Aims

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanoparticles secreted by all cells, enriched in proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids related to cell-to-cell communication and vital components of cell-based therapies. Mesenchymal stromal cell (MSC)-derived EVs have been studied as an alternative for osteoarthritis (OA) treatment. However, their clinical translation is hindered by industrial and regulatory challenges. In contrast, platelet-derived EVs might reach clinics faster since platelet concentrates, such as platelet lysates (PL), are already used in therapeutics. Hence, we aimed to test the therapeutic potential of PL-derived extracellular vesicles (pEVs) as a new treatment for OA, which is a degenerative joint disease of articular cartilage and does not have any curative or regenerative treatment, by comparing its effects to those of human umbilical cord MSC-derived EVs (cEVs) on an ex vivo OA-induced model using human cartilage explants.

The February 2023 Research Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Clinical and epidemiological features of scaphoid fracture nonunion; Routine sterile glove and instrument change at the time of abdominal wound closure to prevent surgical site infection (ChEETAh); Characterization of genetic risk of end-stage knee osteoarthritis treated with total knee arthroplasty; Platelet-rich plasma or autologous blood injection for plantar fasciitis; Volume and outcomes of joint arthroplasty; The hazards of absolute belief in the p-value laid bare.

Aims. To determine whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection improves outcomes two years after acute Achilles tendon rupture. Methods. A randomized multicentre two-arm parallel-group, participant- and assessor-blinded superiority trial was undertaken. Recruitment commenced on 28 July 2015 and two-year follow-up was completed in 21 October 2019. Participants were 230 adults aged 18 years and over, with acute Achilles tendon rupture managed with non-surgical treatment from 19 UK hospitals. Exclusions were insertion or musculotendinous junction injuries, major leg injury or deformity, diabetes, platelet or haematological disorder, medication with systemic corticosteroids, anticoagulation therapy treatment, and other contraindicating conditions. Participants were randomized via a central online system 1:1 to PRP or placebo injection. The main outcome measure was Achilles Tendon Rupture Score (ATRS) at two years via postal questionnaire. Other outcomes were pain, recovery goal attainment, and quality of life. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Results. A total of 230 participants were randomized, 114 to PRP and 116 to placebo. Two-year questionnaires were sent to 216 participants who completed a six-month questionnaire. Overall, 182/216 participants (84%) completed the two-year questionnaire. Participants were aged a mean of 46 years (SD 13.0) and 25% were female (57/230). The majority of participants received the allocated intervention (219/229, 96%). Mean ATRS scores at two years were 82.2 (SD 18.3) in the PRP group (n = 85) and 83.8 (SD 16.0) in the placebo group (n = 92). There was no evidence of a difference in the ATRS at two years (adjusted mean difference -0.752, 95% confidence interval -5.523 to 4.020; p = 0.757) or in other secondary outcomes, and there were no re-ruptures between 24 weeks and two years. Conclusion. PRP injection did not improve patient-reported function or quality of life two years after acute Achilles tendon rupture compared with placebo. The evidence from this study indicates that PRP offers no patient benefit in the longer term for patients with acute Achilles tendon rupture. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(11):1256–1265

Aims. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) intra-articular injections may provide a simple and minimally invasive treatment for early-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA). This has led to an increase in its adoption as a treatment for knee OA, although there is uncertainty about its efficacy and benefit. We hypothesized that patients with early-stage symptomatic knee OA who receive multiple PRP injections will have better clinical outcomes than those receiving single PRP or placebo injections. Methods. A double-blinded, randomized placebo-controlled trial was performed with three groups receiving either placebo injections (Normal Saline), one PRP injection followed by two placebo injections, or three PRP injections. Each injection was given one week apart. Outcomes were prospectively collected prior to intervention and then at six weeks, three months, six months, and 12 months post-intervention. Primary outcome measures were Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and EuroQol five-dimension five-level index (EQ-5D-5L). Secondary outcomes included visual analogue scale for pain and patient subjective assessment of the injections. Results. A total of 102 patients were recruited. The follow-up period was 12 months, at intervals of six weeks, 12 weeks, six months, and 12 months. KOOS-Total significantly improved in all groups at these time intervals compared to pre-injection. There was an improvement in EQ-5D-5L index scores in saline and single injection groups, but not in the multiple injection group. Comparison of treatment groups showed no additional beneficial effect of single or multiple PRP injections above that displayed in the saline injection group. Subjective patient satisfaction and recommendation of treatment received demonstrated a similar pattern in all the groups. There was no indication of superiority of either single or multiple PRP injections compared to saline injections. Conclusion. There is no evidence that single or multiple PRP had any additional beneficial effect compared to saline injection up to 12 months, follow-up after treatment of early stage symptomatic OA of the knee. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(6):663–671

Introduction. The use of stem cell and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for knee osteoarthritis (OA) is extremely controversial and at best experimental. These treatments are being given to patients across the nation for “cash only payments”. Our objectives were (1) to determine the proportion of board certified orthopedic surgeons who offer stem cell or PRP treatment for knee OA, (2) how much the practices charge for those treatments and (3) if members of the knee society use these therapies. Methods. Board certified orthopedic surgeons’ offices in our county were identified by their AAOS active membership. Knee society membership roll was also utilized. Offices were contacted by telephone and presented with a hypothetical patient with end stage knee osteoarthritis searching for specific treatment (stem cells or PRP injections). T-test was used to compare the Dade county board certified orthopedists to knee society members. Results. A total of 186 board certified orthopedic surgeons’ offices were contacted. 17.6% of all contacted orthopedics offices offered PRP and 12.5% offered stem cell treatments. 61.2% of the offices were transparent on the pricing of PRP while 31.8% gave a price for stem cell therapy. The remaining practices stated that pricing would be “determined or discussed” during a scheduled visit. Mean cost for a PRP injection was $887 (SE 101; range: $350–$1700) and for a stem cell injection was $2800 (SE 852; range: $1000–$6000). Usage of these therapies amongst general AAOS members and Knee Society members was found to be significantly different for both PRP and stem cells (17% vs. 10%; p<0.001 and 26% vs. 13%; p<0.001, respectively). No practice had a “free” research protocol to study the treatments. Conclusions. Biological injectables as a treatment for knee OA has theoretical potential promise in the management of arthritis but continues to be at best investigational. Knee Society members demonstrated significantly more caution using these treatments

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) intra-articular injections obtained from blood donors (homologous PRP) on elderly patients with early or moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA) who are not candidates for autologous PRP treatment. A total of 60 symptomatic patients, aged 65–86 years, affected by hematologic disorders and early or moderate knee OA, were treated with 5 ml of homologous PRP intraarticular injections every 14 days for a total of three injections. Clinical evaluations before the treatment, and after 2 and 6 months were performed by International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Equal Visual Analogue Scale (EQ VAS) scores. Adverse events and patient satisfaction were recorded. No severe complications were noted during the treatment and the follow-up period. A statistically significant improvement from basal evaluation to the 2-month follow-up visit was observed, whereas a statistically significant worsening from the 2-month to the 6-month follow-up visit was showed. The overall worst results were observed in patients aged 80 years or over and in those affected by minor bone attrition. It was found that 90% of patients were satisfied at the 6-month evaluation. Homologous PRP has an excellent safety profile but offers only a short-term clinical improvement in selected elderly patients with knee OA who are not candidates for autologous PRP treatment. Increasing age and developing degeneration result in a decreased potential for homologous PRP injection therapy. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings

Objectives. To conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a larger trial to evaluate the difference in Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) scores at six months between patients with Achilles tendinopathy treated with a platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection compared with an eccentric loading programme. Methods. Two groups of patients with mid-substance Achilles tendinopathy were randomised to receive a PRP injection or an eccentric loading programme. A total of 20 patients were randomised, with a mean age of 49 years (35 to 66). All outcome measures were recorded at baseline, six weeks, three months and six months. Results. The mean VISA-A score for the injection group at the primary endpoint of six months was 76.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 58.3 to 93.7) and for the exercise group was 57.4 (95% CI 38.1 to 76.7). There was no statistically significant difference between these scores (p = 0.171), which was expected from such a pilot study. Conclusions. This pilot study has been key to providing data to inform a larger study and shows that the methodology is feasible. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2013;2:227–32

The August 2013 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: the sternoclavicular joint revisited; surgical simulators: more than just a fancy idea?; arthroscopic tennis elbow release; costly clavicle stabilisation; a better treatment for tennis elbow?; shock news: surgeons and radiologists agree; overhead athletes and SLAP repair; and total shoulder arthroplasty more effective than hemiarthroplasty