PofoliaShared via Pofolia

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders· 2012Q2

Platelet-rich plasma vs hyaluronic acid to treat knee degenerative pathology: study design and preliminary results of a randomized controlled trial

Giuseppe Filardo, Elizaveta Kon, Alessandro Di Martino, Berardo Di Matteo et al.

Short summary

A randomized trial found Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) and Hyaluronic Acid (HA) injections both improved knee pain and function at 12 months, with no statistically significant difference between them in patients with moderate osteoarthritis (OA). PRP showed a trend towards better outcomes in lower-grade degeneration (Kellgren-Lawrence score ≤ 2).

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Both PRP and HA injections improved knee function and pain scores at 12 months in patients with moderate knee OA.
  • No statistically significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between PRP and HA groups.
  • PRP showed a trend towards better results in patients with lower-grade knee degeneration (Kellgren-Lawrence score ≤ 2).
  • PRP injections were associated with a significantly higher rate of mild post-injection pain compared to HA.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Platelet rich plasma (PRP), a blood-derived product rich in growth factors, is a promising treatment for cartilage defects but there is still a lack of clinical evidence. The aim of this study is to show, through a randomized double blind prospective trial, the efficacy of this procedure, by comparing PRP to Hyaluronic Acid (HA) injections for the treatment of knee chondropathy or osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: 109 patients (55 treated with HA and 54 with PRP) were treated and evaluated at 12 months of follow-up. The patients were enrolled according to the following inclusion criteria: age > 18 years, history of chronic (at least 4 months) pain or swelling of the knee and imaging findings of degenerative changes of the joint (Kellgren-Lawrence Score up to 3). A cycle of 3 weekly injections was administered blindly. All patients were prospectively evaluated before and at 2, 6, and 12 months after the treatment by: IKDC, EQ-VAS, TEGNER, and KOOS scores. Range of motion and knee circumference changes were measured over time. Adverse events and patient satisfaction were also recorded. RESULTS: Only minor adverse events were detected in some patients, such as mild pain and effusion after the injections, in particular in the PRP group, where a significantly higher post-injective pain reaction was observed (p=0.039). At the follow-up evaluations, both groups presented a clinical improvement but the comparison between the two groups showed a not statistically significant difference in all scores evaluated. A trend favorable for the PRP group was only found in patients with low grade articular degeneration (Kellgren-Lawrence score up to 2). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that PRP injections offer a significant clinical improvement up to one year of follow-up. However, conversely to what was shown by the current literature, for middle-aged patients with moderate signs of OA, PRP results were not better than those obtained with HA injections, and thus it should not be considered as first line treatment. More promising results are shown for its use in low grade degeneration, but they still have to be confirmed.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 2012 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Urology

UrologyMedicine