Purpose <p>Osteoarthritis (OA) is a widespread joint disease characterized by the gradual loss of cartilage. Intra-articular injections, including platelet-rich plasma (PRP), are commonly used for treatment, but the optimal PRP preparation method remains debated. This study aims to perform a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy of different PRP preparation methods and determine the most effective protocols.</p> Methods <p>The literature search was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating intra-articular injectables in osteoarthritic knees were included. Data were extracted, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were analyzed at 3, 6, and 12–18 months. Clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist network meta-analysis, and treatment options were ranked using the P-Score. Statistical analysis was performed using R 4.3.2.</p> Results <p>Twenty-three RCTs with 1752 patients were included. Treatments included PRP, plasma rich in growth factor (PRGF), leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP), leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), and saline placebo. Leukocyte-rich PRP with low platelet concentration increase, using both anticoagulant and activator showed the best effects on WOMAC pain and stiffness scores within 6 months (WMD = 26.02; 95% CrI, 0.92–52.46). Leukocyte-poor PRP with high platelet concentration increase, using anticoagulant without activator was most effective for WOMAC function and stiffness at 12–18 months (WMD = 18.94; 95% CrI, 8.34–28.12). Long-term results indicated Leukocyte-poor PRP with low platelet concentration increase, using anticoagulant without activator yielded the best outcomes for cartilage repair and function (WMD = 17.09; 95% CrI, -8.4 to 42.78).</p> Conclusions <p>Optimizing OA treatment involves tailoring PRP protocols to disease stage, with low platelet, high leukocyte PRP (RPRP_LPC_Y_Y) recommended for early OA due to its anti-inflammatory effects and high platelet, low leukocyte PRP (PPRP-HPC) preferred for advanced OA to promote tissue repair and regeneration.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

The efficacy of platelet-rich plasma preparation protocols in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

  • Dongsheng Yu,
  • Jiani Zhao,
  • Kun Zhao

摘要

Purpose

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a widespread joint disease characterized by the gradual loss of cartilage. Intra-articular injections, including platelet-rich plasma (PRP), are commonly used for treatment, but the optimal PRP preparation method remains debated. This study aims to perform a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy of different PRP preparation methods and determine the most effective protocols.

Methods

The literature search was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating intra-articular injectables in osteoarthritic knees were included. Data were extracted, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were analyzed at 3, 6, and 12–18 months. Clinical outcomes were compared using a frequentist network meta-analysis, and treatment options were ranked using the P-Score. Statistical analysis was performed using R 4.3.2.

Results

Twenty-three RCTs with 1752 patients were included. Treatments included PRP, plasma rich in growth factor (PRGF), leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP), leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP), hyaluronic acid (HA), and saline placebo. Leukocyte-rich PRP with low platelet concentration increase, using both anticoagulant and activator showed the best effects on WOMAC pain and stiffness scores within 6 months (WMD = 26.02; 95% CrI, 0.92–52.46). Leukocyte-poor PRP with high platelet concentration increase, using anticoagulant without activator was most effective for WOMAC function and stiffness at 12–18 months (WMD = 18.94; 95% CrI, 8.34–28.12). Long-term results indicated Leukocyte-poor PRP with low platelet concentration increase, using anticoagulant without activator yielded the best outcomes for cartilage repair and function (WMD = 17.09; 95% CrI, -8.4 to 42.78).

Conclusions

Optimizing OA treatment involves tailoring PRP protocols to disease stage, with low platelet, high leukocyte PRP (RPRP_LPC_Y_Y) recommended for early OA due to its anti-inflammatory effects and high platelet, low leukocyte PRP (PPRP-HPC) preferred for advanced OA to promote tissue repair and regeneration.