Search

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has shown to be clinically effective in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (OA). Notwithstanding, some inconsistences remain due to methodological differences in PRP preparation such as the use (or not) of activation strategies. We aimed to evaluate whether the use of non-activated PRP would be as effective as activated PRP in patients with knee OA.All randomized, placebo-controlled trials were identified through a search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science up to June 2022. Pre- and post-injection pain and function scores were collected. The meta-analysis was conducted with a random-effects model and generic inverse variance method. Effect sizes were estimated using standardized mean differences (SMD).Fourteen clinical trials involving 1292 subjects were included for meta-analysis. Exogenous activation of PRP revealed a significant pain relief (SMD, - 1.05 [95% CI - 1.58 to - 0.52]; p = 0.0001) and a significant functional improvement (SMD, - 1.21 [95% CI - 1.75 to - 0.67]; p 0.0001) unlike studies describing the use of a non-activated PRP. The sensitivity analysis indicated that the effect size for both outcomes was not influenced by a single study.The results of this systematic review suggest that the use of an exogenously activated PRP is more effective in improving both pain and functional scores in patients with knee OA. Key Points • Results from meta-analysis suggest that exogenously activated PRP is clinically more effective than non-activated PRP. • The use of an activated PRP was more frequently reported by the included studies. • The most frequent method for activation was the use of calcium chloride (CaCl

Reports have concluded that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an effective and safe biological approach to treating knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, the effectiveness of PRP in advanced stages of the disease is not entirely clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the use of PRP would be as effective in studies with early-moderate knee OA patients compared to studies including patients with end-stage OA, based on the Kellgren-Lawrence classification.A comprehensive search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of PRP injections versus other intra-articular treatments on pain and functionality. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and the generic inverse variance method.We included 31 clinical trials that reported data of 2705 subjects. Meta-analysis revealed an overall significant improvement of both pain [MD, - 1.05 (95% CI - 1.41 to - 0.68); IOur results indicate that including patients with advanced knee OA does not seem to affect the outcomes of clinical trials in which the effectiveness of the PRP in knee OA is assessed.

The aim of this meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was to evaluate the effect of hydroxychloroquine on glucose control. Randomized controlled trials examining the impact of hydroxychloroquine on glycemic markers were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model and sensitivity analysis through the leave-one-out method. Meta-analysis revealed a significant reduction of fasting glucose (WMD: − 8.05 mg/dl; 95% CI: − 11.17, − 4.93; I2 = 75%; p ˂0.0001), 2-h postprandial glucose (WMD: − 15.52 mg/dl; 95% CI: − 20.61, − 10.42; I2 = 53%; p ˂0.00001), and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values (WMD: − 0.19%, 95% CI: − 0.37, − 0.02; I2 = 94%; p = 0.03) after hydroxychloroquine treatment. Otherwise, meta-analysis showed no significant effect of hydroxychloroquine on insulin levels (WMD: 16.52 μUI/ml; 95% CI: − 16.35, 49.40; I2 = 90%; p = 0.32) and HOMA-β (WMD: − 14.62; 95% CI: − 45.84, 16.59; I2 = 0%; p = 0.36). The present meta-analysis revealed that treatment with hydroxychloroquine improves glucose control through the reduction of fasting glucose, 2-h postprandial glucose, and HbA1c values. Given that the effect of hydroxychloroquine on beta-cell function is based only on two clinical trials, it is not possible to draw definitive conclusions.

To evaluate the efficacy of arthrotomy, when compared with arthroscopy, in the treatment of adults with septic arthritis of any joint. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched to identify studies comparing arthrotomy and arthroscopy as therapeutic approaches in patients with septic arthritis of any joint. The main outcome was the re-infection rate. A meta-analysis was performed using the generic inverse variance method with random or fixed effects model depending on heterogeneity between studies. Heterogeneity was tested with the I2 statistic index. Twenty studies with 10,249 patients treated by arthrotomy or arthroscopy were evaluated. We observed a significant lower risk of re-infection (odds ratio [OR], 1.35 [95% CI, 1.16–1.58]; p = 0.0002) and complications (OR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.12–1.55]; p = 0.001) rate as well as less hospital stay (mean difference [MD], 0.57 days [95% CI, 0.10–1.05]; p = 0.02) favouring arthroscopic intervention. The subanalysis indicated that patients with knee (OR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.17–1.92]; p = 0.001) and shoulder (OR, 1.24 [95% CI, 1.00–1.53]; p = 0.04) septic arthritis intervened by arthrotomy had a higher risk of re-infection. A lower number of hospitalization days (MD, 0.89 days [95% CI, 0.31–1.47]; p = 0.003) and a lower risk for complications (OR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.04–1.52]; p = 0.02) were observed in patients treated with arthroscopy after septic knee arthritis. Available evidence suggests that patients with septic arthritis of the knee and shoulder treated by arthroscopy have less risk of re-infection than those treated by arthrotomy. The quality of the body of evidence is still insufficient to reach reliable conclusions. CRD42020176044. Date registration: April 28, 2020.

To compare the effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection versus placebo (saline injection) on pain and joint function in lateral epicondylitis in randomized placebo-controlled trials. Randomized controlled trials that evaluated pain (visual analog scale [VAS] and patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation [PRTEE]) and/or functional improvement (PRTEE; disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand [DASH]; and Roles–Maudsley score [RMS]) in patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis and compared PRP with placebo injections were considered. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched from inception to October 2019. The assessment of bias was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool version 1. The meta-analysis was conducted with a random effects model and generic inverse variance method. Five trials involving a total of 276 individuals were included. They used a parallel study design and saline solution as placebo. The mean age of participants was 48.0 ± 9.3 years. Follow-up varied from 2 months to 1 year. No significant changes were noted for pain (standardized mean difference [SMD], − 0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI), − 1.32 to − 0.30]) nor functional scores (SMD, − 0.07 [95% CI, − 0.46 to 0.33]) between PRP and placebo injections. The most frequent adverse reaction reported in two of the five studies was transient post-injection pain for a few days (from 16 to 20% in the PRP group and from 8 to 16% in the placebo group). PRP injection was not superior to placebo for relieving pain and joint functionality in chronic lateral epicondylitis. However, patients reported improvement after both interventions in such clinical parameters. Further randomized trials are required to determine whether PRP injection is clinically more effective than placebo (saline injection).

Osteoarthritis (OA) is one of the most common causes of disability and a prevalent chronic disease. The use of collagen is growing due to the satisfactory results in the treatment of OA. However, the possible beneficial effects of collagen for the treatment of OA are currently controversial. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of collagen-based supplements on OA symptoms. PubMed-Medline, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were searched for randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating the effect of orally administered collagen on OA symptoms using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scale and/or the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and a generic inverse variance method. Heterogeneity was tested using the I2 statistic index. Collagen treatment showed a significant reduction in the score of total WOMAC index (WMD − 8.00; 95% CI − 13.04, − 2.95; p = 0.002). After subgroup analysis of the WOMAC subscores, the collagen supplementation revealed a significant decrease in the stiffness subscore (WMD − 0.41; 95% CI − 0.74, − 0.08; p = 0.01), whereas the pain (WMD − 0.22; 95% CI − 1.58, 1.13; p = 0.75) and functional limitation (WMD − 0.62; 95% CI − 5.77, 4.52; p = 0.81) subscores did not have significant differences. Finally, a significant reduction was found in the VAS score after collagen administration (WMD − 16.57; 95% CI − 26.24, − 6.89; p

Although glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate have showed beneficial effects on joint tissues in osteoarthritis (OA), their therapeutic use in the clinical setting is still debatable. Hence, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials was conducted to investigate the efficacy of glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate on knee OA symptoms. Medline, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were searched for randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating the effect of orally administered glucosamine and/or chondroitin sulfate on OA symptoms using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) and/or the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and generic inverse-variance method. Heterogeneity was tested using the I2 statistic index. Treatments with glucosamine and chondroitin were found to significantly reduce pain in VAS [weighted mean difference (WMD) − 7.41 mm, 95% CI − 14.31, − 0.51, p = 0.04 and WMD − 8.35 mm, 95% CI − 11.84, − 4.85, p

Despite an adequate orthopedic treatment with functional bracing, some patients develop a delayed union in humeral shaft fractures. The objective of the present study was to determine the bone consolidation time among patients with delayed union of diaphyseal humeral fractures who were managed with locking compression plate (LCP) fixation combined with an iliac crest autograft using platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as a co-adjuvant. This study was a controlled, randomized, experimental, longitudinal, comparative, prospective, blind clinical trial. Patients diagnosed with delayed union of a diaphyseal humeral fracture with at least 4 months of evolution were treated with an open reduction and LCP osteosynthesis combined with an iliac crest autograft. The experimental group also received PRP. The patients were assessed radiographically until 36 weeks of evolution. A total of 16 patients were included. Both groups had similar demographic characteristics. The patients treated with PRP had an earlier beginning of bone consolidation. Furthermore, these same patients exhibited bone consolidation at 19.9 weeks, on average, in contrast to 25.4 weeks in the control group. The use of PRP promotes earlier bone consolidation in patients with delayed union of the humeral shaft.