The Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis Symptoms and Structural Changes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, MD 21215. Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, MD 21215. Electronic address: delanois@me.com.

The Journal of arthroplasty. 2022
Abstract
BACKGROUND Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) usage in orthopaedics continues to rise despite guidelines suggesting non-superiority to comparative cohorts. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on PRP efficacy using two clinical assessments: (1) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and (2) Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). We assessed consistency and clinical relevancy by determining study heterogeneity (e.g., sample sizes, ages, BMIs, arthritic severities, etc.). Comparative cohorts were: (A) hyaluronic acid (HA); (B) corticosteroid (CS); (C) normal saline (NS); and (D) exercise therapy. We performed sub-analyses of structural changes assessed on ultrasound, radiograph, or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS We utilized PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases up to December 1, 2021, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic-Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Twenty-four studies met criteria, with comparisons to: HA (n=11); CS (n=6); NS (n=5); and exercise therapy (n=3). Seven studies assessed structural changes. Evaluations utilized a methodological scoring system. I(2) statistics and forest plots pooled analyses and delineated study results. RESULTS PRP led to VAS and WOMAC improvements in most studies when compared to HA, CS, and NS (p≤0.05). Comparison to exercise therapy resulted in inconclusive findings (p≥0.05). However, substantial heterogeneity (I(2) ≥76%) was reported due to study variability. No differences were found when assessing structural changes or cartilage thickness by MRI (standardized mean difference -0.01 [-0.19, 0.18], p=0.91). CONCLUSIONS PRP may be associated with pain and functional improvements but was not clinically relevant (inconsistent study- and patient-metrics). Additionally, PRP did not confer superiority when assessing knee-related structural changes.
Study details
Study Design : Systematic Review
Language : eng
Additional Material : Letter in: ‘The Journal of Arthroplasty’, (2022), PMID: 36229160, 37(11): e16-e17, DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2022.06.001">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2022.06.001</a> Commentary on: ‘The Journal of Arthroplasty’, (2022), PMID: 36229159, 37(11): e15, DOI: <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2022.06.002">http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2022.06.002</a>
Credits : Bibliographic data from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine