白细胞并不影响富血小板血浆注射治疗膝骨关节炎的安全性和疗效:一项双盲随机对照试验。
Leukocytes Do Not Influence the Safety and Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.
机构信息
Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica II, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Servizio Trasfusionale Unico Metropolitano, Bologna, Italy.
出版信息
Am J Sports Med. 2024 Nov;52(13):3212-3222. doi: 10.1177/03635465241283500. Epub 2024 Oct 12.
BACKGROUND
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is increasingly used for the injection treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, the role of leukocytes contained in PRP is controversial, with some preclinical studies suggesting detrimental effects and others emphasizing their contribution in secreting bioactive molecules.
PURPOSE
To compare the safety and effectiveness of leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) and leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) for the treatment of knee OA.
HYPOTHESIS
That leukocytes could influence results both in terms of adverse events and clinical outcomes.
STUDY DESIGN
Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.
METHODS
This double-blind randomized controlled trial included 132 patients with Kellgren-Lawrence grade 1-3 knee OA who were randomized to a 3-injection cycle of either LR-PRP or LP-PRP. Patients were prospectively assessed at baseline and at 2, 6, and 12 months with subjective evaluations comprising the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective score, the KOOS (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score), the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index), the visual analog scale for pain, the EuroQol-visual analog scale, the EuroQol-5 dimensions, and the Tegner activity scale. Objective evaluations consisted of the IKDC objective score, active/passive range of motion, and circumference of the index and contralateral knees. Patient judgment of the treatment was recorded as well as adverse reactions and failures.
RESULTS
An overall improvement in subjective and objective outcomes was documented, with no differences between the 2 groups, except for the improvement in the IKDC subjective score at 2 months, which was greater for the LR-PRP group compared with the LP-PRP group (14.8 ± 14.8 vs 8.6 ± 13.3, respectively; = .046), as well as for active ( = .021) and passive ( = .040) ROM of the index knee at 6 months, showing statistically significant higher values in the LP-PRP group; and for quadriceps circumference of the index ( = .042) and contralateral ( = .045) knees at 12 months, which were significantly greater in the LR-PRP group. The IKDC subjective score improved from 42.5 ± 17.6 at baseline to 55.6 ± 21.4 at 12 months for the LR-PRP group ( < .0005) and from 45.7 ± 16.4 to 55.3 ± 20.4 for the LP-PRP group ( = .001). No differences in terms of patient treatment judgment were observed at all follow-up time points. No severe adverse events related to the treatment were reported, but some mild adverse events related to the treatment were observed: 16 in the LR-PRP group and 17 in the LP-PRP group. Treatment failed in 5 patients in the LR-PRP group and 2 in the LP-PRP group.
CONCLUSION
This double-blind randomized controlled trial demonstrated that leukocytes did not affect the safety and efficacy of intra-articular PRP injections for the treatment of patients with knee OA. Both LR-PRP and LP-PRP demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes at all follow-up time points, without showing differences in subjective and objective outcomes or in adverse events and treatment failures.
REGISTRATION
NCT04187183 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
背景
富含血小板的血浆(PRP)越来越多地用于膝关节骨关节炎(OA)的注射治疗。然而,PRP 中所含白细胞的作用存在争议,一些临床前研究表明存在不利影响,而另一些研究则强调其在分泌生物活性分子方面的作用。
目的
比较富含白细胞的 PRP(LR-PRP)和白细胞减少的 PRP(LP-PRP)治疗膝骨关节炎的安全性和有效性。
假设
白细胞可能会影响不良事件和临床结果。
研究设计
随机对照试验;证据水平,1 级。
方法
这项双盲随机对照试验纳入了 132 例膝关节 OA 患者,Kellgren-Lawrence 分级为 1-3 级,他们被随机分为 3 次注射循环的 LR-PRP 或 LP-PRP。患者在基线和 2、6 和 12 个月时进行前瞻性评估,包括国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)主观评分、KOOS(膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分)、WOMAC(西部安大略省和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数)、疼痛视觉模拟评分、EuroQol-视觉模拟评分、EuroQol-5 维度和 Tegner 活动量表。客观评估包括 IKDC 客观评分、主动/被动关节活动度以及指数和对侧膝关节的周长。记录患者对治疗的判断以及不良反应和失败情况。
结果
记录到主观和客观结果的整体改善,两组之间无差异,但在 2 个月时 LR-PRP 组的 IKDC 主观评分改善更大,与 LP-PRP 组相比(分别为 14.8±14.8 与 8.6±13.3, =.046),以及 6 个月时指数膝关节的主动( =.021)和被动( =.040)ROM,LP-PRP 组的数值更高;12 个月时指数( =.042)和对侧( =.045)膝关节的股四头肌周长,LR-PRP 组的数值明显更大。LR-PRP 组的 IKDC 主观评分从基线时的 42.5±17.6 改善至 12 个月时的 55.6±21.4( <.0005),LP-PRP 组从基线时的 45.7±16.4 改善至 12 个月时的 55.3±20.4( =.001)。在所有随访时间点,患者对治疗的判断均无差异。未报告与治疗相关的严重不良事件,但观察到与治疗相关的一些轻度不良事件:LR-PRP 组 16 例,LP-PRP 组 17 例。LR-PRP 组 5 例和 LP-PRP 组 2 例治疗失败。
结论
这项双盲随机对照试验表明,白细胞不会影响关节内 PRP 注射治疗膝关节 OA 患者的安全性和疗效。LR-PRP 和 LP-PRP 在所有随访时间点均表现出相似的临床结果,在主观和客观结果、不良事件和治疗失败方面均无差异。
登记
NCT04187183(ClinicalTrials.gov)。