Sandeep S Bains, Gabrielle N Swartz, Reza Katanbaf, James Nace, Craig Bennett, Michael A Mont, Ronald E Delanois
{"title":"富血小板血浆注射在缓解短期疼痛方面不如皮质类固醇注射:一项前瞻性、双盲、随机对照试验。","authors":"Sandeep S Bains, Gabrielle N Swartz, Reza Katanbaf, James Nace, Craig Bennett, Michael A Mont, Ronald E Delanois","doi":"10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical benefits of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections compared to corticosteroid (CS) injections in patients who have mild to moderate symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in a double-blinded randomized control trial. We aimed to compare improvements in the following outcomes at six weeks and three months: 1) pain scores, including Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); and 2) functional scores, including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this double-blinded randomized control trial, 52 patients who had symptomatic, radiographically confirmed knee osteoarthritis were enrolled. A power analysis determined that a sample size of 52 was required. Patients were randomized to receive treatment with an intra-articular injection of CS (n = 26) or PRP (n = 26). We evaluated clinical outcomes, including VAS, NPRS, WOMAC, and KOOS scores at baseline, six weeks, and three months after injection. We also determined if our clinical outcomes met the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) based on the following scores reported in the literature: 19.9 for VAS and 2 for NPRS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no difference in baseline VAS, NPRS, KOOS, or WOMAC scores between the CS and PRP cohorts. At six weeks, CS patients had significantly greater reductions from baseline in VAS (-24.26 versus -7.38, P = 0.033) and NPRS (-2.24 versus -0.92, P = 0.042). The MCID for both VAS and NPRS was met in the CS cohort at 6 weeks, but not in the PRP cohort. At three months, CS and PRP patients experienced similar improvements in VAS (-18.27 versus 13.27, P = 0.610) and NPRS (-1.81 versus -0.65, P = 0.798), respectively. Neither cohort met the MCID at three months. Both groups experienced similar improvements in KOOS and WOMAC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When comparing PRP to CS injections in patients who have mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis, CS demonstrated greater pain reduction at six weeks. Based on these findings, expectations regarding the clinical utility of PRP should be tempered.</p>","PeriodicalId":51077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arthroplasty","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections Are Inferior to Corticosteroid Injections for Short-Term Pain Relief: A Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Sandeep S Bains, Gabrielle N Swartz, Reza Katanbaf, James Nace, Craig Bennett, Michael A Mont, Ronald E Delanois\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical benefits of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections compared to corticosteroid (CS) injections in patients who have mild to moderate symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in a double-blinded randomized control trial. We aimed to compare improvements in the following outcomes at six weeks and three months: 1) pain scores, including Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); and 2) functional scores, including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this double-blinded randomized control trial, 52 patients who had symptomatic, radiographically confirmed knee osteoarthritis were enrolled. A power analysis determined that a sample size of 52 was required. Patients were randomized to receive treatment with an intra-articular injection of CS (n = 26) or PRP (n = 26). We evaluated clinical outcomes, including VAS, NPRS, WOMAC, and KOOS scores at baseline, six weeks, and three months after injection. We also determined if our clinical outcomes met the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) based on the following scores reported in the literature: 19.9 for VAS and 2 for NPRS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no difference in baseline VAS, NPRS, KOOS, or WOMAC scores between the CS and PRP cohorts. At six weeks, CS patients had significantly greater reductions from baseline in VAS (-24.26 versus -7.38, P = 0.033) and NPRS (-2.24 versus -0.92, P = 0.042). The MCID for both VAS and NPRS was met in the CS cohort at 6 weeks, but not in the PRP cohort. At three months, CS and PRP patients experienced similar improvements in VAS (-18.27 versus 13.27, P = 0.610) and NPRS (-1.81 versus -0.65, P = 0.798), respectively. Neither cohort met the MCID at three months. Both groups experienced similar improvements in KOOS and WOMAC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>When comparing PRP to CS injections in patients who have mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis, CS demonstrated greater pain reduction at six weeks. Based on these findings, expectations regarding the clinical utility of PRP should be tempered.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51077,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Arthroplasty\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Arthroplasty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.013\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2025.03.013","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在一项双盲、随机对照试验中,我们旨在评估和比较富血小板血浆(PRP)注射与皮质类固醇(CS)注射对轻度至中度症状性膝骨关节炎患者的临床益处。我们的目的是比较6周和3个月时以下结果的改善情况:1)疼痛评分,包括视觉模拟量表(VAS)和数字疼痛评定量表(NPRS); 2)功能评分,包括西安大略省和麦克马斯特大学关节炎指数(WOMAC)和膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分(oos)。方法:在这项双盲、随机对照试验中,纳入了52例有症状、影像学证实的膝关节骨关节炎患者。功率分析确定样本量为52。患者随机接受关节内注射CS (n = 26)或PRP (n = 26)治疗。我们评估了临床结果,包括基线、注射后6周和3个月的VAS、NPRS、WOMAC和kos评分。我们还根据以下文献报道的评分来确定我们的临床结果是否符合最低临床重要差异(MCID): VAS评分为19.9,NPRS评分为2。结果:CS组和PRP组的基线VAS、NPRS、oos或WOMAC评分无差异。在6周时,CS患者的VAS (-24.26 vs -7.38, P = 0.033)和NRPS (-2.24 vs -0.92, P = 0.042)较基线有明显更大的下降。CS组在6周时达到了VAS和NPRS的MCID,而PRP组没有达到。3个月时,CS和PRP患者的VAS(-18.27比13.27,P = 0.610)和NPRS(-1.81比-0.65,P = 0.798)分别有相似的改善。这两组人在三个月时都没有达到MCID。两组在6周和3个月时kos和WOMAC均有相似的改善。结论:当比较PRP和CS注射在轻度至中度膝骨关节炎患者中,CS在6周时表现出更大的疼痛减轻。基于这项研究的发现,对于这些患者,对PRP临床应用的期望应该有所缓和。
Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections Are Inferior to Corticosteroid Injections for Short-Term Pain Relief: A Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial.
Background: We aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical benefits of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections compared to corticosteroid (CS) injections in patients who have mild to moderate symptomatic knee osteoarthritis in a double-blinded randomized control trial. We aimed to compare improvements in the following outcomes at six weeks and three months: 1) pain scores, including Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); and 2) functional scores, including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).
Methods: In this double-blinded randomized control trial, 52 patients who had symptomatic, radiographically confirmed knee osteoarthritis were enrolled. A power analysis determined that a sample size of 52 was required. Patients were randomized to receive treatment with an intra-articular injection of CS (n = 26) or PRP (n = 26). We evaluated clinical outcomes, including VAS, NPRS, WOMAC, and KOOS scores at baseline, six weeks, and three months after injection. We also determined if our clinical outcomes met the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) based on the following scores reported in the literature: 19.9 for VAS and 2 for NPRS.
Results: There was no difference in baseline VAS, NPRS, KOOS, or WOMAC scores between the CS and PRP cohorts. At six weeks, CS patients had significantly greater reductions from baseline in VAS (-24.26 versus -7.38, P = 0.033) and NPRS (-2.24 versus -0.92, P = 0.042). The MCID for both VAS and NPRS was met in the CS cohort at 6 weeks, but not in the PRP cohort. At three months, CS and PRP patients experienced similar improvements in VAS (-18.27 versus 13.27, P = 0.610) and NPRS (-1.81 versus -0.65, P = 0.798), respectively. Neither cohort met the MCID at three months. Both groups experienced similar improvements in KOOS and WOMAC.
Conclusions: When comparing PRP to CS injections in patients who have mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis, CS demonstrated greater pain reduction at six weeks. Based on these findings, expectations regarding the clinical utility of PRP should be tempered.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Arthroplasty brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement. This peer-reviewed journal publishes original research and manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas relating to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with clinical series and experience, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, metallurgy, biologic response to arthroplasty materials in vivo and in vitro.