Platelet-rich plasma in osteoarthritis treatment: review of current evidence

Author:

Gato-Calvo Lucía1,Magalhaes Joana12,Ruiz-Romero Cristina12,Blanco Francisco J.134,Burguera Elena F.5ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Grupo de Investigación en Reumatología (GIR), Agrupación Estratégica CICA-Instituto de Investigación Biomédica (INIBIC), Complexo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña (CHUAC), Sergas, Universidad de A Coruña (UDC), A Coruña, Spain

2. CIBER de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN), Spain

3. Red de Investigación en Inflamación y Enfermedades Reumáticas, INIBIC-CHUAC, A Coruña, Spain

4. ProteoRed/ISCIII, INIBIC-CHUAC, A Coruña, Spain

5. Grupo de Investigación en Reumatología, Agrupación Estratégica CICA-INIBIC, Hospital Universitario A Coruña, Xubias de Arriba 84, 15006 A Coruña, Spain

Abstract

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is defined as a volume of plasma with a platelet concentration higher than the average in peripheral blood. Many basic, preclinical and even clinical case studies and trials report PRP’s ability to improve musculoskeletal conditions including osteoarthritis, but paradoxically, just as many conclude it has no effect. The purpose of this narrative review is to discuss the available relevant evidence that supports the clinical use of PRP in osteoarthritis, highlighting those variables we perceive as critical. Here, recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses were used to identify the latest randomized controlled trials (RCTs) testing a PRP product as an intra-articular treatment for knee osteoarthritis, compared with an intra-articular control (mostly hyaluronic acid). Conclusions in the identified RCTs are examined and compared. In total, five recent meta-analyses and systematic reviews were found meeting the above criteria. A total of 19 individual trials were identified in the five reviews but only 9 were level of evidence I RCTs, and many had moderate or high risks of bias. At present, results from these RCTs seem to favor PRP use over other intra-articular treatments to improve pain scales in the short and medium term (6–12 months), but the overall level of evidence is low. As a result, clinical effectiveness of PRP for knee osteoarthritis treatment is still under debate. This is, prominently, the result of a lack of standardization of PRP products, scarceness of high quality RCTs not showing high risks of bias, and poor patient stratification for inclusion in the RCTs.

Funder

Interreg (POCTEP)-EU Program

axencia galega de innovación

instituto de salud carlos iii

Instituto de Salud Carlos III

Ministerio de Educación y Cultura

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Medicine (miscellaneous)

Cited by 105 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3