Women show a positive response to platelet-rich plasma despite presenting more painful knee osteoarthritis than men.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of gender on the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), comparing their short-term response between men and women. METHODS: Four hundred-eighteen patients (529 knees) were included. Patients were treated with three injections of PRP on a weekly basis. Blood and PRP samples were randomly tested. Patients were asked to complete the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) and 12-item short form survey (SF-12), at baseline and 6 months. Success rates were calculated according to a reduction in the pain score of at least 9.3 points [minimal clinically important improvement (MCII)]. Comparative tests and multivariate regression were performed. RESULTS: The PRP had a platelet concentration factor of 2.0X compared to blood levels, with no leucocytes or erythrocytes. KOOS scores showed an increase from baseline to 6 months (p < 0.0001). There was an increase in the physical component summary (PCS) (p < 0.0001) and mental component summary (MCS) (p < 0.01) of the SF-12. The number of knees of women with MCII was 156 out of 262 (59.6%), whereas the number of knees of men was 136 out of 267 (50.9%) (p = 0.0468). Women had worse baseline scores on pain (p = 0.009), PCS (p < 0.0001) and MCS (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Although the symptomatology generated by KOA was worse in women when compared to men, treatment with repeated injections of PRP was effective, ultimately achieving a higher improvement in women providing comparable final follow-up outcomes between men and women. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

High survival rate after the combination of intrameniscal and intraarticular infiltrations of platelet-rich plasma as conservative treatment for meniscal lesions.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of applying a combination of intrameniscal and intraarticular infiltrations of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in patients with meniscal tears, analyzing its failure rate and clinical evolution, as well as factors that may influence the positive response to this treatment. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety-two cases out of 696 met the inclusion criteria and were included in this work. Survival and patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) were collected and analyzed. Survival rate was defined as the percentage of patients who did not undergo meniscus surgery during their follow-up time. Patients were asked to complete the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at baseline, 6 months and 18 months. Other patient- and pathology-related variables were collected. Blood and PRP samples were randomly tested as a quality control measure. Survival and comparative statistical tests, and multivariate regression were performed for the analysis of the variables. RESULTS: The PRP applied had a platelet concentration factor of 1.9X in respect to blood levels, with no leukocytes or erythrocytes. Thirty-eight patients required surgical intervention after treatment reaching a survival rate of 90.3% with an estimated mean survival time of 54.4 months. The type of injury (P = 0.002) and the presence of chondropathy were risk factors for surgical intervention after PRP treatment (P = 0.043). All KOOS scores showed a significant statistical increase from baseline to 6 months (N = 93) and 18 months (N = 66) (P < 0.0001). The number of cases with minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) at 6 months and 18 months post-treatment was 65 (69.9%) and 43 (65.2%), respectively. CONCLUSION: The combination of intrameniscal and intraarticular PRP infiltrations is a valid conservative treatment for meniscal injuries avoiding the need for surgical intervention. Its efficacy is higher in horizontal tears and decreases when joint degeneration is present. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Platelet-rich plasma injections delay the need for knee arthroplasty: a retrospective study and survival analysis.

PURPOSE: The biological action of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) could slow down the osteoarthritis progression, resulting in a delay of joint replacement. This work aims to evaluate the ability of PRP to postpone and even avoid knee replacement in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) analyzing, on the one hand, the time of delay and on the other hand the percentage of patients without undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: A retrospective analysis and a survival analysis were conducted. KOA patients who underwent knee replacement between 2014 and 2019 and previously received PRP infiltrations were included in the retrospective analysis. Regarding survival analysis, KOA patients who received PRP treatment during 2014 and with follow-up until 2019 were included. The dates of PRP treatment and TKA, KOA severity, age of the patients, number of PRP cycles, and administration route were analyzed. RESULTS: This work included 1084 patients of which 667 met the inclusion criteria. 74.1% of the patients in the retrospective study achieved a delay in the TKA of more than 1.5 years, with a median delay of 5.3 years. The survival analysis showed that 85.7% of the patients did not undergo TKA during the five year follow-up. The severity degree, age, PRP cycles, and administration route had a statistically significant influence on the efficacy of PRP in delaying surgery. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the application of PRP in KOA patients is a treatment that could delay TKA, although further studies are needed to understand and improve this therapy.

Real-world evidence to assess the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of knee degenerative pathology: a prospective observational study.

Objective: The present work aims to analyse the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in degenerative knee pathology based on real-world data and to evaluate possible factors influencing the response to treatment. Methods: In total, 531 cases were analysed collecting data on gender, age, body mass index, pathology location, severity, number of cycles and route of administration. Clinical outcome was evaluated at 6 and 15 months after treatment, using the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and obtaining percentages of Minimal Clinically Important Improvement (MCII). Blood and PRP samples were randomly tested as a quality control measure to ensure the correct properties. Comparative statistical tests and multivariate regression were performed for the analysis of the variables. Results: The PRP applied had a platelet concentration factor of 1.67, with no leukocytes or erythrocytes. The percentage of patients with MCII at 6 and 15 months after PRP application was 59.32% and 70.62%, respectively. Patients with MCII were younger (p = 0.0246) and with lower body mass index (p = 0.0450). The treatment had a better response in mild/moderate cases than in severe cases (p = 0.0002). Intraosseous PRP application in severe cases improved the effect of intraarticular PRP (p = 0.0358). The application of a second cycle of PRP only improved the response in patients without MCII at 6 months (p = 0.0029), especially in mild/moderate cases (p = 0.0357). Conclusion: The applications of PRP in degenerative knee pathologies is an effective treatment, but this effectiveness nonetheless depends on several variables. Real-world data can complement that from clinical trials to provide valuable information.

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring-Guided Adalimumab Therapy in Rheumatic Diseases: A Prospective, Pragmatic Trial.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the clinical and cost-effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) based on serum adalimumab levels compared to standard of care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ankylosing spondylitis. METHODS: This was a non-inferiority, multicentric, non-randomized, pragmatic trial including adult patients diagnosed with moderate-to-severe, clinically stable rheumatic diseases treated with adalimumab. Consecutive patients were assigned 1:2 to the control (CG) or the intervention group (IG), based on the site of inclusion, and followed up for 18 months. Adalimumab serum levels were measured at each study visit and released to the IG only to modify dosing strategy. Data on disease activity, healthcare resource utilization and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured through the EQ-5D-5L were collected. Number of persistent and overall flares, time to first flare, days experiencing high disease activity, total direct costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 169 recruited patients, 150 were included in the analysis (52 and 98 patients in the CG and IG, respectively). The primary endpoint was not met as persistent flares were not significantly lower in the IG, although mean (SD) number of flares was numerically lower in the IG (0.67 [0.70] versus 0.90 [0.82], P = 0.073), respectively. Based on EQ-5D-5L utilities, HRQoL was significantly higher in the IG at 3 (P = 0.001) and 6 months (P = 0.035), which overall translated into 0.075 QALYs gained per patient for the IG at month 18. Overall, direct costs were significantly lower for the IG patients (€15,311.59 [4,870.04] versus €17,378.46 [6,556.51], P = 0.030), resulting in the intervention being dominant, leading to increased QALY at a lower overall cost CONCLUSION: Adalimumab dose tapering based on TDM for rheumatic patients led to an increased quality of life and QALY gain and entailed lower costs, being a more cost-effective alternative than clinically guided management.