白细胞不会影响注射富血小板血浆治疗膝骨关节炎的安全性和有效性:双盲随机对照试验

Iacopo Romandini, Angelo Boffa, Alessandro Di Martino, Luca Andriolo, Annarita Cenacchi, Elena Sangiorgi, Simone Orazi, Valeria Pizzuti, Stefano Zaffagnini, Giuseppe Filardo
{"title":"白细胞不会影响注射富血小板血浆治疗膝骨关节炎的安全性和有效性:双盲随机对照试验","authors":"Iacopo Romandini, Angelo Boffa, Alessandro Di Martino, Luca Andriolo, Annarita Cenacchi, Elena Sangiorgi, Simone Orazi, Valeria Pizzuti, Stefano Zaffagnini, Giuseppe Filardo","doi":"10.1177/03635465241283500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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; P = .046), as well as for active ( P = .021) and passive ( P = .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 ( P = .042) and contralateral ( P = .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 ( P < .0005) and from 45.7 ± 16.4 to 55.3 ± 20.4 for the LP-PRP group ( P = .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).","PeriodicalId":517411,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"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\",\"authors\":\"Iacopo Romandini, Angelo Boffa, Alessandro Di Martino, Luca Andriolo, Annarita Cenacchi, Elena Sangiorgi, Simone Orazi, Valeria Pizzuti, Stefano Zaffagnini, Giuseppe Filardo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03635465241283500\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"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; P = .046), as well as for active ( P = .021) and passive ( P = .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 ( P = .042) and contralateral ( P = .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 ( P < .0005) and from 45.7 ± 16.4 to 55.3 ± 20.4 for the LP-PRP group ( P = .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).\",\"PeriodicalId\":517411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The American Journal of Sports Medicine\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The American Journal of Sports Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465241283500\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465241283500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:富血小板血浆(PRP)越来越多地被用于膝关节骨关节炎(OA)的注射治疗。目的:比较富含白细胞的 PRP(LR-PRP)和缺乏白细胞的 PRP(LP-PRP)治疗膝关节 OA 的安全性和有效性。研究设计:随机对照试验;证据级别:1。方法:这项双盲随机对照试验纳入了132名凯尔格伦-劳伦斯1-3级膝关节OA患者,他们被随机分配到LR-PRP或LP-PRP的3个注射周期中。患者在基线和2、6、12个月时接受前瞻性评估,主观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(西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数)、疼痛视觉模拟量表、EuroQol-视觉模拟量表、EuroQol-5维度和Tegner活动量表。客观评估包括 IKDC 客观评分、主动/被动活动范围、指数膝关节和对侧膝关节的周长。结果:除了 IKDC 主观评分在 2 个月后的改善幅度较大外,LR-PRP 组与 LP-PRP 组相比(14.8 ± 14.8 vs 8.6 ± 13.3;P = .046),以及6个月时指数膝关节的主动(P = .021)和被动(P = .040)ROM,LP-PRP组的数值显著高于LP-PRP组;12个月时指数膝关节的股四头肌周长(P = .042)和对侧膝关节的股四头肌周长(P = .045),LR-PRP组的数值显著高于LP-PRP组。LR-PRP组的IKDC主观评分从基线时的(42.5 ± 17.6)提高到12个月时(55.6 ± 21.4)(P < .0005),LP-PRP组从(45.7 ± 16.4)提高到(55.3 ± 20.4)(P = .001)。在所有随访时间点,患者对治疗的判断均无差异。没有与治疗相关的严重不良事件报告,但观察到一些与治疗相关的轻度不良事件:LR-PRP组16例,LP-PRP组17例。结论:这项双盲随机对照试验表明,白细胞不会影响关节内注射 PRP 治疗膝关节 OA 患者的安全性和有效性。在所有随访时间点上,LR-PRP和LP-PRP的临床疗效相当,在主观和客观疗效、不良反应和治疗失败方面均无差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
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
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; P = .046), as well as for active ( P = .021) and passive ( P = .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 ( P = .042) and contralateral ( P = .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 ( P < .0005) and from 45.7 ± 16.4 to 55.3 ± 20.4 for the LP-PRP group ( P = .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).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Thank You, Reviewers! Strengthening the Evidence: Addressing Biases in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Studies: Response Strengthening the Evidence: Addressing Biases in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Studies: Letter to the Editor In Gratitude Presidential Address of the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1