Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Research

A COMPARISON OF CLINICAL RESULTS BETWEEN MICROFRACTURE TECHNIQUE WITH THE USE OF PRF INTRA-OPERATIVE INJECTION, PRP POST-OPERATIVE INJECTION AND MICROFRACTURE ONLY FOR OSTEOCHONDRAL LESION OF THE KNEE

8th Combined Meeting Of Orthopaedic Research Societies (CORS)



Abstract

Introduction

Ostochondral lesion of the knee is a common cause of chronic knee pain. Arthroscopic treatment with subcondral microfracture is a widespread technique leading to noticeable improvement of knee function and pain. To improve the effectiveness of this treatment options, we thought to add intra (PRF) or post-operative (PRP) growth factors. Platelet rich plasma (PRP) is obtained by centrifugation of the blood to produce a plasma with high concentration of platelets and growth factors. This latter represents a promising method to manage degenerative cartilage lesion and can be used postoperatively to improve clinical results of patients treated arthroscopically. Platelet Rich Fibrin (PRF) has been presented as a second-generation platelet concentrate, and it is used intraoperatively to cover the microfracuteres’ holes. No literature was found about using of PRF intraoperative in association with arthroscopic microfracture technique. The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes of the treatment of knee osteochondral lesion using arthroscopic microfracture technique alone or in association with PRF Intraoperative application using “Vivostat” system or with PRP “ReGen Lab” postoperative injection.

Patients & Methods

90 patients with clinical and radiographic evidence of osteochondral lesion of the medial or lateral compartment of the knee were enrolled. All patients received arthroscopic debridement and Microfractures and were randomised into 3 groups: 30 patients received microfractures and intraoperative PRF “Vivostat” injection(Group A), 30 patients received microfracture and 3 intra-articular injections of 5.5 mL PRP “Regen”(Group B), 30 patients received microfracture only. IKDC, KOOS and VAS score were administered to all patients before starting the treatment, at 1, 6 and 12 months from the end of the management.

Results

Patients who received microfracture and PRF intraoperative application provided the best outcomes, showing a significant higher clinical scores (P<0.001) compared to the other two groups. Patients underwent PRP postoperative administration reported significant higher score than those undergoing arthroscopic microfracture alone (P<0.005), but lesser than Intraoperative PRF group at 6 months and 1 year follow up.

Discussion/Conclusion

Treatment of osteochondral lesions of the knee using microfracture technique significantly improved functional and pain scores from the pre- to postoperatively time in the overall cohort. Intraoperative application of PRF shows significantly better outcome than postoperative PRP injections. However, additional treatment with intra-articular PRP injection as an adjunct to microfracture technique may offer better clinical outcomes over microfracture technique alone.