1.
Assessment of the effectiveness and satisfaction of platelet-rich plasma compared with hyaluronic acid in knee osteoarthritis at minimum 7-year follow-up: A post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial
Wang Z, Wang R, Xiang S, Gu Y, Xu T, Jin H, Gu X, Tong P, Zhan H, Lv S
Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. 2022;10:1062371
Abstract
Background: Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) can be effectively treated conservatively using platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections into the affected joints. While the short-term therapeutic clinical benefits were well documented, the mid-term results remain undetermined. To clarify its efficacy, the mid-term clinical outcomes of intra-articular injections of either PRP or hyaluronic acid (HA) in KOA were compared. Methods: One hundred patients who complied with the inclusion criteria were randomized to undergo once a week 3 weeks, intra-articular injections of either PRP or HA. Patients were evaluated before the injection, at 3, 6, and a mean of 78.9 months of follow-up. Eighty-five patients reached the final evaluation. Data on survival, re-intervention, pain, function, imaging, and satisfaction were collected and analyzed. Results: With surgery for any reason as the endpoint, the cumulative survival rate of the PRP group was 90%, while that of the HA group was 74%. There was a significant difference between the two groups in the total re-intervention rate (56.7% vs 16.2%, p < 0.05). The comparative analyses showed significant intergroup differences in the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) (p < 0.01, p < 0.05, respectively) at the final follow-up. And base on the regression analyses, the type of treatment, age, and Kellgren-Lawrence (K-L) grade served as statistically an independent determinants of VAS (p < 0.001, p = 0.034, p < 0.001, respectively). Likewise, those variables independently determined WOMAC in our study. However, no difference was observed in the imaging evaluation, containing the K-L grade and Cartilage Lesion Score, between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, the satisfaction treated by the PRP was 78.6%, with a superiority compared with HA (55.8%, p < 0.05), and no complications were noted in the whole treatment process among patients who participated. Conclusion: PRP was more effective than HA in survival and re-intervention rates, VAS, and WOMAC, although there were no significant differences in the imaging evaluation between the two groups. Furthermore, patients treated with PRP were associated with higher satisfaction compared with HA.
2.
Are platelet concentrate scaffolds superior to traditional blood clot scaffolds in regeneration therapy of necrotic immature permanent teeth? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Tang Q, Jin H, Lin S, Ma L, Tian T, Qin X
BMC oral health. 2022;22(1):589
Abstract
BACKGROUND The effectiveness of platelet concentrates in promoting root development of necrotic immature permanent teeth is unclear. The present study evaluated whether the platelet concentrate protocol was superior to the traditional blood clot protocol in regeneration therapy. METHODS We searched Electronic databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials and EMBASE. Randomized controlled trial studies, cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies were included, in which platelet-rich concentrates were tested for periapical healing and root development, with the blood clot treatment protocol as the control group. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were considered. Selected articles were assessed for risk of bias. Pooled risk ratios (risk ratio, RR) were calculated for clinical success, responses to cold and electric pulp tests, periapical lesions, apex closure, root lengthening, and thickening of the dentin walls. Subgroup meta-analysis were conducted according to the type of platelet concentrate used. RESULTS Of the 1272 screened studies, 13 randomized controlled studies, 2 case-control studies and 1 cohort study were selected, in which 465 immature necrotic permanent teeth, particularly incisors and premolars, were treated. Of these 465 teeth, 457 (98.2%) in both the control and experimental groups remained clinically asymptomatic for the entire study duration, whereas eight (1.8%) showed signs and symptoms of failure, including spontaneous pain, sensitivity to percussion or reinfection. Compared with control teeth, teeth treated with PRP achieved better apical healing than BC group (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.01-1.26, P = 0.03), and teeth treated with platelet concentrates showed improved apical closure (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86-1.25, P = 0.69), root lengthening (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.74-1.39, P = 0.93), and thickening of the dentin walls (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.95-1.93, P = 0.09), although these differences were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Platelet concentrates can be used as successful scaffolds for regenerative endodontic treatment of necrotic immature permanent teeth, and PRP as a scaffold may achieve better periapical healing of teeth with periapical inflammation, although they did not differ significantly from conventional blood clot scaffolds in development of the root.