Abstract

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint condition and, with a burgeoning ageing population, is due to increase in prevalence. Beyond conventional medical and surgical interventions, there are an increasing number of ‘alternative’ therapies. These alternative therapies may have a limited evidence base and, for this reason, are often only afforded brief reference (or completely excluded) from current OA guidelines. Thus, the aim of this review was to synthesize the current evidence regarding autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI), mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) therapy, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), vitamin D and other alternative therapies. The majority of studies were in knee OA or chondral defects. Matrix-assisted ACI has demonstrated exceedingly limited, symptomatic improvements in the treatment of cartilage defects of the knee and is not supported for the treatment of knee OA. There is some evidence to suggest symptomatic improvement with MSC injection in knee OA, with the suggestion of minimal structural improvement demonstrated on MRI and there are positive signals that PRP may also lead to symptomatic improvement, though variation in preparation makes inter-study comparison difficult. There is variability in findings with vitamin D supplementation in OA, and the only recommendation which can be made, at this time, is for replacement when vitamin D is deplete. Other alternative therapies reviewed have some evidence (though from small, poor-quality studies) to support improvement in symptoms and again there is often a wide variation in dosage and regimens. For all these therapeutic modalities, although controlled studies have been undertaken to evaluate effectiveness in OA, these have often been of small size, limited statistical power, uncertain blindness and using various methodologies. These deficiencies must leave the question as to whether they have been validated as effective therapies in OA (or chondral defects). The conclusions of this review are that all alternative interventions definitely require clinical trials with robust methodology, to assess their efficacy and safety in the treatment of OA beyond contextual and placebo effects.

Highlights

  • Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis and the global prevalence of knee OA alone is 3.8%, affecting over 250 million individuals worldwide [1]

  • The scope of ‘non-surgical’ alternative therapies is large and, for this reason, this review focuses on the treatments which are likely to arise in clinical discussion with OA patients including autologous mesenchymal stem cell (MSC) injection, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), vitamin D and ‘other’ treatments

  • A pilot study by Orozco and colleagues [25] performed on patients with mild to severe knee OA (Kellgren–Lawrence grades II–IV) who received an intra-articular injection of (40 × 106) bone marrow-derived MSCs, demonstrated improvement in pain, function and cartilage quality at 12 months

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis and the global prevalence of knee OA alone is 3.8%, affecting over 250 million individuals worldwide [1]. A pilot study by Orozco and colleagues [25] performed on patients with mild to severe knee OA (Kellgren–Lawrence grades II–IV) who received an intra-articular injection of (40 × 106) bone marrow-derived MSCs, demonstrated improvement in pain, function and cartilage quality at 12 months. A form of collagen-rich in proline, was assessed in 52 patients as part of a randomised, placebo-controlled trial which found significant inter-group differences in several types of pain, an effect size was not reported, making extrapolation to clinical benefit difficult [58]. A systematic review by Gagnier and colleagues investigated the role of Harpagophytum in the treatment of lower back pain and OA, including 3 randomised, placebo-controlled trials of hip and knee OA (385 patients) [68]. A similar finding was reported in an earlier systematic review which noted “infrequent reports of mild, and predominantly gastrointestinal, adverse effects” [72]

Conclusion
Key points
Findings
Compliance with ethical standards
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call