Regenerative Research Roundup - June 2022



Welcome to the Regenerative Research Roundup, where we look through recently published research and bring you the best of the best in a quick-to-read digest.

This month was slow for LOE 1 studies, so we're reviewing some more thought-provoking material such as machine learning in KOA diagnosis and treatment; microneedling with PRP; PRP vs. Steroid injection cost efficacy; and methodological quality of the top 50 PRP papers.

Let's explore!

 

Intelligent Algorithm-Based Magnetic Resonance for Evaluating the Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Intractable Pain of Knee Arthritis

Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging // Level of Evidence: IV

Machine learning applications are innovating their way through most industries - medicine and biotechnology are no different. In this study, authors used machine learning algorithms with MRI to determine a better approach to diagnosing and treating knee osteoarthritis. This is a promising new application of machine learning as Knee OA diagnosis by traditional KL-Grade assessment do not always correlate to outcomes or pain/function.

Twenty-three patients with KOA were admitted to hospital between July 2020 and August 2021 to receive PRP treatments (3 total; 3-5x baseline). Knee osteoarthritis MRI osteoarthritis knee scores (KOA MOAKS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities arthritis index (WOMAC) before and after treatment were compared.


The results showed that the results of knee osteoarthritis scores, inferior angle of femur, superior angle of tibia, and tibiofemoral angle (TFA) by automatic magnetic resonance diagnostic model were entirely consistent with artificial detection results. Furthermore, total scores of knee lateral area, interior area, central area, and patellar area were all remarkably lower than those before the treatment.

ACCESS HERE: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9223928


 

A Comparative Study of Combined Microneedling with Platelet Rich Plasma Versus Microneedling Alone in Acne Scar

International Journal of Scientific Research // Level of Evidence: lll

In this study, a total of 34 patients received split-face treatments of either a) microneedling with PRP, or b) microneedling alone. Three treatments were performed and final assessment was done using physician satisfaction score and Goodman and Baron acne scar grading one month after last sitting.

The baseline mean Goodman and Baron Score of both side of face was 2.72±0.45 which was reduced to 2.2 ±0.4 and 2.37 ±0.5 on right side and left side of face respectively. The mean physician satisfaction score was 2.16±0.79 and 1.91±0.8 on right side and left side of face respectively.

ACCESS HERE: https://doi.org/10.36106/ijsr/9232702


 

Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Corticosteroid Injections for the Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Markov Cost-Effectiveness Decision Analysis

Hand // Level of Evidence: lV

The use of PRP in treating carpal tunnel syndrome has demonstrated mixed results - leaving more traditional interventions such as steroid injections the favourite among physicians that have a hard time justifying the cost of PRP based on existing evidence.

However, this new study used Markov modeling to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PRP injections versus corticosteroid injections for the treatment of mild-to-moderate CTS. The breakdown of costs correlated against pain scores according to QALY and ICER are included in the study.

Ultimately, authors found that PRP injections were more cost-effective than methylprednisolone/triamcinolone injections from healthcare and societal perspectives for mild-to-moderate CTS.

ACCESS HERE: https://doi.org/10.1177/15589447221092056


 

Assessment of Characteristics and Methodological Quality of the Top 50 Most Cited Articles on Platelet-Rich Plasma in Musculoskeletal Medicine

Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine // Level of Evidence: IV

PRP research is exploding and as such, citations for leading papers are increasing at an astronomical rate. However, the number of citations a paper receives is not always indicative of the quality of evidence. This study sought to identify the 50 most cited articles on PRP, assess their study design, and determine any correlations between the number of citations and level of evidence (LoE) or methodological quality.

The top 50 articles were published between 2005 and 2016 in 21 journals with the mean number of citations equaling 241 ± 94. Interestingly, only 48% of these papers are LOE 1 or 2 with the remaining 52% being compromised of lower evidence standards.



The one area this study lacked was in an assessment of the quality and frequency of PRP injections. Normal standards of evidence collection do not always tell the whole story in PRP science as authors routinely use products that are below the threshold of efficacy for these therapies. We've already written about such papers here.

ACCESS HERE: https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671221093074


 

If you have any questions or comments regarding the above research, or are wondering how you can apply it to your regenerative practice, please leave a comment below or shoot me an email at cdowns@mdbiologix.com

Cheers!

Connor


 

This blog post provides general information to help the reader better understand regenerative medicine, musculoskeletal health, and any related subjects. The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and may not reflect the views and opinions of MDBiologix. All content provided in this blog, website, or any linked materials, including text, graphics, images, patient profiles, outcomes, and information, are not intended and should not be considered or used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Please always consult with a professional and certified healthcare provider to discuss if any treatment is right for you.