Suppr超能文献

生物制剂治疗膝骨关节炎。

Biologic Therapies for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopaedics, Center for Joint Preservation and Replacement, Sinai Hospital - Baltimore, Baltimore, MD.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City, NY.

出版信息

J Arthroplasty. 2019 Apr;34(4):801-813. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.12.001. Epub 2018 Dec 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The use of biologic therapies for the management of knee osteoarthritis has increased, despite insufficient evidence of efficacy. Our aim was to complete a systematic review and analysis of reports utilizing the highest level-of-evidence evaluating: (1) platelet-rich plasma injections (PRPs); (2) bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs); (3) adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs); and (4) amnion-derived mesenchymal stem cells (AMSCs).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried for studies evaluating PRP injections, BMSCs, ADSCs, and AMSCs in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Of 1009 studies identified within the last 5 years, 123 met inclusion criteria. A comprehensive analysis of all levels-of-evidence was performed, as well as separate analysis on level-of-evidence I studies. Level-of-evidence was determined by the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons classification system.

RESULTS

Although the majority of PRP reports demonstrated improvements in pain and/or function, others revealed no substantial improvements. Similar findings were noted for BMSCs, ADSCs, and AMSCs. Assessments of BMSC studies yielded majority with positive clinical results, although short-lived. Studies on ADSCs revealed improved clinical outcomes, but equivocal radiographic outcomes. Studies evaluating AMSCs demonstrated improvements in pain and function, and decreased radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSION

Despite some promising early results for PRP, BMSC, ADSC, and AMSC therapies, the majority of level-of-evidence I studies have multiple problems: small sample sizes, potentially inappropriate control cohorts, short-term follow-up, and so on. Despite the limitations, there still appears to be evidence justifying their use for knee osteoarthritis management. More high-level, larger human studies utilizing standardized protocols are needed.

摘要

背景

尽管生物治疗对膝骨关节炎的疗效证据不足,但生物治疗的应用仍在增加。我们的目的是对利用评估最高证据水平的报告进行系统评价和分析:(1)富血小板血浆(PRP)注射;(2)骨髓间充质干细胞(BMSC);(3)脂肪间充质干细胞(ADSC);和(4)羊膜间充质干细胞(AMSC)。

方法

在 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆数据库中检索评估 PRP 注射、BMSC、ADSC 和 AMSC 治疗膝骨关节炎患者的研究。在过去 5 年内,共确定了 1009 项研究,其中 123 项符合纳入标准。对所有证据水平进行了全面分析,并对证据水平 I 研究进行了单独分析。证据水平由美国骨科医师学会的分类系统确定。

结果

尽管大多数 PRP 报告显示疼痛和/或功能有所改善,但其他报告则没有明显改善。BMSC、ADSC 和 AMSC 也有类似的发现。BMSC 研究的评估结果大多数为阳性,但持续时间短。ADSC 研究显示出改善的临床结果,但影像学结果不确定。评估 AMSC 的研究表明疼痛和功能改善,骨关节炎的放射学证据减少。

结论

尽管 PRP、BMSC、ADSC 和 AMSC 治疗有一些早期的有希望的结果,但大多数证据水平 I 研究存在多个问题:样本量小、潜在的不适当对照组、短期随访等。尽管存在局限性,但仍有证据支持将其用于膝骨关节炎的管理。需要更多使用标准化方案的高级别、更大规模的人类研究。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验