Treating Knee Osteoarthritis With Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid Combination Therapy: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652199801
Author(s):  
Michael R. Baria ◽  
W. Kelton Vasileff ◽  
James Borchers ◽  
Alex DiBartola ◽  
David C. Flanigan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Preparation Technique ◽  
Randomized Studies ◽  
Patient Reported

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are injectable treatments for knee osteoarthritis. The focus of previous studies has compared their efficacy against each other as monotherapy. However, a new trend of combining these 2 injections has emerged in an attempt to have a synergistic effect. Purpose: To systematically review the clinical literature examining the combined use of PRP + HA. Design: Systematic review. Methods: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines using PubMed and Embase. The following search terms were used: knee osteoarthritis AND platelet rich plasma AND hyaluronic acid. The review was performed by 2 independent reviewers who applied the inclusion/exclusion criteria and independently extracted data, including methodologic scoring, PRP preparation technique, HA composition, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Results: A total of 431 articles were screened, 12 reviewed in full, and 8 included in the final analysis: 2 case series, 3 comparative, and 3 randomized studies. Average follow-up was 9 months. The modified Coleman Methodology Score was 38.13 ± 13.1 (mean ± SD). Combination therapy resulted in improved PROs in all studies. Of the comparative and randomized studies, 2 demonstrated that combination therapy was superior to HA alone. However, when PRP alone was used as the control arm (4 studies), combination therapy was not superior to PRP alone. Conclusion: Combination therapy with PRP + HA improves PROs and is superior to HA alone but is not superior to PRP alone.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid for treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

10.19082/2115 ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 2115-2122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hassan Niroomand Sadabad ◽  
Masoud Behzadifar ◽  
Farzad Arasteh ◽  
Meysam Behzadifar ◽  
Hamid Reza Dehghan
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Adverse Reactions and Clinical Outcomes for Leukocyte-Poor Versus Leukocyte-Rich Platelet-Rich Plasma in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 232596712110119
Author(s):  
Jun-Ho Kim ◽  
Yong-Beom Park ◽  
Chul-Won Ha ◽  
Young Ju Roh ◽  
Jung-Gwan Park
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Randomized Studies

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has gained attention as a therapeutic option for knee osteoarthritis; however, its efficacy varies widely. Leukocytes in PRP raise the concern of aggravating proinflammatory activity. To date, PRP has rarely been investigated with regard to leukocyte concentration. Purpose: To provide clinical evidence of the intra-articular injection of PRPs containing different leukocyte concentrations. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus databases. PRP was classified into leukocyte-poor (LP-PRP) and leukocyte-rich (LR-PRP). Clinical outcomes including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, and adverse reactions were evaluated. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria were used for quality assessment. Results: Included were 32 studies with an evidence level between 1 and 4. Both LP-PRP and LR-PRP showed improvements above the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in VAS pain score. No significant intergroup difference was seen at 3, 6, or 12 months of follow-up. Regarding function, both LP-PRP and LR-PRP showed improvements above the MCID in the WOMAC and IKDC scores, with no significant difference between the groups. Adverse reactions for pain were significantly higher in LR-PRP than in LP-PRP (odds ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-2.10; P = .01). After intra-articular PRP injection, LR-PRP showed a significantly higher rate of swelling than LP-PRP (odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.99; P = .02). The mean Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score of the included studies was 18.6 (range, 10-24). Conclusion: Intra-articular PRP injection resulted in improvements above the MCID in terms of pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis up to 12 months. The risk of local adverse reactions appeared to be increased after LR-PRP compared with LP-PRP injection. The findings of this review can support the potential use of intra-articular PRP injection for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. In clinical application, clinicians need to consider selecting a specific type of PRP for knee osteoarthritis.

scholarly journals Impact of Platelet-Rich Plasma Use on Pain in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 355-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herman Johal ◽  
Moin Khan ◽  
Shu-hang Patrick Yung ◽  
Mandeep S. Dhillon ◽  
Freddie H. Fu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
English Language ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Lateral Epicondylitis ◽  
Sufficient Information ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Clinically Significant

Context:Amid extensive debate, evidence surrounding the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for musculoskeletal injuries has rapidly proliferated, and an overall assessment of efficacy of PRP across orthopaedic indications is required.Objectives:(1) Does PRP improve patient-reported pain in musculoskeletal conditions? and (2) Do PRP characteristics influence its treatment effect?Data Sources:MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science libraries were searched through February 8, 2017. Additional studies were identified from reviews, trial registries, and recent conferences.Study Selection:All English-language randomized trials comparing platelet-rich therapy with a control in patients 18 years or older with musculoskeletal bone, cartilage, or soft tissue injuries treated either conservatively or surgically were included. Substudies of previously reported trials or abstracts and conference proceedings that lacked sufficient information to generate estimates of effect for the primary outcome were excluded.Study Design:Systematic review and meta-analysis.Level of Evidence:Level 1.Data Extraction:All data were reviewed and extracted independently by 3 reviewers. Agreement was high between reviewers with regard to included studies.Results:A total of 78 randomized controlled trials (5308 patients) were included. A standardized mean difference (SMD) of 0.5 was established as the minimum for a clinically significant reduction in pain. A reduction in pain was associated with PRP at 3 months (SMD, –0.34; 95% CI, –0.48 to –0.20) and sustained until 1 year (SMD, –0.60; 95% CI, –0.81 to –0.39). Low- to moderate-quality evidence supports a reduction in pain for lateral epicondylitis (SMD, –0.69; 95% CI, –1.15 to –0.23) and knee osteoarthritis (SMD, –0.91; 95% CI, –1.41 to –0.41) at 1 year. PRP characteristics did not influence results.Conclusion:PRP leads to a reduction in pain; however, evidence for clinically significant efficacy is limited. Available evidence supports the use of PRP in the management of lateral epicondylitis as well as knee osteoarthritis.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Practice Guidelines on Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid, Corticosteroid, and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis: An International Perspective

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712110302
Author(s):  
Mark Phillips ◽  
Mohit Bhandari ◽  
John Grant ◽  
Asheesh Bedi ◽  
Thomas Trojian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Symptom Relief ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Knee Oa

Background: There are many clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). They differ by region, considering local health care systems, along with cultural and economic factors. Currently, there are conflicting CPG recommendations across the various publications, which makes it difficult for clinicians to fully understand the optimal treatment decisions for knee OA management. Purpose: To summarize the current published CPG recommendations for the role of injections in the nonoperative management of knee OA, specifically with the use of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IA-HA), intra-articular corticosteroids (IA-CS), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Study Design: Systematic review. Methods: A comprehensive search identified all nonoperative knee OA CPGs within the ECRI (formerly Emergency Care Research Institute) Guidelines Trust database, the Guidelines International Network database, Google Scholar, and the Trip (formerly Turning Research Into Practice) database. Guideline recommendations were categorized into strong, conditional, or uncertain recommendations for or against the use of IA-HA, IA-CS, or PRP. Guideline recommendations were summarized and depicted graphically to identify trends in recommendations over time. Results: The search strategy identified 27 CPGs that provided recommendations. There were 20 recommendations in favor of IA-HA use, 21 recommendations in favor of IA-CS use, and 9 recommendations that were uncertain or unable to make a formal recommendation for or against PRP use based on current evidence. Most recommendations considered IA-HA and IA-CS use for symptom relief when other nonoperative options are ineffective. IA-CS were noted to provide fast and short-acting symptom relief for acute episodes of disease exacerbation, while IA-HA may demonstrate a relatively delayed but prolonged effect in comparison. The CPGs concluded that PRP recommendations currently lack evidence to definitively recommend for or against use. Conclusion: Available CPGs provide recommendations on injectables for knee OA treatment. General guidance from a global perspective concluded that IA-CS and IA-HA are favored for different needed responses and can be utilized within the knee OA treatment paradigm, while PRP currently has insufficient evidence to make a conclusive recommendation for or against its use.

scholarly journals Comparative Effectiveness of Alternative Dosing Regimens of Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 461-466
Author(s):  
Kathryn McElheny ◽  
Brett Toresdahl ◽  
Daphne Ling ◽  
Keith Mages ◽  
Irfan Asif
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
English Language ◽  
Single Injection ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Consistent Difference ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Patient Reported

Context: Viscosupplementation is widely used for management of knee osteoarthritis. Many formulations of hyaluronic acid (HA) are available, ranging from a single injection to a series of up to 5 injections per treatment. Objective: To compare efficacy between single and multiple HA injection formulations. Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus databases were all searched. Study Selection: Full-text prospective randomized and nonrandomized controlled human trials, cohort studies, and cost-effectiveness evaluations in the English language comparing different injection regimens of viscosupplementation were included. Study Design: Systematic review. Level of Evidence: Level 1. Data Extraction: Data were collected using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Four databases were searched by a librarian and the principal investigator, identifying 6196 articles for screening. Results: Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria. Of the studies comparing single- with multiple-injection formulations of HA for treatment of knee osteoarthritis, there was no consistent difference in patient-reported outcomes. Furthermore, 5-injection formulations do not appear to be superior to 3-injection formulations. Conclusion: There are limited head-to-head trials comparing viscosupplementation formulations that differ based on number of injections, and in particular, there is a paucity of trials evaluating single-injection formulations. Based on the currently available data, there appears to be similar efficacy with the possibility for greater cost-effectiveness and less patient inconvenience with single-injection formulations.

Intra-Articular Injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid in Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis (Systematic Review and Meta-analysis)

QJM ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 114 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Atef Mohamed El-beltagy ◽  
Zeiad M Zakaria ◽  
; Mohamed Abdel-Samei Ibrahim
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Although PRP is one of the options in the management of knee OA, its effectiveness and wide application is still controversial. Therefore, we conducted the present systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and effectiveness of PRP versus HA injection for knee OA. Objective The purpose of this study is to compare between the efficacy of intra-articular injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid in treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Methods We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis in accordance to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement. PRISMA and MOOSE are reporting checklists for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers of Meta-analyses of interventional and observational studies. According to International committee of medical journal association (ICJME), reviewers must report their findings according to each of the items listed in those checklists. Results The overall effect favoured PRP over HA for WOMAC function score, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC stiffness score, and WOMAC total score; mostly 6 and 12 months after treatment. According VAS score, we found that the overall effect favoured PRP over HA at 12 months only. In contrary, the overall effect did not favour PRP over HA for VAS score at 3 and 6 months. PRP is superior to HA for IKDC scores at 6 and 12 months with similar results at 3 months. Conclusion Intra-articular PRP injection is more effective in terms of pain relief and function improvement at short-term follow-up in the treatment of knee OA than HA, and there is no significant difference in the risk of adverse events between PRP and HA. A randomized controlled trial with larger group sizes is necessary to find the predictors of the response to PRP and HA intra-articular injection.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Intra-Articular Injection of Platelet Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid in Early Knee Osteoarthritis – Case Series

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishnaiah Kurapati ◽  
Sanjay Tapadia ◽  
Madhusudhan Rao ◽  
Kavitha Anbarasu ◽  
Vinod Kumar Verma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Case Series
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document