Nonoperative and Operative Soft-Tissue and Cartilage Regeneration and Orthopaedic Biologics of the Knee: An Orthoregeneration Network (ON) Foundation Review

Corticosteroid Injections Within 2 Weeks After Knee Arthroscopy Are Associated With Increased Infection Risk

PURPOSE

To quantify the risk of 90-day postoperative infection after arthroscopy, stratified by specific time intervals of corticosteroid injections (CSIs) postoperatively (0-2 weeks, 2-4 weeks, 4-6 weeks, and 6-8 weeks), using a large, all-payer database.

METHODS

A national, all-payer database was queried. In the primary and secondary analyses, the main outcome was infection at 90 days. Infection was defined by documentation of a septic knee or surgical-site infection according to International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision codes, and Current Procedural Terminology codes.

RESULTS

In the multivariable regression, the odds ratio (OR) of postoperative infection at 90 days was greater in the cohorts receiving CSIs within 0 to 2 weeks (OR, 3.31; 95% confidence interval, 1.85-5.92; P < .001) and 2 to 4 weeks (OR, 2.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.57-4.71; P = .003) than in the control group. On comparison of CSIs administered within 0 to 2 weeks and CSIs administered within 2 to 4 weeks, we observed a greater odds of postoperative infection (OR, 2.50) at 90 days after arthroscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

CSIs given within 2 weeks after knee arthroscopy increase the risk of postoperative infection the most, whereas CSIs given within 4 weeks increase the risk but to a lesser degree.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective, comparative, prognosis study.

Innovative Approaches in Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment: A Comprehensive Review of Bone Marrow-Derived Products

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic articular disease characterized by the progressive degeneration of cartilage and bone tissue, leading to the appearance of subchondral cysts, osteophyte formation, and synovial inflammation. Conventional treatments consist of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), analgesics, and glucocorticoids. However, the prolonged use of these drugs causes adverse effects. NSAIDs, for instance, are known to be nephrotoxic, increasing the damage to articular cartilage. New therapies capable of accelerating the process of tissue regeneration and repair are being discussed, such as the use of orthobiologics that are naturally found in the body and obtained through minimally invasive collection and/or laboratory manipulations. Bone marrow aspirate (BMA) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) are both rich in hematopoietic stem cells, mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs), and growth factors (GFs) that can be used in the healing process due to their anabolic and anti-inflammatory effects. The aim of this literature review is to assess the efficacy of BMA and BMAC in the treatment of knee OA based on the favorable results that researchers have obtained with the use of both orthobiologics envisaging an accelerated healing process and the prevention of OA progression.

ACL injury management: a comprehensive review of novel biotherapeutics

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is integral to the stability of the knee joint, serving to limit anterior tibial translation and regulate rotational movements. ACL injuries are among the most common and debilitating forms of knee trauma, often resulting in joint effusion, muscular atrophy, and diminished athletic capabilities. Despite the established efficacy of ACL reconstruction as the standard treatment, it is not uniformly successful. Consequently, there is a growing interest in novel biotherapeutic interventions as potential alternatives. This comprehensive review examines the latest advancements in ACL biotherapy, encompassing the application of hyaluronic acid, self-assembled short peptides, growth factors, stem cell therapy, gene therapy, platelet-rich plasma therapy, bone marrow aspirate concentrate cells, extracorporeal shock wave, electrical stimulation and cross bracing protocol. The collective aim of these innovative treatments is to facilitate the restoration of the ACL's native biological and biomechanical integrity, with the ultimate goal of enhancing clinical outcomes and the functional recovery of affected individuals.

A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial to Investigate the Efficacy of Autologous Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate During Arthroscopic Meniscectomy in Patients With Early Knee Osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

Despite being recognized as a safe procedure with minimal reported complications, injecting autologous bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) as an adjuvant to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) for symptomatic patients with meniscal tears and concomitant knee osteoarthritis (OA) has not been studied in randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE

To compare patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) scores and radiographic outcomes in symptomatic patients with meniscal tears and concomitant mild knee OA who underwent APM with and without an autologous BMAC injection administered at the time of surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Enrolled patients aged ≥18 years determined to have a symptomatic meniscal tear with concomitant mild knee OA suitable for APM and meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized into 2 groups: BMAC and control (no BMAC). The primary endpoint of the study was the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score at 1 year postoperatively. Secondary endpoints included radiographic outcomes (Kellgren-Lawrence grade) at 1 year postoperatively and various PROM scores, including those for the IKDC, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), visual analog scale, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey, at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after meniscectomy.

RESULTS

Of the 95 enrolled patients, 83 (87.4%) were included for final analysis. No significant differences were found between the groups with regard to patient characteristics, intraoperative variables, concomitant procedures, preoperative PROM scores, or preoperative radiographic findings. At 1 year postoperatively, the BMAC group failed to demonstrate significantly better IKDC scores (P = .687) or radiographic outcomes (P > .05 for all radiographic measures) compared with the control group. Secondary PROM scores also did not significantly differ between the groups (P > .05 for all PROMs). However, there were higher achievement rates of the minimal clinically important difference for the KOOS Sport (100.0% vs 80.0%, respectively; P = .023) and KOOS Symptoms (92.3% vs 68.0%, respectively; P = .038) at 1 year postoperatively in the BMAC group than in the control group. All PROMs, excluding the VR-12 mental score, showed significant improvements compared with baseline at all postoperative time points for both the BMAC and control groups.

CONCLUSION

The addition of an autologous BMAC injection during APM did not result in significant changes in IKDC scores or radiographic outcomes at the 1-year postoperative mark. Secondary PROM scores were generally comparable between the 2 groups, but there was higher minimal clinically important difference achievement for the KOOS Sport and KOOS Symptoms at 1 year postoperatively in the BMAC group. In patients with symptoms consistent with a meniscal tear who had concomitant mild OA, the addition of BMAC to arthroscopic debridement did not affect the outcome.

REGISTRATION

NCT02582489 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines on Regenerative Medicine Treatment for Chronic Pain: A Consensus Report from a Multispecialty Working Group

Purpose

Injectable biologics have not only been described and developed to treat dermal wounds, cardiovascular disease, and cancer, but have also been reported to treat chronic pain conditions. Despite emerging evidence supporting regenerative medicine therapy for pain, many aspects remain controversial.

Methods

The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified the educational need for an evidence-based guideline on regenerative medicine therapy for chronic pain. The executive board nominated experts spanning multiple specialties including anesthesiology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and sports medicine based on expertise, publications, research, and clinical practice. A steering committee selected preliminary questions, which were reviewed and refined. Evidence was appraised using the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria for evidence level and degree of recommendation. Using a modified Delphi approach, consensus points were distributed to all collaborators and each collaborator voted on each point. If collaborators provided a decision of "disagree" or "abstain", they were invited to provide a rationale in a non-blinded fashion to the committee chair, who incorporated the respective comments and distributed revised versions to the committee until consensus was achieved.

Results

Sixteen questions were selected for guideline development. Questions that were addressed included type of injectable biologics and mechanism, evidence in treating chronic pain indications (eg, tendinopathy, muscular pathology, osteoarthritis, intervertebral disc disease, neuropathic pain), role in surgical augmentation, dosing, comparative efficacy between injectable biologics, peri-procedural practices to optimize therapeutic response and quality of injectate, federal regulations, and complications with mitigating strategies.

Conclusion

In well-selected individuals with certain chronic pain indications, use of injectable biologics may provide superior analgesia, functionality, and/or quality of life compared to conventional medical management or placebo. Future high-quality randomized clinical trials are warranted with implementation of minimum reporting standards, standardization of preparation protocols, investigation of dose-response associations, and comparative analysis between different injectable biologics.

Arthroscopy with Lipoaspirate and Plasma Infiltration Using Adipose-Derived Stem Cells Plus Platelet-Rich Plasma: Harvesting and Injection for Arthroscopic Treatment of Cartilage Defects of the Knee

Osteoarthritis, predominantly of the knee, is a highly prevalent disease leading to pain, reduced quality of life, and significantly reduced ability to work. With autologous orthobiologic options, new regenerative treatment methods have emerged, offering an alternative to early surgical intervention. Supercharged Liparthroplasty combines arthroscopy with lipoaspirate and plasma infiltration of the joint. Lipoaspirate contains high levels of adipose-derived stem cells, which show chondroprotective and anti-inflammatory qualities. Intra-articular injection, combined with platelet-rich plasma administration for accelerated cartilage metabolism, thus provides an optional approach in osteoarthritis treatment. This article aims to provide in detail our regimen for Supercharged Liparthroplasty, including tissue harvesting and preparation of the injectables, therefore enabling physicians to adopt this point-of-care technique.

Reorientation technique has benefits in bone marrow aspiration of stem cells

We treated patients with osteoarthritis of the knee using injections of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (stem cell therapy). Since multiple controversial harvesting methods using different sites, needles, volumes and techniques have been described, we aimed to compare those methods. Four different harvesting sites at the iliac crest, three different types of needles, three different types of volumes and two different harvesting techniques were compared in 48 bone marrow aspirations. The conventional technique (Group 1) was compared with a reorientation technique (Group 2). The number of leucocytes and CD34 + cells and the viability in bone marrow aspirate (BMA) were analysed with a CytoFLEX Flow Cytometer. The reorientation technique showed significantly higher cell counts than the conventional technique in all parameters. Leucocytes per nl increased from 5 ± 2 to 12 ± 4 (p < .001), and CD 34 + cells per μl increased from 40 ± 40 to 140 ± 98 (p = .003). There was no difference between anterior and posterior harvesting at the iliac crest or between use of a thick and use of a thin needle. Use of the reorientation technique, compared to employing the conventional technique, has a significant advantage since the number of leucocytes and CD34 + cells can be tripled. For the use of bone marrow aspirate in the case of arthritis, it might therefore be a future option to harvest a maximum cell yield through the new reorientation technique and to omit centrifugation. However, the clinical relevance of these findings remains the subject of future studies.

Level of Evidence: Level I.

Clinical relevance: Enhanced technique of BMA for knee surgeons to ensure the maximum cell yield for stem cell therapy in regenerative medicine.

Creating an Optimal In Vivo Environment to Enhance Outcomes Using Cell Therapy to Repair/Regenerate Injured Tissues of the Musculoskeletal System

Following most injuries to a musculoskeletal tissue which function in unique mechanical environments, an inflammatory response occurs to facilitate endogenous repair. This is a process that usually yields functionally inferior scar tissue. In the case of such injuries occurring in adults, the injury environment no longer expresses the anabolic processes that contributed to growth and maturation. An injury can also contribute to the development of a degenerative process, such as osteoarthritis. Over the past several years, researchers have attempted to use cellular therapies to enhance the repair and regeneration of injured tissues, including Platelet-rich Plasma and mesenchymal stem/medicinal signaling cells (MSC) from a variety of tissue sources, either as free MSC or incorporated into tissue engineered constructs, to facilitate regeneration of such damaged tissues. The use of free MSC can sometimes affect pain symptoms associated with conditions such as OA, but regeneration of damaged tissues has been challenging, particularly as some of these tissues have very complex structures. Therefore, implanting MSC or engineered constructs into an inflammatory environment in an adult may compromise the potential of the cells to facilitate regeneration, and neutralizing the inflammatory environment and enhancing the anabolic environment may be required for MSC-based interventions to fulfill their potential. Thus, success may depend on first eliminating negative influences (e.g., inflammation) in an environment, and secondly, implanting optimally cultured MSC or tissue engineered constructs into an anabolic environment to achieve the best outcomes. Furthermore, such interventions should be considered early rather than later on in a disease process, at a time when sufficient endogenous cells remain to serve as a template for repair and regeneration. This review discusses how the interface between inflammation and cell-based regeneration of damaged tissues may be at odds, and outlines approaches to improve outcomes. In addition, other variables that could contribute to the success of cell therapies are discussed. Thus, there may be a need to adopt a Precision Medicine approach to optimize tissue repair and regeneration following injury to these important tissues.

Evaluating willingness for surgery using the SMART Choice (Knee) patient prognostic tool for total knee arthroplasty: study protocol for a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Approximately 1 in 5 patients feel unsatisfied after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Prognostic tools may aid in the patient selection process and reduce the proportion of patients who experience unsatisfactory surgery. This study uses the prognostic tool SMART Choice (Patient Prognostic Tool for Total Knee Arthroplasty) to predict patient improvement after TKA. The tool aims to be used by the patient without clinician input and does not require clinical data such as X-ray findings or blood results. The objective of this study is to evaluate the SMART Choice tool on patient decision making, particularly willingness for surgery. We hypothesise that the use of the SMART Choice tool will influence willingness to undergo surgery, especially when used earlier in the patient TKA journey.

METHODS

This is a multicentred, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial conducted in Melbourne, Australia. Participants will be recruited from the St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne (SVHM) Orthopaedic Clinic, and the client base of HCF, Australia (private health insurance company). Patients over 45 years of age who have been diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis and considering TKA are eligible for participation. Participants will be randomised to either use the SMART Choice tool or treatment as usual. The SMART Choice tool provides users with a prediction for improvement or deterioration / no change after surgery based on utility score change calculated from the Veterans-RAND 12 (VR-12) survey. The primary outcome of the study is patient willingness for TKA surgery. The secondary outcomes include evaluating the optimal timing for tool use and using decision quality questionnaires to understand the patient experience when using the tool. Participants will be followed up for 6 months from the time of recruitment.

DISCUSSION

The SMART Choice tool has the potential to improve patient decision making for TKA. Although many prognostic tools have been developed for other areas of surgery, most are confined within academic bodies of work. This study will be one of the first to evaluate the impact of a prognostic tool on patient decision making using a prospective clinical trial, an important step in transitioning the tool for use in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) - ACTRN12622000072718 . Prospectively registered - 21 January 2022.

Nonoperative and Operative Bone and Cartilage Regeneration and Orthopaedic Biologics of the Hip: An Orthoregeneration Network (ON) Foundation Hip Review

Orthoregeneration is defined as a solution for orthopaedic conditions that harnesses the benefits of biology to improve healing, reduce pain, improve function, and, optimally, provide an environment for tissue regeneration. Options include drugs, surgical intervention, scaffolds, biologics as a product of cells, and physical and electromagnetic stimuli. The goal of regenerative medicine is to enhance the healing of tissue after musculoskeletal injuries as both isolated treatment and adjunct to surgical management, using novel therapies to improve recovery and outcomes. Various orthopaedic biologics (orthobiologics) have been investigated for the treatment of pathology involving the hip, including osteonecrosis (aseptic necrosis) involving bone marrow, bone, and cartilage, and chondral injuries involving articular cartilage, synovium, and bone marrow. Promising and established treatment modalities for osteonecrosis include nonweightbearing; pharmacological treatments including low molecular-weight heparin, prostacyclin, statins, bisphosphonates, and denosumab, a receptor activator of nuclear factor-kB ligand inhibitor; extracorporeal shock wave therapy; pulsed electromagnetic fields; core decompression surgery; cellular therapies including bone marrow aspirate comprising mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs aka mesenchymal stem cells) and bone marrow autologous concentrate, with or without expanded or cultured cells, and possible addition of bone morphogenetic protein-2, vascular endothelial growth factor, and basic fibroblast growth factor; and arterial perfusion of MSCs that may be combined with addition of carriers or scaffolds including autologous MSCs cultured with beta-tricalcium phosphate ceramics associated with a free vascularized fibula. Promising and established treatment modalities for chondral lesions include autologous platelet-rich plasma; hyaluronic acid; MSCs (in expanded or nonexpanded form) derived from bone marrow or other sources such as fat, placenta, umbilical cord blood, synovial membrane, and cartilage; microfracture or microfracture augmented with membrane containing MSCs, collagen, HA, or synthetic polymer; mosaicplasty; 1-stage autologous cartilage translation (ACT) or 2-stage ACT using 3-dimensional spheroids; and autologous cartilage grafting; chondral flap repair, or flap fixation with fibrin glue. Hip pain is catastrophic in young patients, and promising therapies offer an alternative to premature arthroplasty. This may address both physical and psychological components of pain; the goal is to avoid or postpone an artificial joint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Introducing the Orthoregeneration Network Foundation Review Articles: Guiding Tissue Regeneration and Biologic Therapies Into Practice

In this issue of Arthroscopy, readers will find the first of what are designed to be a series of peer-reviewed Orthoregeneration Network (ON) Foundation review articles. The ON Foundation is an independent, nonprofit, international foundation dedicated to promoting research and education in the field of orthopaedic tissue regeneration. ON defines "Orthoregeneration … as a solution for orthopaedic conditions that harnesses the benefits of biology to improve healing, reduce pain, improve function, and optimally, provide an environment for tissue regeneration" making use of treatments, including "drugs, surgical intervention, scaffolds, biologics as a product of cells, and physical and electromagnetic stimuli." The article is accessible and could be of interest to all readers, including clinicians, as well as basic scientists and researchers. It brings us great pleasure to collaborate with the ON Foundation and introduce the ON Foundation Reviews to the readers of Arthroscopy.