Abstract

BACKGROUND The objective of the study was to determine the changes in clinical outcome (pain and knee activity) and assess bone/ cartilage biomarkers and inflammatory activity in persons with osteoarthritis (OA) knee following a single injection of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (IA-PRP) and combination of intra-articular, intraosseous PRP (IA+IO-PRP). METHODS This prospective, randomized, single-blind clinical trial was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital in India. Ninety-six persons with OA knee with a Kellgren-Lawrence score of 3 were randomized into three groups- Group-I (IA-PRP), Group-II (IA+IO-PRP)], Group-III, [intra-articular normal saline (IA-NS)]. The primary outcome was a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The secondary outcomes were the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), bone/ cartilage turnover biomarkers [C-telopeptide (CTX-II), N-telopeptide (NTX-I), cartilage oligomeric matrix protein (COMP), N-terminal propeptide of collagen type-IIA (PIIANP), and hyaluronic acid (HA)], ultrasonography (USG) findings of the knee joint. The outcome measures were assessed at baseline, 6, and 12 weeks of follow-up. RESULTS Compared to IA-NS injection, IA-PRP and IA+IO-PRP injections significantly improved VAS-pain and KOOS scores at 6 and 12 weeks. Furthermore, both PRP groups showed a significant reduction in ESR, CRP, and CTX-II at 12 weeks following PRP injections. In addition, at 12 weeks, the IA+IO-PRP group showed a significant reduction (p=0.009) in NTX-I level. Persons in the IA+IO-PRP group reported significant reductions in the synovial-effusion and infra-patellar bursitis. CONCLUSIONS Significant clinical improvements were noticed following IA-PRP and IA-IO-PRP injections compared to IA-NS injections. Both PRP groups reported a significant reduction in ESR, CRP, and CTX-II levels at 12 weeks. Persons in the IA+IO-PRP group reported significant changes in u-NTX-I level and knee-USG findings.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Subchondral bony structure damage plays an essential role in the pathogenesis of osteoarthritis (OA) knee. An intra-articular injection cannot reach the damaged subchondral bony structure and treat its pathologies effectively. The objective of the study was to compare the clinical effects of single intra-articular injection with or without intra-osseous injections of PRP in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) knee. METHODS This was a single-blind, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial. Fifty patients, with OA knee (K&L grade III), with ages between 50 and 65 years, were randomly allocated into 'intra-osseous, intra-articular PRP' ('IO+IA-PRP') (n = 25) or 'intra-articular PRP' group ('IA-PRP') (n = 25). Patients in the 'IO+IA-PRP' group received 18 ml PRP injection, and the 'IA-PRP' group received 8 ml PRP injection. Intra-osseous injections were given at the tibial plateau (5 ml) and femoral condyle (5 ml), along with intra-articular knee injection (8 ml), under fluoroscopic guidance. Outcomes were measured using VAS-pain, the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), and the treatment satisfaction scale. All patients (n = 50) were followed up till six months. RESULTS The mean age was 57.12(4.27) years and 57.00(4.96) years in the 'IO+IA-PRP' and 'IA-PRP' groups. Both groups showed significant improvement in pain relief (VAS pain) and KOOS parameters: pain, symptoms, ADL function, sport and recreation function, and quality of life. Compared to the 'IA-PRP' group, the 'IO+IA-PRP' group showed a greater reduction of VAS pain at six months. However, no significant difference was obtained in VAS pain-relief between these two groups (p = 0.422) at six months. Similarly, at 6 months, in inter-group comparison, except 'sport and recreation function' (p < 0.05), no significant differences were obtained in mean-scores of KOOS parameters: pain (p = 0.514); symptom (p = 0.148), ADL-function (p = 0.991), QoL-(p = 0.376). Patients in the 'IO+IA-PRP' group complained of significant 'injection-associated' adverse events and consumed a greater number of Acetaphenomen. CONCLUSIONS Both groups showed significant improvement following the intervention. Intra-osseous PRP injections did not provide any additional benefit over intra-articular PRP injection until six months regarding pain relief and functional improvement.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Exchange transfusion is a valuable treatment option in sickle cell disease (SCD) and is preferred over simple transfusion as it removes abnormal haemoglobin S (HbS) levels and reduces complications. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of automated red cell exchange (aRBX) procedure over manual red cell exchange transfusion (MET) in SCD patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS A standard meta-analysis protocol was developed, and after performing a comprehensive literature search in PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane and International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP), reviewers assessed eligibility and extracted data from nine relevant studies. A random effects model was used to estimate the pooled effect size calculated from the mean difference in HbS percentage, serum ferritin level and risk ratio for the adverse events. Quality assessment was done using the risk-of-bias assessment tool, and a summary of observations was prepared using standard Cochrane methodology with GradePro GDT. RESULTS The random-model analysis revealed a mean difference of 4.10 (95% CI: -3.29-11.49; Z = 1.09; p = 0.28) for HbS percentage, mean difference of 435.29 (95% CI: -73.74-944.32; Z = 1.68; p = 0.09) for serum ferritin and pooled risk ratio of 1.35 (95% CI: 0.63-2.87; Z = 0.77; p = 0.44) for adverse events. CONCLUSION This meta-analysis did not reveal any significant benefit of aRBX in reducing HbS percentage and attenuating the serum ferritin level when compared with MET. There was also no significant increased risk of adverse events detected in association with aRBX.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) has been used in severe COVID-19 disease to eliminate the cytokine storm. This meta-analysis aims to assess the effectiveness of TPE in reducing mortality in severe COVID-19 disease compared to standard treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, the Cochrane database and the International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (ICTRP). The random-effect model was used to calculate the risk ratio and standardized mean difference (SMD) as pooled effect size for the difference in mortality and length of the intensive care unit (ICU) stay. The risk of bias and publication bias were assessed in R version 4.1.0. The certainty of the evidence was calculated using the GradePro tool. RESULTS The database identified 382 participants from six studies, including one randomized control trial. Egger's test did not detect any publication bias (p = 0.178). The random model analysis for mortality evaluated a risk ratio of 0.38 (95% CI: 0.28-0.52) with a significant reduction in the TPE group. The certainty of the evidence was moderate, with a risk ratio of 0.34 (95% CI: 0.24-0.49). Length of ICU stays between TPE versus standard care showed an SMD of 0.08 (95% CI: -0.38, 0.55) and was not significant. CONCLUSION The length of ICU stay in the TPE group was not different from standard care. However, this meta-analysis revealed a significant benefit of TPE in reducing mortality in severe COVID-19 disease compared to standard treatment.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Platelet refractoriness, which leads to platelet transfusion failure resulting in significant morbidity and long hospital stay, is routinely not investigated. AIMS To determine the efficacy of cross-match compatible platelets in multi-transfused alloimmunized hemato-oncological patients refractory to platelet transfusion. MATERIALS AND METHOD 149 ABO compatible single donor apheresis platelet transfusions given to 38 alloimmunized refractory patients. Corrected Count Increment (CCI) <5000 (1h) was taken to define refractoriness. Solid-phase red cell adherence assay was used to determine the alloimmunization status and platelet cross-matching. Post Transfusion Platelet Increment, CCI and the Percentage Platelet Recovery were used to monitor the effectiveness of platelet transfusion. ANOVA test followed by Post hoc test Tukey HSD used to compare group means and classified into three groups depending upon the cross-matching and compatibility status. Categorical data was analysed for various outcomes using Pearson's chi square test or Fischer exact test. RESULT Patients showed statistically significant recovery in terms of PPI, CCI and PPR at 1h post SDAP transfusions when they received cross-matched compatible platelets. The one-hour CCI was significantly higher for cross-match-compatible platelets (19173+/-2692) than for incompatible (5888+/-1526) and for uncross-matched (8140+/-1480). Forty four (97.8%) of 45 cross-matched compatible platelet transfusion episodes showed a satisfactory response in terms of PPI and CCI values as compared to 50 % and 53.9% in uncross-matched group respectively (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION Platelet cross-matching is an effective intervention in the management of multi-transfused alloimmunized Haemato-oncological patients, refractory to platelet transfusion.

Abstract

PURPOSE We set out to assess the resuscitation fluid requirements and physiological and clinical responses of intensive care unit (ICU) patients resuscitated with 20% albumin versus 4-5% albumin. METHODS We performed a randomised controlled trial in 321 adult patients requiring fluid resuscitation within 48 h of admission to three ICUs in Australia and the UK. RESULTS The cumulative volume of resuscitation fluid at 48 h (primary outcome) was lower in the 20% albumin group than in the 4-5% albumin group [median difference - 600 ml, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 800 to - 400; P < 0.001]. The 20% albumin group had lower cumulative fluid balance at 48 h (mean difference - 576 ml, 95% CI - 1033 to - 119; P = 0.01). Peak albumin levels were higher but sodium and chloride levels lower in the 20% albumin group. Median (interquartile range) duration of mechanical ventilation was 12.0 h (7.6, 33.1) in the 20% albumin group and 15.3 h (7.7, 58.1) in the 4-5% albumin group (P = 0.13); the proportion of patients commenced on renal replacement therapy after randomization was 3.3% and 4.2% (P = 0.67), respectively, and the proportion discharged alive from ICU was 97.4% and 91.1% (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS Resuscitation with 20% albumin decreased resuscitation fluid requirements, minimized positive early fluid balance and was not associated with any evidence of harm compared with 4-5% albumin. These findings support the safety of further exploration of resuscitation with 20% albumin in larger randomised trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION http://www.anzctr.org.au . Identifier ACTRN12615000349549.