Forogh Bijan, Mianehsaz Elaheh, Shoaee Shervan, Ahadi Tannaz, Raissi Gholam R, Sajadi Simin
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Firouzgar Hospital, Tehran, Iran -
J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2016 Jul-Aug;56(7-8):901-8. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
Evidence on the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in treating osteoarthritis (OA) is insufficient. Therefore, the present study compares the effects of a one-time injection of PRP and corticosteroid (CS).
In the present randomized double blind clinical trial, the participants who suffered from knee osteoarthritis (Grades II/III), were randomly divided into two groups: intra articular injection of PRP and CS. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), the 20-Meter-Walk Test (20MW), active and passive ranges of motions (ROM), flexion contracture, and pain intensity based on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were assessed before, 2-months, and 6-months after interventions.
Forty-one participants (48 knees) were involved in the research (66.7% women; average age of 61.1±7.0 years old). Compared to the group treated with corticosteroid, pain relief (df: 6, 35; F=11.0; P=0.007), symptom free (df:6, 35; F=23.0; P<0.001), activities of daily living (ADL) (df:6, 35; F=10.7; P=0.005) and quality of life (df:6, 35; F=5.2; P=0.02) in the RPR group were significantly higher, but sporting ability was not different between the two groups (df: 6, 35; F=0.6; P=0.55). PRP was significantly more helpful for relieving patients' pain (VAS) compared to corticosteroids (df: 6, 35; F=32.0; P=0.001). It is also notable that using PRP was more helpful in improving the 20MW test than corticosteroid treatment (df: 6, 35; F=7.4; P=0.04) but none of the treatments had any impact on active flexion ROM، passive flexion ROM and flexion contracture (P>0.05).
Our study demonstrated that one shot of PRP injection, decreased joint pain more and longer-term, alleviated the symptoms, and enhanced the activity of daily living and quality of life in short-term duration in comparison with CS.
关于富血小板血浆(PRP)治疗骨关节炎(OA)效果的证据不足。因此,本研究比较了一次性注射PRP和皮质类固醇(CS)的效果。
在本随机双盲临床试验中,将患有膝关节骨关节炎(II/III级)的参与者随机分为两组:关节内注射PRP和CS。在干预前、干预后2个月和6个月评估膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分(KOOS)、20米步行试验(20MW)、主动和被动活动范围(ROM)、屈曲挛缩以及基于视觉模拟量表(VAS)的疼痛强度。
41名参与者(48个膝关节)参与了研究(女性占66.7%;平均年龄61.1±7.0岁)。与皮质类固醇治疗组相比,PRP组的疼痛缓解(自由度:6, 35;F = 11.0;P = 0.007)、无症状(自由度:6, 35;F = 23.0;P < 0.001)、日常生活活动(ADL)(自由度:6, 35;F = 10.7;P = 0.005)和生活质量(自由度:6, 35;F = 5.2;P = 0.02)显著更高,但两组的运动能力无差异(自由度:6, 35;F = 0.6;P = 0.55)。与皮质类固醇相比,PRP在缓解患者疼痛(VAS)方面明显更有效(自由度:6, 35;F = 32.0;P = 0.001)。还值得注意的是,使用PRP在改善20MW试验方面比皮质类固醇治疗更有帮助(自由度:6, 35;F = 7.4;P = 0.04),但两种治疗对主动屈曲ROM、被动屈曲ROM和屈曲挛缩均无影响(P > 0.05)。
我们的研究表明,与CS相比,一次性注射PRP在短期内能更有效且更持久地减轻关节疼痛、缓解症状,并提高日常生活活动能力和生活质量。