Purpose To evaluate the similarities and differences between the variety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) formulations, preparation, and uses to try to determine the best responses for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Materials and Methods A comparison of the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included in the 3 most recent and high-quality meta-analyses to classify the different studies in 2 groups (bad responders group (BRG) and very good responders group (VGRG)). Results and Discussion From the 19 RCTs analyzed, 7 trials were included in the VGRG and 4 in the BRG. In VGRG, 1 or 2 injections were performed in 4/7 trials, time between injections was 2 to 3 weeks in 4/5 studies with many injections, volume injected varied from 2.5 to 8 mL, and single spinning technique was used in 5/7 studies. PRP classification was Mishra 4B and PAWP2Bβ in 5/7 studies. The use of PRP with leukocytes is only found in the BRG. Conclusion There is a lack of standardization in PRP preparation technique for knee osteoarthritis. However it appears that the use of a single spinning technique, a platelet concentration lower than 5 times the baseline, and avoidance of leukocytes should be preferred.

No abstract

h i g h l i g h t sAMPS and MUNIX are equally sensitive to distinguish patients with and without motor neuron disease. Data of both methods are strongly correlated. The utility of AMPS and MUNIX as a reliable marker to document motor unit loss is similar. a b s t r a c tObjective: The aim of this study was to evaluate how the motor unit number index (MUNIX) is related to the adapted multiple point stimulation (AMPS) technique. Methods: MUNIX and AMPS technique were prospectively performed on thenar muscles in 20 consecutive patients referred to our neurophysiological laboratory with the clinical diagnosis of a possible motoneurone disorder (MND). The clinical and paraclinical assessment confirmed the diagnosis of MND in 13 out of 20 patients, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in 9 (with MND group). In the other 7 patients, there were neither evidence of MND, nor of any peripheral nervous system disease (without MND group). Results: AMPS and MUNIX data were significantly (p < 0.001) lower in patients with MND than in patients without MND. There was a strong significant positive linear correlation between AMPS and MUNIX values (n = 20; R = 0.83; p < 0.01). Conclusion: Both MUNIX and AMPS methods could serve as a reliable marker to document the motor unit loss. Significance: The present paper constitutes one more clue of MUNIX reliability.

No abstract

No abstract