Dataset Information

Cytokine Profiling and Intra-Articular Injection of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma in Knee Osteoarthritis.

ABSTRACT: 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.

SUBMITTER: Riewruja K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8779764 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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 .

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.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Mesenchymal stromal cells are a safe and promising option to treat knee osteoarthritis as previously demonstrated in different clinical trials. However, their efficacy, optimal dose and addition of adjuvants must be determined. Here, we evaluated the clinical effects of a dose of 100?×?106 bone marrow mesenchymal stromal cells (BM-MSCs) in combination with Platelet Rich Plasma (PRGF®) as adjuvant in a randomized clinical trial. METHODS:A phase II, multicenter, randomized clinical trial with active control was conducted. Sixty patients diagnosed with knee OA were randomly assigned to 3 weekly doses of PRGF® or intraarticular administration of 100?×?106 cultured autologous BM-MSCs plus PRGF®. Patients were followed up for 12 months, and pain and function were assessed using VAS and WOMAC and by measuring the knee range of motion range. X-ray and magnetic resonance imaging analyses were performed to analyze joint damage. RESULTS:No adverse effects were reported after BM-MSC administration or during follow-up. According to VAS, the mean value (SD) for PRGF® and BM-MSC with PRGF® went from 5 (1.8) to 4.5 (2.2) (p?=?0.389) and from 5.3 (1.9) to 3.5 (2.5) (p?=?0.01), respectively at 12 months. In WOMAC, the mean (SD) baseline and 12-month overall WOMAC scores in patients treated with PRGF® was 31.9 (16.2) and 22.3 (15.8) respectively (p?=?0.002) while that for patients treated with BM-MSC plus PRGF® was 33.4 (18.7) and 23.0 (16.6) (p?=?0.053). Although statistical significances between groups have been not detected, only patients being treated with BM-MSC plus PRGF® could be considered as a OA treatment responders following OARSI criteria. X-ray and MRI (WORMS protocol) revealed no changes in knee joint space width or joint damage. CONCLUSIONS:Treatment with BM-MSC associated with PRGF® was shown to be a viable therapeutic option for osteoarthritis of the knee, with clinical improvement at the end of follow-up. Further phase III clinical trials would be necessary to confirm the efficacy. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov identifier NCT02365142. Nº EudraCT: 2011-006036-23.

Project description:BackgroundKnee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common, chronic, progressive and degenerative disease which affects patients' quality of life and may cause disability and social isolation. OA is a huge economic burden for the patient and a large strain for the whole healthcare system. Articular cartilage has a small potential to repair, with progressively more clinicians emphasizing cellular therapy. Subcutaneous fat tissue in human body is a large reservoir of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and is been harvested in minimally invasive, simple procedure. Up to date there is no prospective randomized controlled studies demonstrating effectiveness and role of adipose tissue injections in OA treatment. The purpose of this study is to assess functional and clinical changes among patients with symptomatic knee OA treated with intra-articular injections of autologous adipose tissue or platelet rich plasma (PRP) and to compare efficacy of both therapeutic methods.MethodsThis is a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Patients who meet inclusion criteria will be allocated to Fat Tissue group or PRP group randomly. Subjects will receive an intra articular injection with autologous adipose tissue and PRP respectively. Patients will be assessed five times: before treatment and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after the treatment. The assessment consists of patient reported outcome measures (The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee 2000, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Health Questionnaire EQ- 5D- 5 L), three functional tests (The Timed Up and Go Test, The 5 Times Sit to Stand Test, The 10 m Walk Test) and Maximal Isometric Voluntary Contraction.DiscussionThis study protocol has several strengths and weaknesses. One of strongest point of this study is the wide, multidimensional functional assessment which will give a large amount of objective data. On the other hand, lack of blinding has to be considered as a risk of both subject and investigator bias.Trial registrationname of registry: ClinicalTrials.gov, trial registration number: NCT04321629, retrospectively registered on date of registration.

Project description:The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical and economic benefits of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) in Chinese patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). A total of 86 patients (42 treated with PRP and 44 with HA) were treated with three weekly intra-articular injections. The inclusion criteria included patients between 18 and 75 years of age, with chronic knee pain or swelling lasting >3 months and X-ray findings of degenerative joint alterations according to the Kellgren-Lawrence score grade I-III. Clinical examinations were performed before treatment, at 1- and 6-month post-injection intervals. International Knee Documentation Committee subjective, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities and visual analogue scale scores were determined at each examination. Adverse reactions, average cost, treatment time and patient satisfaction were also recorded. Compared with patients injected with HA, PRP was found to be associated with increased and more severe post-injection pain and swelling, where the duration of adverse reactions was greater in the PRP group (P=0.02). During the follow-up evaluations, both groups showed statistically significant improvements in all clinical scores from pre-injection to 1- and 6-month assessments (P<0.05). However, no significant inter-group (PRP vs. HA) differences were observed in the clinical scores between the two follow-up time points. There were also no significant differences in clinical score between the groups with regards to the Kellgren-Lawrence grade I, II or III. The average cost of PRP injections was 22.8X that of HA administration and the average treatment time was 5X that of HA, but there was no significant difference in patient satisfaction. These preliminary results indicate that although PRP injections can significantly improve clinical outcome in patients with knee OA, PRP is not any more effective compared with HA. Furthermore, PRP injections are associated with higher costs and treatment times. Therefore, additional clinical studies are required before PRP injections can be considered as a first-line treatment option for knee OA.

Dataset Information

Cytokine Profiling and Intra-Articular Injection of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma in Knee Osteoarthritis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets