PRP vs HA intra-articular knee injecions for cartilage defects

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    A cohort comparision study Comparing Platelet Rich Plasma vs Hyaluronic Acid Intra-articular Knee Injections for Early Cartilage Defects in the knee.

  • IRAS ID

    101800

  • Contact name

    Ananthram Shetty

  • Contact email

    aashetty@hotmail.com

  • Sponsor organisation

    Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Canterbury Christ Church University

  • Research summary

    Osteoarthritis and early degenerative cartilage lesions is having a significant impact on our society as a greater number of people are living and working for longer. This is having an effect on our economy due to days missed from work and greater dependency on state resources.

    The limited regenerative capacity of cartilage is largely responsible for this problem. Existing degenerative lesions can lead to accelerated deterioration of the articular surface leading to end-stage arthritis. Any solution that can delay or reverse this process is therefore desirable. A number of non-invasive solutions do exist to treat painful knees that improve functionality but with varying rates of success. Two of the more promising agents are hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet rich plasma (PRP). HA is widely applied in clinical practice with good results in many studies. HA forms part of the inflammatory process that can lead to the regeneration of cartilage in defective areas of the knee.

    PRP uses reparative growth factors taken from the patient’s own blood to create an environment in the knee conducive to wound healing that can fill cartilage defects. It’s autologous origin, easy preparation and safety profile makes it a potentially ground breaking treatment option for knee cartilage defects and osteoarthritis.

    The aim of this study is thus to compare the outcome between patients injected with these two agents.

  • REC name

    London - Camden & Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    13/LO/1779

  • Date of REC Opinion

    28 Apr 2014

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion