切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志

中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志 ›› 2023, Vol. 09 ›› Issue (05) : 282 -288. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2023.05.005

膝关节

关节腔内注射富血小板血浆与透明质酸钠治疗Ⅰ-Ⅲ期膝骨关节炎的对比研究
马聪, 李雪靖, 郑晓佐, 张晓阳, 段坤峰, 刘国强, 郄素会†()   
  1. 050000　石家庄，河北医科大学第三医院药剂科
    050000　石家庄，河北医科大学第三医院关节外科
  • 收稿日期:2023-08-21 出版日期:2023-10-05
  • 通信作者: 郄素会
  • 基金资助:
    河北省卫生健康委科研基金项目(20211585)

A comparative study of intraarticular injection of platelet-rich plasma and sodium hyaluronate in the treatment of Stage I-Ⅲ knee osteoarthritis

Cong Ma, Xuejing Li, Xiaozuo Zheng, Xiaoyang Zhang, Kunfeng Duan, Guoqiang Liu, Suhui Qie†()   

  1. Department of Pharmacy, the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050051, China
    Department of Joint Surgery, the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050051, China
  • Received:2023-08-21 Published:2023-10-05
  • Corresponding author: Suhui Qie
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

马聪, 李雪靖, 郑晓佐, 张晓阳, 段坤峰, 刘国强, 郄素会. 关节腔内注射富血小板血浆与透明质酸钠治疗Ⅰ-Ⅲ期膝骨关节炎的对比研究[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2023, 09(05): 282-288.

Cong Ma, Xuejing Li, Xiaozuo Zheng, Xiaoyang Zhang, Kunfeng Duan, Guoqiang Liu, Suhui Qie. A comparative study of intraarticular injection of platelet-rich plasma and sodium hyaluronate in the treatment of Stage I-Ⅲ knee osteoarthritis[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2023, 09(05): 282-288.

目的

探讨比较关节腔内注射富血小板血浆（PRP）与透明质酸（HA）治疗K-L分级Ⅰ-Ⅲ期膝骨关节炎（KOA）的疗效。

方法

前瞻性收集2020年01月至2021年08月在河北医科大学第三医院关节科门诊收治的Ⅰ-Ⅲ期KOA患者100例，采用随机数字表法分为2组，最终96例患者符合纳排标准，PRP组（n=46例）和HA组（n=50例）。两组病例分别接受关节腔内注射PRP（5 ml）或HA（2 ml），每周1次，连续4次。所有患者治疗后均采取相同的康复训练及生活指导，至少接受12个月的定期随访。记录纳入患者的人口统计学资料，并根据BMI分为<30 kg/m2和≥30 kg/m2两个亚组。治疗前、治疗后第1、3、6和12个月时，分别采用VAS、WOMAC、HSS评分和2分钟步行测试（2MWT）对两组患者临床疗效进行评估，并记录治疗过程中出现的任何不良事件。

结果

两组患者接受关节腔内注射PRP或HA治疗后膝关节疼痛程度与功能较治疗前均有改善。在BMI<30 kg/m2亚组中，接受PRP注射治疗后第6和12个月的VAS评分与接受HA注射治疗患者相比，差异存在统计学意义[（1.4±0.8）分vs.（1.9±0.7）分，P=0.014；（1.0±0.6）分vs.（1.4±0.8）分，P=0.028）；治疗后第3、6和12个月的WOMAC[（45.4±7.7）分vs.（28.3）分，P<0.001；（19.6±5.1）分vs.（25.5±3.5）分，P<0.001；（19.6±5.1）分vs.（18.5±4.5）分，P=0.002）、HSS评分（80.9±6.3）分vs.（76.2±6.7）分，P=0.001；（86.3±5.4）分vs.（80.4±5.9）分，P<0.001；（91.4±3.5）分vs.（88.6±4.2）分，P=0.001）及2MWT（134.6±15.5）分vs.（122.5±20.4）分，P=0.002；（134.6±15.5）分vs.（129.0±23.2）分，P=0.041；（139.8±12.6）分vs.（130.8±20.3）分，P=0.012）结果均好于HA组，差异具有统计学意义。在BMI≥30 kg/m2亚组中，接受PRP注射治疗患者在各治疗阶段与HA组相比，在VAS、WOMAC、HSS评分及2MWT结果方面无明显差异（P>0.05）。

结论

膝关节腔内注射PRP对Ⅰ-Ⅲ期非肥胖的KOA患者具有较好治疗效果，可有效改善患者疼痛和膝关节功能。与接受HA注射治疗组相比，接受PRP治疗组3个月后对膝关节功能改善更明显，治疗6个月后对疼痛缓解更明显，值得临床推广。

关键词: 富血小板血浆, 透明质酸钠, 膝骨关节炎, 关节腔内注射, 治疗
Objective

To compare the efficacy of intraarticular injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of K-L stage Ⅰ-Ⅲ knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

Methods

A total of 100 patients with stage Ⅰ-Ⅲ KOA admitted to the joint department of the Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University were prospectively collected and divided into 2 groups by random number table method between January 2020 and August 2021. Finally, 96 patients in PRP group (n=46 cases) and HA group (n=50 cases) met the atretic criteria. The patients of two groups received intra-articular injection of PRP (5 ml) or HA (2 ml) once a week for 4 consecutive times. All patients received the same rehabilitation training and life guidance after treatment, and received regular follow-up for at least 12 months. The demographic data of the enrolled patients were recorded, and were divided into 2 subgroups: <30 kg/m2 and ≥30 kg/m2 according to the BMI. The VAS, WOMAC, HSS scores and 2-minute walking test (2MWT) were used to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the two groups before treatment and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment, respectively.

Results

The degree of knee pain and function were improved in both groups after intraluminal injection of PRP or HA. In the subgroup of BMI<30 kg/m2, there were statistically significant differences in VAS score at 6 and 12 months after PRP injection compared with HA injection (1.4±0.8 vs. 1.9±0.7, P=0.014; 1.0±0.6 vs. 1.4±0.8, P=0.028); The WOMAC (45.4±7.7 vs. 28.3, P<0.001; 19.6±5.1 vs. 25.5±3.5, P<0.001; 19.6±5.1 vs. 18.5±4.5, P=0.002), HSS scores (80.9±6.3 vs. 76.2±6.7, P=0.001; 86.3±5.4 vs. 80.4±5.9, P<0.001; 91.4±3.5 vs. 88.6±4.2, P=0.001) and 2MWT results (134.6±15.5 vs. 122.5±20.4, P=0.002; 134.6±15.5 vs. 129.0±23.2, P=0.041; 139.8±12.6 vs. 130.8±20.3, P=0.012) at 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment were better than those in HA group, with significant differences. In the subgroup of BMI≥30 kg/m2, there were no significant differences in VAS, WOMAC, HSS scores and 2MWT results between patients receiving PRP injection and patients in HA group at all treatment stages (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Intraarticular injection of PRP in knee joint has a good therapeutic effect on non-obese KOA patients of stage Ⅰ to Ⅲ, and can improve pain and knee joint function in effective patients. Compared with patients treated with HA, PRP treatment can improve knee joint function more significantly after 3 months and relieve pain more significantly after 6 months, which is worthy of clinical application.

Key words: Platelet-rich plasma, Hyaluronic acid, Knee Osteoarthritis, Intraarticular injection, Treatment
表1 两组膝骨关节炎患者一般资料比较
组别 例数 性别（例，男/女） 年龄（岁，±s） BMI（kg/m2，±s） 侧别（例，左/右） K-L分级（例，Ⅰ/Ⅱ/Ⅲ）
PRP组 46 8/38 58.7±5.6 27.9±4.9 14/32 4/23/19
HA组 50 10/40 58.3±7.1 27.3±8.1 19/31 6/24/20
统计值   χ2=0.107 t=1.409 t=1.075 χ2=0.608 χ2=0.281
P值   0.744 0.740 0.675 0.436 0.869
组别 例数 治疗前VAS评分（分，±s） 治疗前WOMAC评分（分，±s） 治疗前HSS评分（分，±s） 治疗前2MWT（m，±s） 随访时间（月，±s）
PRP组 46 5.1±1.6 52.8±2.3 73.2±6.9 108.2±27.0 15.9±2.7
HA组 50 5.3±1.5 52.2±2.7 72.0±6.3 107.5±25.4 16.6±2.4
统计值   t=0.133 t=1.353 t=1.253 t=-0.083 t=0.437
P值   0.830 0.347 0.629 0.815 0.165
表2 治疗前后两组膝骨关节炎患者VAS评分（分，±s）
组别 BMI（kg/m2） 例数 K-L分级（例，Ⅰ/Ⅱ/Ⅲ） 治疗前VAS 治疗结束时 治疗后3个月 治疗后6个月 治疗后12个月 F值 P值
PRP组 <30 38 3/21/14 4.9±1.4 4.5±1.5 2.9±0.8*# 1.4±0.8*#& 1.0±0.6*#& 17.247 <0.001
HA组 <30 40 4/20/16 5.1±1.3 4.6±1.1 2.8±0.8 1.9±0.7 1.4±0.8 12.964 <0.001
统计值     χ2=0.249 F=0.030 F=1.340 F=0.070 F=2.761 F=1.710    
P值     0.883 0.710 0.774 0.950 0.014 0.028    
PRP组 ≥30 8 1/2/5 5.7±1.8 5.4±1.6 5.1±1.4 4.6±1.6* 4.8±2.1* 11.653 0.733
HA组 ≥30 10 2/4/4 5.9±2.0 5.5±1.8 5.3±1.7 4.8±2.0* 5.0±1.9* 18.729 0.485
统计值     χ2=0.900 F=0.245 F=0.240 F=0.731 F=4.325 F=1.160    
P值     0.638 0.682 0.874 0.637 0.802 0.735    
表3 治疗前后两组膝骨关节炎患者WOMC评分（分，±s）
组别 BMI（kg/m2） 治疗前WOMAC 治疗结束时 治疗后3个月 治疗后6个月 治疗后12个月
PRP组 <30 50.2±1.7 45.4±7.7 45.4±7.7 19.6±5.1 19.6±5.1
HA组 <30 50.8±2.0 45.4±8.2 28.3±3.0 25.5±3.5 18.5±4.5
F值   1.775 1.320 0.973 10.856 0.685
P值   0.093 0.973 <0.001 <0.001 0.002
PRP组 ≥30 58.4±3.4 55.8±4.1 52.5±4.6 50.3±3.9 51.4±4.2
HA组 ≥30 57.6±3.1 55.6±3.8 53.4±4.0 51.6±3.4 50.7±4.04
F值   1.253 0.201 0.018 1.507 0.500
P值   0.898 0.873 0.624 0.395 0.642
表4 治疗前后两组膝骨关节炎患者HSS评分（分，±s）
组别 BMI（kg/m2） 治疗前HSS 治疗结束时 治疗后3个月 治疗后6个月 治疗后12个月
PRP组 <30 73.7±6.5 75.1±6.5 80.9±6.3 86.3±5.4 91.4±3.5
HA组 <30 72.3±5.8 73.2±6.1 76.2±6.7 80.4±5.9 88.6±4.2
F值   1.671 0.259 1.539 0.013 0.837
P值   0.259 0.136 0.001 <0.001 0.001
PRP组 ≥30 70.6±7.2 69.8±7.0 72.5±6.8 75.2±7.6 76.1±8.4
HA组 ≥30 71.2±6.9 70.3±6.5 72.8±7.2 76.4±6.4 75.9±5.8
F值   3.373 0.106 0.168 0.066 0.034
P值   0.717 0.848 0.767 0.702 0.631
表5 治疗前后两组膝骨关节炎患者2 MWT评估结果（米，±s）
组别 BMI（kg/m2） 治疗前2MWT 治疗结束时 治疗后3个月 治疗后6个月 治疗后12个月
PRP组 <30 109.5±27.3 113.9±18.5 134.6±15.5 134.6±15.5 139.8±12.6
HA组 <30 107.7±27.4 115.8±19.8 122.5±20.4 129.0±23.2 130.8±20.3
F值   0.051 0.157 2.823 0.002 16.815
P值   0.748 0.633 0.002 0.041 0.012
PRP组 ≥30 105.3±25.1 108.2±24.7 110.5±28.2 112.5±26.4 115.3±28.5
HA组 ≥30 105.8±23.8 107.3±23.5 109.8±25.5 115.6±24.8 116.7±26.1
F值   0.734 0.316 0.013 0.545 0.216
P值   0.957 0.924 0.799 0.805 0.754
1
Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, et al. Knee replacement [J]. Lancet, 2012, 379(9823): 1331-1340.
2
谢天顺,邱萍,朱锦宇. 2019版OARSI《膝、髋和多关节骨关节炎非手术治疗指南》膝关节骨关节炎部分更新内容的解读[J].中华骨与关节外科杂志, 2020, 13(9): 705-708.
3
焦递进,杨杰,聂士超,等.曲安奈德联合透明质酸钠治疗膝关节骨性关节炎的Meta分析[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2019, 5(6): 348-358.
4
Mehranfar S, Abdi Rad I, Mostafav E, et al. The use of stromal vascular fraction (SVF), platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and stem cells in the treatment of osteoarthritis: an overview of clinical trials [J]. Artif Cells Nanomed Biotechnol, 2019, 47(1): 882-890.
5
Lana JFSD, Weglein A, Sampson SE, et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing hyaluronic acid, platelet-rich plasma and the combination of both in the treatment of mild and moderate osteoarthritis of the knee [J]. J Stem Cells Regen Med, 2016, 12(2): 69-78.
6
Zhao Jinlong, Huang Hetao, Liang Guihong, et al. Effects and safety of the combination of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2020, 21(1): 224.
7
张熙斌,尹正录,李贵玲,等.局部注射富血小板血浆或糖皮质激素联合体外冲击波治疗肱骨外上髁炎的临床疗效对比[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2021, 7(3): 158-163.
8
Maheu E, Bannuru RR, Herrero-Beaumont G, et al. Why we should definitely include intra-articular hyaluronic acid as a therapeutic option in the management of knee osteoarthritis: Results of an extensive critical literature review [J]. Semin Arthritis Rheum, 2019, 48(4): 563-572.
9
Di Martino A, Di Matteo B, Papio T, et al. Platelet-Rich plasma versus hyaluronic acid injections for the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: results at 5 years of a Double-Blind, randomized controlled trial [J]. Am J Sports Med, 2019, 47(2): 347-354.
10
Filardo G, Di Matteo B, Di Martino A, et al. Platelet-Rich plasma intra-articular knee injections show no superiority versus viscosupplementation: a randomized controlled trial [J]. Am J Sports Med, 2015, 43(7): 1575-1582.
11
Karvonen-Gutierrez CA, Sowers MR, Heeringa SG. Sex dimorphism in the association of cardiometabolic characteristics and osteophytes-defined radiographic knee osteoarthritis among obese and non-obese adults: NHANES III [J]. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 2012, 20(7): 614-621.
12
Ip HL, Nath DK, Sawleh SH, et al. Regenerative medicine for knee osteoarthritis - the efficacy and safety of Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich plasma and mesenchymal stem cells injections: a literature review [J]. Cureus, 2020, 12(9): e10575.
13
Pereira D, Peleteiro B, Araújo J, et al. The effect of osteoarthritis definition on prevalence and incidence estimates:a systematic review [J]. Osteoarthritis Cartilage, 2011, 19(11): 1270-1285.
14
Huang LF, Guo B, Xu FX, et al. Effects of quadriceps functional exercise with isometric contraction in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis [J]. Int J Rheum Dis, 2018, 21(5): 952-959.
15
Phillips M, Bhandari M, Grant J, et al. A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Practice Guidelines on Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid, Corticosteroid, and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for Knee Osteoarthritis: An International Perspective [J]. Orthop J Sports Med, 2021, 9(8): 23259671211030272.
16
Huang Y, Liu XL, Xu XL, et al. Intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma,hyaluronic acid or corticosteroids for knee osteoarthritis: A prospective randomized controlled study [J]. Orthopade, 2019, 48(3): 239-247.
17
Saraf A, Hussain A, Singhal A, et al. Do age, gender, BMI and disease duration influence the clinical outcomes in patients of knee osteoarthritis treated with serial injections of autologous platelet rich plasma? [J]. J Clin Orthop Trauma, 2023, 43: 102226.
18
Al Khatib F, Gouissem A, Mbarki R, Adouni M. Biomechanical Characteristics of the Knee Joint during Gait in Obese versus Normal Subjects [J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2022, 19(2): 989..
19
Tan JX, Chen H, Zhao L, et al. Platelet-Rich plasma versus hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of 26 randomized controlled trials [J]. Arthroscopy, 2021, 37(1): 309-325.
20
Mastim MA, Borana C, Shah V, et al. An Open-Labeled Randomized Prospective Multi-center Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Intra-articular Injection of OSSINEXT™, an Autologous Growth Factor Concentrate (AGFC) Compared to Hyaluronic Acid (HA) in Knee Osteoarthritis [J]. Cureus, 2022, 14(11): e31058.
21
Chavda S, Rabbani SA, Wadhwa T. Role and Effectiveness of Intra-articular Injection of Hyaluronic Acid in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review [J]. Cureus, 2022, 14(4): e24503.
[1] 王得晨, 杨康, 杨自杰, 归明彬, 屈莲平, 张小凤, 高峰. 结直肠癌微卫星稳定状态和程序性死亡、吲哚胺2,3-双加氧酶关系的研究进展[J]. 中华普通外科学文献(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 462-465.
[2] 彭旭, 邵永孚, 李铎, 邹瑞, 邢贞明. 结肠肝曲癌的诊断和外科治疗[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 108-110.
[3] 马伟强, 马斌林, 吴中语, 张莹. microRNA在三阴性乳腺癌进展中发挥的作用[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 111-114.
[4] 张海涛, 康婵娟, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎效果观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 654-657.
[5] 杨雪, 张伟, 尚培中, 宋创业, 尚丹丹, 张蔚. 胆囊十二指肠瘘结石经瘘口排出后自愈一例报道[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 707-708.
[6] 孔博, 张璟, 吕珂. 超声技术在复杂腹壁疝诊治中的作用[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 670-673.
[7] 姜明, 罗锐, 龙成超. 闭孔疝的诊断与治疗：10年73例患者诊疗经验总结[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 706-710.
[8] 魏小勇. 原发性肝癌转化治疗焦点问题探讨[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 602-607.
[9] 张其坤, 商福超, 李琪, 栗光明, 王孟龙. 联合脾切除对肝癌合并门静脉高压症患者根治性切除术后的生存获益分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 613-618.
[10] 许丁伟, 马江云, 李新成, 黄洁. Alagille综合征疑诊为先天性胆道闭锁一例并文献复习[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 681-687.
[11] 崔佳琪, 吴迪, 陈海艳, 周惠敏, 顾元龙, 周光文, 杨军. TACE术后并发肝脓肿的临床诊治分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 688-693.
[12] 陆志峰, 周佳佳, 梁舒. 虚拟现实技术在治疗弱视中的临床应用研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 891-895.
[13] 李田, 徐洪, 刘和亮. 尘肺病的相关研究进展[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(08): 900-905.
[14] 岳瑞雪, 孔令欣, 郝鑫, 杨进强, 韩猛, 崔国忠, 王建军, 张志生, 孔凡庭, 张维, 何文博, 李现桥, 周新平, 徐东宏, 胡崇珠. 乳腺癌HER2蛋白表达水平预测新辅助治疗疗效的真实世界研究[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(07): 765-770.
[15] 符梅沙, 周玉华, 李慧, 薛春颜. 淋巴细胞免疫治疗对复发性流产患者外周血T淋巴细胞亚群分布与PD1/PD-L1表达的影响及意义[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 726-730.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号