Ensayo clínico fase III para evaluar la eficacia y seguridad del uso de plasma rico en plaquetas frente a ácido hialurónico en coxartrosis

Villanova-López, M.M.; Núñez-Núñez, María; Fernández-Prieto, D.; González-López, C.; García-Donaire, José Antonio; Pérez-Pérez, Antonio; Castillo, S.; Murillo-Izquierdo, M; Camean-Fernández, M.; Gutiérrez‐Pizarraya, Antonio; Navas-Iglesias, N; Roca-Ruiz, L.J.; Calleja‐Hernández, Miguel Ángel; Ballester-Alfaro, J.J.

doi:10.1016/j.recot.2019.09.008

Cited by 9 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There were six studies involved in this study and all of them were RCTs [4][5][6][7][8][9]. In total, there were 237 samples in PRP group and 220 samples in HA group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platelet-rich plasma injections for hip osteoarthritis : a systematic review

Silalahi,

Lazio,

Witarsih

2023

World Journal of Current Med and Pharm Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent type of joint disorder. Symptomatic hip OA was observed in 9.2% of adults aged 45 and above, with 27% displaying radiographic evidence of the condition. While there is no definitive cure for OA, numerous research studies have explored the application of PRP (Platelet-Rich Plasma) for addressing knee OA, there is a relatively limited number of investigations dedicated to hip OA. It is important to note that the hip joint possesses distinct characteristics compared to the other three joints. Therefore, in this systematic review, we wanted to focus on hip osteoarthritis and gave a brief update from the previous studies. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines. All randomized control trials that compared injection of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyaluronic Acid in hip osteoarthritis patients using English language from 2018 until 2023 will be included. Six studies involved in this study with total samples of 237 in PRP group and 220 in HA group. The injection site, injection volume, number of injections, interval, and follow up were varied between these studies. All of the patients are undergoing treatment with ultrasound-guided intraarticular injections of PRP. The outcomes tabulated were Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score which showed improvements from the baseline. All of the studies showed improvement of the score from the baseline. Although, there were improvements, it can be concluded that there was not enough evidence to promote the utilization of intra-articular PRP injections as a treatment for hip osteoarthritis. Since international guidelines only recommend intra-articular steroid injections for managing hip OA, it would be advantageous to conduct additional studies comparing PRP to steroids to assess the effectiveness of PRP injections in treating hip OA.

show abstract

“…There were six studies involved in this study and all of them were RCTs [4][5][6][7][8][9]. In total, there were 237 samples in PRP group and 220 samples in HA group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platelet-rich plasma injections for hip osteoarthritis : a systematic review

Silalahi,

Lazio,

Witarsih

2023

World Journal of Current Med and Pharm Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Use of Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma as a Therapeutic Intervention for Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is a cohort of patients in whom hip preservation surgery is not indicated, because they have developed signs of early osteoarthritis (OA), and nor can they have a hip replacement, as they are too early in the disease process. Management of this cohort of patients is not standardised and both pharmacological and nonpharmacological measures are utilised to reduce pain. Interventions available for early OA include intra-articular injections of steroids, viscosupplementation and more recently platelet-rich plasma (PRP). However, the use of PRP in hip OA has not yet been studied systematically. Purpose: To assess intra-articular PRP as a therapeutic intervention for hip OA, including the duration of efficacy, influence of dose and composition of PRP, and the incidence of adverse effects. Study Design: A systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We performed literature searches on the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, WEB OF SCIENCE, COCHRANE, and SCOPUS databases, and the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed. Data were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the methodological index for non-randomized studies instrument, with an additional assessment for randomized controlled trials with the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials. This is the first study to concisely collate the available data on the use of PRP in hip OA. Results: Eight studies were included in the analysis, with data from a total of 331 patients. PRP significantly reduced pain compared with the baseline at multiple time points, with the greatest effect at the 1- to 2-month follow-up, but PRP significantly improved function only at the 1- to 2-month follow-up. A significantly larger reduction in pain was achieved with a single injection of PRP compared with multiple injections, a total injected dose of PRP <15 mL compared with ≥15 mL, and use of a leukocyte-poor PRP preparation compared with leukocyte-rich PRP. There were no lasting adverse effects. Conclusion: Low- and moderate-quality evidence suggests that PRP reduces pain and improves function at the end-point follow-up of studies compared with the baseline. Moderate-quality evidence suggests that a larger reduction in pain is achieved with a single injection of PRP compared with multiple injections, and low-quality evidence attributes a larger reduction of pain with a total injected dose of PRP <15 mL compared with ≥15 mL and using leukocyte-poor PRP compared with leukocyte-rich PRP.

show abstract

Comparison of clinical efficiency between intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Chen

Jin

Yao

et al. 2023

Therapeutic Advances in Musculoskeletal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are non-surgical treatments for osteoarthritis (OA), but the comparison of their efficiency is still inconclusive. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to compare the efficacy of PRP and HA in the treatment of OA by meta-analysis and to explore the effects of different injection times and leukocyte concentration on the efficacy of PRP. Design: Meta-analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted. The data were analyzed by Review Manager v5.4.1. Data sources and methods: Articles were retrieved and screened from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. The outcome included the total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the visual analog scale (VAS), adverse events (AEs), the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and the satisfaction rate. Results: A total of 30 articles involving 2733 patients were included. The total WOMAC score and IKDC score of the PRP group were better than those of the HA group at the last follow-up time, while there was no significant difference in AEs, satisfaction rate, and VAS between the two groups. In our subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference between single-injection PRP and triple-injection PRP. Leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) was better than leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) in IKDC, but there was no significant difference between them in the other scores. Conclusions: In the treatment of OA, compared with HA, PRP performed better in the improvement of the patient’s function. There was no significant difference in VAS and AEs between the two groups, and the safety was comparable. LP-PRP looked to be superior to LR-PRP in functional recovery, but there appeared to be no significant difference in pain relief between them. There was no significant difference between single PRP and triple PRP in the subgroup analysis.

show abstract

Ensayo clínico fase III para evaluar la eficacia y seguridad del uso de plasma rico en plaquetas frente a ácido hialurónico en coxartrosis

Cited by 9 publications

References 17 publications

Platelet-rich plasma injections for hip osteoarthritis : a systematic review

Platelet-rich plasma injections for hip osteoarthritis : a systematic review

The Use of Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma as a Therapeutic Intervention for Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Comparison of clinical efficiency between intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About