BackgroundQuite a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA) have been recently published. Therefore, an updated systematic review was performed to evaluate the temporal effect of PRP on knee pain and physical function.MethodsPubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Scopus were searched for human RCTs comparing the efficacy and/or safety of PRP infiltration with other intra-articular injections. A descriptive summary and quality assessment were performed for all the studies finally included for analysis. For studies reporting outcomes concerning Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) or adverse events, a random-effects model was used for data synthesis.ResultsFourteen RCTs comprising 1423 participants were included. The control included saline placebo, HA, ozone, and corticosteroids. The follow-up ranged from 12 weeks to 12 months. Risk of bias assessment showed that 4 studies were considered as moderate risk of bias and 10 as high risk of bias. Compared with control, PRP injections significantly reduced WOMAC pain subscores at 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up (p = 0.02, 0.004, <0.001, respectively); PRP significantly improved WOMAC physical function subscores at 3, 6, and 12 months (p = 0.002, 0.01, <0.001, respectively); PRP also significantly improved total WOMAC scores at 3, 6 and 12 months (all p < 0.001); nonetheless, PRP did not significantly increased the risk of post-injection adverse events (RR, 1.40 [95% CI, 0.80 to 2.45], I 2 = 59%, p = 0.24).ConclusionsIntra-articular PRP injections probably are more efficacious in the treatment of knee OA in terms of pain relief and self-reported function improvement at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up, compared with other injections, including saline placebo, HA, ozone, and corticosteroids.Review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016045410. Registered 8 August 2016.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13018-017-0521-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous concentrated cocktail of growth factors and inflammatory mediators, and has been considered to be potentially effective for cartilage repair. In addition, the fibrinogen in PRP may be activated to form a fibrin matrix to fill cartilage lesions, fulfilling the initial requirements of physiological wound healing. The anabolic, anti-inflammatory and scaffolding effects of PRP based on laboratory investigations, animal studies, and clinical trials are reviewed here. In vitro, PRP is found to stimulate cell proliferation and cartilaginous matrix production by chondrocytes and adult mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), enhance matrix secretion by synoviocytes, mitigate IL-1β-induced inflammation, and provide a favorable substrate for MSCs. In preclinical studies, PRP has been used either as a gel to fill cartilage defects with variable results, or to slow the progression of arthritis in animal models with positive outcomes. Findings from current clinical trials suggest that PRP may have the potential to fill cartilage defects to enhance cartilage repair, attenuate symptoms of osteoarthritis and improve joint function, with an acceptable safety profile. Although current evidence appears to favor PRP over hyaluronan for the treatment of osteoarthritis, the efficacy of PRP therapy remains unpredictable owing to the highly heterogeneous nature of reported studies and the variable composition of the PRP preparations. Future studies are critical to elucidate the functional activity of individual PRP components in modulating specific pathogenic mechanisms.

BackgroundHigh levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines in leukocyte- and platelet-rich plasma (L-PRP) may activate the nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) pathway to counter the beneficial effect of the growth factors on bone regeneration. However, to date, no relevant studies have substantiated this.MethodsL-PRP and pure platelet-rich plasma (P-PRP) were isolated. The in vitro effects of L-PRP and P-PRP on the proliferation, viability and migration of human bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (HBMSCs) and EaHy926, tube formation of EaHy926, and osteogenic differentiation of HBMSCs were assessed by cell counting, flow cytometry, scratch assay, tube formation assay, and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), western blotting and Alizarin red staining, respectively. The in vitro effects of L-PRP and P-PRP on the nuclear translocation of NF-κB p65, mRNA expression of inducible nitric oxide synthase and cyclooxygenase-2, and production of prostaglandin E2 and nitric oxid were assessed by western blotting, RT-PCR, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and Griess reaction, respectively. The in vivo effects of L-PRP or P-PRP preprocessed β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) on the calvarial defects in rats were assessed by histological and immunofluorescence examinations.ResultsP-PRP, which had similar platelet and growth factors concentrations but significantly lower concentrations of leukocytes and pro-inflammatory cytokines compared with L-PRP, promoted the proliferation, viability and migration of HBMSCs and EaHy926, tube formation of EaHy926 and osteogenic differentiation of HBMSCs in vitro, compared with L-PRP. The implantation of P-PRP preprocessed β-TCP also yielded better histological results than the implantation of L-PRP preprocessed β-TCP in vivo. Moreover, L-PRP treatment resulted in the activation of the NF-κB pathway in HBMSCs and EaHy926 in vitro while the postoperative delivery of caffeic acid phenethyl ester, an inhibitor of NF-κB activation, enhanced the histological results of the implantation of L-PRP preprocessed β-TCP in vivo.ConclusionsLeukocytes in L-PRP may activate the NF-κB pathway via the increased pro-inflammatory cytokines to induce the inferior effects on bone regeneration of L-PRP compared with P-PRP. Hence, P-PRP may be more suitable for bone regeneration compared with L-PRP, and the combined use of P-PRP and β-TCP represents a safe, simple, and effective alternative option for autogenous bone graft in the treatment of bone defects.