Both epidemiologic and clinical research continues to be performed in osteoarthritis (OA). While epidemiologic studies identify risk factors for incident and progressive disease, clinical studies explore the role of both non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments, including oral and intra-articular therapies. We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed for the time period between April 1, 2015 to February 22, 2016. Selected publications in the areas of both epidemiology and treatment are reviewed in this article.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the utilization of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for degenerative cartilage processes and evaluate whether there is sufficient evidence to better define its potential effects.
DESIGN: Systematic literature reviews were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE and Cochrane electronic databases till May 2015, using the keywords "platelet-rich plasma OR PRP OR autologous conditioned plasma OR ACP AND cartilage OR chondrocyte OR chondrogenesis OR osteoarthritis (OA) OR arthritis."
RESULTS: The final result yielded 29 articles. Twenty-six studies examined PRP administration for knee OA and 3 involved PRP administration for hip OA. The results included 9 prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (8 knee and 1 hip), 4 prospective comparative studies, 14 case series, and 2 retrospective comparative studies. Hyaluronic acid (HA) was used as a control in 11 studies (7 RCTs, 2 prospective comparative studies, and 2 retrospective cohort). Overall, all RCTs reported on improved symptoms compared to baseline scores. Only 2 RCTs-one for knee and one for hip-did not report significant superiority of PRP compared to the control group (HA). Nine out of 11 HA controlled studies showed significant better results in the PRP groups. A trend toward better results for PRP injections in patients with early knee OA and young age was observed; however, lack of uniformity was evident in terms of indications, inclusion criteria, and pathology definitions in the different studies.
CONCLUSION: Current clinical evidence supports the benefit in PRP treatment for knee and hip OA, proven to temporarily relieve pain and improve function of the involved joint with superior results compared with several alternative treatments. Further research to establish the optimal preparation protocol and characteristics of PRP injections for OA is needed.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present investigation is to conduct a systematic review of the literature to review the clinical results of platelet rich plasma (PRP) and mesenchymal stem cell treatments (MSC) (biologics) for articular cartilage lesions and osteoarthritis of the knee.
METHODS: A search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies involving biologic therapy for osteoarthritis or osteochondral defects. Only Level I-III clinical trials with at least 3-month follow-up were included. Outcome data was gathered on any patient-completed surveys, 2nd look arthroscopy, follow-up imaging, biopsy/histology results, and any adverse effects of treatment.
RESULTS: Thirty-three articles met our inclusion criteria. There was a total of 21 PRP studies in the study. All PRP studies showed clinical improvement with PRP therapies in outcomes surveys measuring patient satisfaction, pain, and function. Two studies reported no significant difference in improvement compared to hyaluronic acid (HA). Similarly, the 7/9 MSC studies showed improvement. One study found BM-MSC implantation was not significantly superior to matrix assisted chondrocyte implantation (MACI), while one reported peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) did not significantly improve outcomes over HA. Of the three studies looking at a combination of MSC/PRP, two found MSC/PRP combination did not improve outcomes compared to MSC or PRP therapy alone. The one PRP study that had a 2nd look arthroscopy reported increases cartilage regeneration with PRP. All 8 MSC studies with follow-up MRI and all 7 MSC studies with 2nd look arthroscopy showed improvement in cartilage regeneration in terms of coverage, fill of the defect, and/or firmness of the new cartilage.
CONCLUSION: Current data suggests that, of the two treatments, MSC provides more significant disease modifying effect; however, further research needs to be done to compare these two treatments and determine if there is a synergetic effect when combined.
Both epidemiologic and clinical research continues to be performed in osteoarthritis (OA). While epidemiologic studies identify risk factors for incident and progressive disease, clinical studies explore the role of both non-pharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments, including oral and intra-articular therapies. We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed for the time period between April 1, 2015 to February 22, 2016. Selected publications in the areas of both epidemiology and treatment are reviewed in this article.
