studies concerning the characteristics of the various types of PRP and their mechanisms, indexed before April 2019. Using the method recommended by the French National Authority for Health inspired by the Delphi consensus process, 25 recommendations were finally retained and evaluated. The recommendations were classified as appropriate or not appropriate, with strong or relative agreement, or uncertain if a consensus was not achieved.ResultsAmong the 25 recommendations selected, the main ones are the following: (1) Intra-articular injections of PRP are an effective symptomatic treatment for early to moderate knee osteoarthritis. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a relative agreement (Median = 8; rank = 6-9). Level of evidence 1A. (2) A PRP treatment sequence in knee osteoarthritis may include 1-3 injections. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a strong agreement (Median = 9; rank = 7-9). Level of evidence 1A. (3) Leucocytes-poor PRP should be preferred in knee osteoarthritis. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a relative agreement (Median = 8; rank = 5-9). Level of evidence 5. (4) Intra-articular PRP knee injections should be performed under ultrasound or fluoroscopic guidance. This recommendation was considered uncertain with no consensus (Median = 8; rank = 3-9). Level of evidence 5. (5) PRP should not be mixed with an anesthetic or intra-articular corticosteroid. This recommendation was considered appropriate with a relative agreement (Median = 9; rank = 6-9). Level of evidence 5 CONCLUSION: Those 25 recommendations should standardize and facilitate the use of IA PRP injections, which are considered by experts as an effective treatment especially in early or moderate knee OA. Although a strong or relative agreement from the experts was obtained for most of the recommendations, many of them had a very low level of evidence (Level 5) and were principally based on the clinical experience of the experts.
| S-EPMC8458198 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Despite encouraging results reported with regards to Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) application in osteoarthritis (OA) knee, still critical issues like conclusive structural evidence of its efficacy, standard dose and good manual method of preparation to obtain high yield remains unanswered. Present study is an attempt to optimise the dose and concentration of therapeutic PRP and its correlation with structural, physiologic efficacy with a new manual method of PRP preparation. A total of one hundred and fifty patients were randomized to receive either PRP (10 billion platelets) or hyaluronic acid (HA; 4 ml; 75 patients in each group) and followed up till 1 year. An addition of filtration step with 1 µm filter in manual PRP processing improved platelet recovery upto 90%. Significant improvements in WOMAC (51.94 ± 7.35 vs. 57.33 ± 8.92; P < 0.001), IKDC scores (62.8 ± 6.24 vs 52.7 ± 6.39; P < 0.001), 6-min pain free walking distance (+ 120 vs. + 4; P < 0.001) persisted in PRP compared to HA group at 1 year. Significant decline IL-6 and TNF-α levels observed in PRP group (P < 0.05) compared to HA at 1 month. Study demonstrated that an absolute count of 10 billion platelets is crucial in a PRP formulation to have long sustained chondroprotective effect upto one year in moderate knee OA.
| S-EPMC7889864 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We describe a new technique of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) infiltration for the treatment of severe knee osteoarthritis. PRP intra-articular infiltration is a promising treatment for knee osteoarthritis, but it still has some limitations in high-degree osteoarthritis. Diagnosis of osteoarthritis is based on clinical and radiographic findings, and patients with grade III or IV knee tibiofemoral osteoarthritis based on the Ahlbäck scale are considered candidates for this technique. The technique consists of performing intraosseous infiltration of PRP into the subchondral bone, which acts on this tissue and consequently on cartilage-bone communication. Although the intraosseous injection hinders the conventional knee intra-articular infiltration, it allows an extension of the range of action of the PRP, which acts directly on the subchondral bone, which is involved in the progression of osteoarthritis. Thus this technique involves a new administration of PRP that can delay knee arthroplasty; moreover, it can be applied for not only severe osteoarthritis but also other pathologies in which the subchondral bone is critical in the etiology, such as necrosis and osteochondral lesions.
| S-EPMC4314556 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundKnee 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsA 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 6th 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 6th 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 1st month and WOMAC score in the 3rd month after treatment.ConclusionTo 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.
| S-EPMC8294028 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The aim of the trial was to determine the effectiveness of oxygen-ozone injections on knee osteoarthritis concerning pain reduction, joint functional improvement, and quality of life.In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo controlled clinical trial, 98 patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) were randomized into two groups receiving intra-articular 20 ?g/ml of ozone (OZ) or placebo (PBO) for 8 weeks. The efficacy outcomes for knee OA were the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Lequesne Index, Timed Up and Go Test (TUG Test), SF-36, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and Geriatric Pain Measure (GPM).After 8 weeks of treatment, ozone was more effective than the placebo: VAS [mean difference (MD) = 2.16, p < 0.003 (CI 95% 0.42-3.89)], GPM [MD = 18.94, p < 0.004 (CI 95% 3.43-34.44)], LEQ [MD = 4.05, p < 0.001 (CI 95% 1.10-7.00)], WOMAC (P) [median of diff = 9.999, p = 0.019 (CI 95% 0.000-15.000)], WOMAC (JS) [median of diff = 12.499, p < 0.001 (CI 95% 0.000-12.500)], WOMAC (PF) = [median of diff = 11.760, p = 0.003 (CI 95% 4.409-19.119)], TUG (no statistical difference) and SF-36 (FC) [(MD = -25.82, p < 0.001 (CI 95% 33.65-17.99)], SF-36 (PH) [MD = -40.82, p < 0.001 (CI 95% -54.48-27.17)], SF-36 (GSH) [MD = -3.38, p < 0.001 (CI 95% -4.83-1.93)], SF-36 (SA) [MD = 2.17, p < 0.001 (CI 95% -19.67-8.24), SF-36 (EA) [MD = -35.37, p < 0.001 (CI 95% -48.86-21.89)]. Adverse events occurred in 3 patients (2 in the placebo group and 1 in the ozone group) and included only puncture accidents.The study confirms the efficacy of ozone concerning pain relief, functional improvement, and quality of life in patients with knee osteoarthritis.International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Register ISRCTNR55861167.
| S-EPMC5524330 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundIntra-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.MethodsAll 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.ResultsIncluded 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).ConclusionsIA-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 numberCRD42020181928 .
| S-EPMC8208610 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease leading to joint pain and stiffness. Due to lack of effective treatments, physical and psychological disabilities caused by OA have a detrimental impact on the patient's quality of life. Emerging evidence suggests that intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) may provide favorable results since PRP comprises not only a high level of platelets but also a huge amount of cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors. However, the precise mechanism and standardization method remain uncertain. This study aimed to examine cytokine profiling in both PRP and platelet-poor plasma (PPP) of knee OA patients and to determine the effects of PRP on OA chondrocytes and knee OA patients. PRP contained a wide variety of cytokines, chemokines, growth factors, and autologous intra-articular PRP injection resulted in favorable outcomes in knee OA patients. Significant increases in levels of IL-1, IL-2, IL-7, IL-8, IL-9, IL-12, TNF-α, IL-17, PDGF-BB, bFGF, and MIP-1β were detected in PRP compared to PPP (p < 0.001). An in vitro study showed a marked increase in proliferation in OA chondrocytes cultured with PRP, compared to PPP and fetal bovine serum (p < 0.001). In a clinical study, knee OA patients treated with PRP showed improvement of physical function and pain, assessed by physical performance, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index and visual analog scale. Our findings from both in vitro and clinical studies suggest that intra-articular PRP injection in knee OA patients may be a potential therapeutic strategy for alleviating knee pain and delaying the need for surgery.
| S-EPMC8779764 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection compared with hyaluronic acid (HA) injection for patients undergoing knee osteoarthritis. METHODS:We systematically searched electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library on January 23, 2020 to identify relevant studies issued in English languages. The outcomes evaluating the efficacy of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) treatment were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores (WOMAC pain, function, stiffness, and total scores) at 1, 3, 6, and 12?months; International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, Lequesne Index score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, EQ-VAS scores, and KOOS scores. The pooled data were analyzed by Stata 12.0. RESULTS:A total of 20 RCTs were enrolled in the present meta-analysis. The pooled results demonstrated that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection reduced pain more effectively than hyaluronic acid (HA) injection at 6-month and 12-month follow-up evaluated by WOMAC pain scores and VAS scores. EQ-VAS in the patients treated with PRP injection was lower than that in patients with HA injection at 12?months. Moreover, the patients with PRP injection had a better function recovery than those with HA injection at 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up, as evaluated by WOMAC function scores. WOMAC total scores showed significant difference at 6-month and 12-month follow-up. The IKDC scores indicated PRP injection was significantly more effective than HA injection at 3?months and 6?months. However, the Lequesne Index scores, KOOS scores, and adverse events did not show any significant difference between groups. CONCLUSION:Intra-articular PRP injection appeared to be more efficacious than HA injection for the treatment of KOA in terms of short-term functional recovery. Moreover, PRP injection was superior to HA injection in terms of long-term pain relief and function improvement. In addition, PRP injection did not increase the risk of adverse events compared to HA injection.
| S-EPMC7488405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Intraarticular hyaluronan or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is widely used in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). The efficacy of combined hyaluronan with PRP remained inconclusive. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of combined a single crosslinked hyaluronan (HYAJOINT Plus) and a single PRP versus a single PRP in patients with knee OA. In a prospective randomized-controlled trial, 85 patients with knee OA (Kellgren-Lawrence 2) were randomized to receive a single intraarticular injection of HYAJOINT Plus (3 ml, 20 mg/ml) followed by 3 ml PRP (the combined-injection group, N?=?43) or a single injection of 3 ml PRP (the one-injection group, N?=?42). The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the visual analog scale (VAS) pain (0-00 mm) at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC, Likert Scale), Lequesne index, single leg stance test (SLS), use of rescue analgesics and patient satisfaction at 1, 3 and 6 months. Seventy-eight patients were available for the intention-to-treat analysis at 6 months. Both groups improved significantly in VAS pain, WOMAC, Lequesne index and SLS at each follow-up visit (p?<?0.001). Patients receiving a single PRP experienced significantly greater improvements in VAS pain than patients receiving combined injections at 1-month follow-up (adjusted mean difference: -?5.6; p?=?0.017). There were no significant between-group differences in several of the second outcomes at each follow-up visit, except the WOMAC-pain and WOMAC-stiffness scores favoring the one-injection group at 1 month (p?=?0.025 and p?=?0.011). However, at 6-month follow-up, the combined-injection group achieved significantly better VAS pain reduction (p?=?0.020). No serious adverse events occurred following injections. In conclusion, either combined injections of HYAJOINT Plus and PRP or a single PRP alone was safe and effective for 6 months in patients with Kellgren-Lawrence 2 knee OA. Combined injections of HYAJOINT Plus and PRP achieved better VAS pain reduction than a single PRP at 6 months. The results indicating a long term benefit effect of a combination of HYAJOINT Plus and PRP in a particular subset of patients with moderate knee OA need to be replicated in larger trials.ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04315103.
| S-EPMC7794411 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is intense clinical interest in the potential effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA). This study tested the hypotheses that (i) "lower" levels of the inflammatory mediators (IMs), interleukin-1?, and tumor necrosis factor ? (TNF-?) and (ii) "higher" levels of the growth factors (GFs), insulin-like growth factor 1, and transforming growth factor ?1 within leukocyte-poor PRP correlate with more favorable chondrocyte and macrophage responses in vitro. Samples were collected from 10 "healthy" young male (23-33 years old) human subjects (H-PRP) and nine older (62-85 years old) male patients with severe knee OA (OA-PRP). The samples were separated into groups of "high" or "low" levels of IM and GF based on multiplex cytokine and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay data. Three-dimensional (3D) alginate bead chondrocyte cultures and monocyte-derived macrophage cultures were treated with 10% PRP from donors in different groups. Gene expression was analyzed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Contrary to our hypotheses, the effect of PRP on chondrocytes and macrophages was mainly influenced by the age and disease status of the PRP donor as opposed to the IM or GF groupings. While H-PRP showed similar effects on expression of chondrogenic markers (Col2a1 and Sox9) as the negative control group (p?>?0.05), OA-PRP decreased chondrocyte expression of Col2a1 and Sox-9 messenger RNA by 40% and 30%, respectively (Col2a1, p?=?0.015; Sox9, p?=?0.037). OA-PRP also upregulated TNF-? and matrix metallopeptidase 9 (p?<?0.001) gene expression in macrophages while H-PRP did not. This data suggests that PRP from older individuals with OA contain factors that may suppress chondrocyte matrix synthesis and promote macrophage inflammation in vitro. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 37:1760-1770, 2019.
| S-EPMC6824920 | biostudies-literature