Filardo Giuseppe, Di Matteo Berardo, Di Martino Alessandro, Merli Maria Letizia, Cenacchi Annarita, Fornasari PierMaria, Marcacci Maurilio, Kon Elizaveta
II Orthopaedic and Traumatologic Clinic-Biomechanics and Technology Innovation Laboratory, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy.
II Orthopaedic and Traumatologic Clinic-Biomechanics and Technology Innovation Laboratory, Rizzoli Orthopaedic Institute, Bologna, Italy
Am J Sports Med. 2015 Jul;43(7):1575-82. doi: 10.1177/0363546515582027. Epub 2015 May 7.
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disease that will affect almost half the population at some point in their lives through pain and decreased functional capacity. New nonoperative options are being proposed to treat earlier stages of joint degeneration to provide symptomatic relief and delay surgical intervention.
To evaluate the benefit provided by platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections to treat knee joint degeneration in comparison with hyaluronic acid (HA), the most common injective treatment currently adopted for this condition.
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
A total of 443 patients were screened, and 192 of them were enrolled in the study according to the following inclusion criteria: (1) unilateral symptomatic knee with history of chronic pain (at least 4 months) or swelling and (2) imaging findings of degenerative changes (Kellgren-Lawrence score of 0-3 at radiographs or MRI evidence of degenerative chondropathy). Patients underwent 3 weekly intra-articular injections of either PRP or HA. Patients were prospectively evaluated at baseline and then at 2, 6, and 12 months of follow-up using the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score (main outcome), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, EuroQol visual analog scale, and Tegner score. Range of motion, transpatellar circumference, patient satisfaction, and adverse events were also recorded.
Two patients reported severe pain and swelling after HA injections, while no major adverse events were noted in the PRP group. However, PRP presented overall significantly more postinjection swelling and pain. Both treatments proved to be effective in improving knee functional status and reducing symptoms: the IKDC score in the PRP group rose from 52.4 ± 14.1 to 66.2 ± 16.7 at 12 months (P < .0005), and in the HA group it rose from 49.6 ± 13.0 to 64.2 ± 18.0 at 12 months (P < .0005). A similar trend was observed for all the clinical scores used. The comparative analysis of the 2 treatments showed no significant intergroup difference at any follow-up evaluation in any of the clinical scores adopted.
PRP does not provide a superior clinical improvement with respect to HA, and therefore it should not be preferred to viscosupplementation as injective treatment of patients affected by knee cartilage degeneration and OA.
骨关节炎(OA)是一种常见疾病,在人生的某个阶段,几乎一半的人都会受到影响,出现疼痛和功能能力下降的症状。目前正在提出新的非手术治疗方案,用于治疗关节退变的早期阶段,以缓解症状并推迟手术干预。
比较富血小板血浆(PRP)注射与透明质酸(HA)(目前治疗该病最常用的注射治疗方法)治疗膝关节退变的疗效。
随机对照试验;证据等级为1级。
共筛查443例患者,其中192例符合以下纳入标准被纳入研究:(1)单侧有症状膝关节,有慢性疼痛(至少4个月)或肿胀病史;(2)有退变改变的影像学表现(X线片上Kellgren-Lawrence评分为0-3级,或MRI有退行性软骨病的证据)。患者每周接受1次关节内注射,共3次,注射药物为PRP或HA。在基线时对患者进行前瞻性评估,然后在随访的第2、6和12个月使用国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)主观评分(主要结局指标)、膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分、欧洲五维度健康量表视觉模拟量表以及Tegner评分进行评估。记录活动范围、髌周周长、患者满意度和不良事件。
2例患者在注射HA后报告有严重疼痛和肿胀,而PRP组未发现重大不良事件。然而,PRP注射后总体肿胀和疼痛明显更严重。两种治疗方法均被证明能有效改善膝关节功能状态并减轻症状:PRP组的IKDC评分在12个月时从52.4±14.1升至66.2±16.7(P<.0005),HA组在12个月时从49.6±13.0升至64.2±18.0(P<.0005)。所有使用的临床评分均观察到类似趋势。对两种治疗方法的比较分析显示,在任何随访评估中,所采用的任何临床评分在组间均无显著差异。
与HA相比,PRP在临床上并未提供更优的改善效果,因此,作为膝关节软骨退变和OA患者的注射治疗方法,不应优先选择PRP而不选择关节腔注射透明质酸治疗。