The influence of sample size and gender composition on the meta-analysis conclusion of platelet-rich plasma treatment for osteoarthritis

• Main Authors: Kun Zhao, Yan-shan Liu, Liu-yan Nie, Lin-na Qian, Nan-fang Nie, Sebastian Leptihn, Varitsara Bunpetch, Jia-qi Xu, Xiao-hui Zou, Hongwei Ouyang
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier 2020-05-01
• Series: Journal of Orthopaedic Translation
• Subjects: Meta-analysis; Osteoarthritis; Platelet-rich plasma; Randomised controlled trials
• Online Access: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214031X19302141

Objective: The magnitude of the therapeutic effects of intra-articular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on osteoarthritis (OA) is still under debate. The goal of this study that was a systematic review of randomised controlled trials ​of PRP injections for the treatment of OA was to elucidate the therapeutic efficacy of PRP. Methods: Electronic databases of PubMed, CENTRAL, EMBASE, EBSCO, ClinicalTrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ​were searched from inception to June 2018 for RCTs that compared PRP injections to controls in patients with OA. A random-effects approach was used to compile data and subgroups according to trial size (large trials versus small trials), patient profile (age and gender), and PRP preparation method was performed. Results: Thirty trials met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. All results had unexplained statistical heterogeneity. Patients treated with PRP compared with control showed statistically relevant pain relief and function improvement at short term (standardised mean difference [SMD] ​= ​−0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.98 to −0.27, P ​= ​0.0006, SMD ​= ​−0.74, 95% CI: −1.11 to 0.36, P ​= ​0.0001, respectively), medium term (SMD ​= ​−0.53, 95% CI: −0.83 to −0.23, P ​= ​0.0006, SMD ​= ​−0.50, 95% CI: −0.75 to −0.25, P ​= ​0.0006), and long term (SMD ​= ​−0.69, 95% CI: −1.08 to −0.30, P ​= ​0.0006, SMD ​= ​−0.68, 95% CI: −0.1.09 to −0.27, P ​= ​0.001, respectively). A subgroup analysis of the data from large trials and from trials composed of less than 50% female patients revealed that therapeutic effects of the treatment are insignificant. Conclusions: According to the currently available data, PRP injections are beneficial for pain relief and function improvement in patients with OA. This meta-analysis, however, demonstrated that the efficacy of PRP is related to sample size and gender composition. Thus, more randomised controlled trials of high quality and larger patient size, also including gender aspects, are required to understand this phenomenon. The translational potential of this article: The translation potential of this meta-analysis is that provided another perspective to analyse the treatment effect of PRP for OA. In future research, phenotypes subpopulation and gender difference of OA patient should be considered for PRP treatment.