American Medical Society for Sports Medicine Position Statement: Principles for the Responsible Use of Regenerative Medicine in Sports Medicine

Retrospective Analysis of Short-Term Responses to PRP Injections for Patients With Vocal Fold Scars and Presbylaryngis

Vocal fold scarring and presbylarynx significantly impair voice quality, leading to a decline in patients' quality of life. These pathologies represent considerable challenges for laryngologists. Traditional treatments often produce suboptimal outcomes. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an innovative, minimally invasive treatment that uses autologous biological material rich in growth factors and platelets, with positive effects on tissue regeneration and repair. Based on its promising effects, we started using PRP as a therapeutic option in vocal folds scars and presbylarynx. We performed a retrospective study on the efficacy and clinical outcomes of PRP injections performed in these patients. Between October 2021 and November 2023, 48 patients (35 women, 13 men; mean age 53 ± 15 years) were treated with PRP for a total of 109 injections for acute or chronic vocal fold lesions or presbylaryngis. PRP preparation followed a standardized protocol. The mean volume of PRP injected per vocal fold was 0.57 ± 0.30 mL, with high platelet purity (95.05% ± 3.48) found in PRP biological characterization. No adverse events were reported. The vocal outcomes assessed 1 month after the treatment found no modification in the acoustic parameters, but a significant improvement in the perceptual voice analysis on the G (P < 0.001), R (P = 0.005), and B (P = 0.008) of the GRB scale, and a clinical improvement on videolaryngostroboscopy for 62.5% of the patients. Most importantly, 70.8% of the patients reported subjective improvement with an average reduction in VHI-30 score of 10.79 points, with 32% of patients achieving clinically significant improvement (≥18 points). PRP injections demonstrate promising efficacy and safety in vocal fold scars and presbylaryngis treatment, with a significant improvement in perceptual voice analysis and subjective assessments. Further studies with larger cohorts and control groups are needed to confirm these findings and optimize PRP therapy protocols.

Experts Achieve Consensus on a Majority of Statements Regarding Ethics, Transparency, Regulation, and Best Practices for the Use of Orthobiologics

PURPOSE

To establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process about ethics, transparency, regulation, and best practices for the use of orthobiologics in clinical practice for musculoskeletal pathology.

METHODS

A consensus process on the regulation of orthobiologics at the provider level was conducted using a modified Delphi technique. Twenty orthopaedic surgeons, sports medicine physicians, or basic scientists participated. Each participant was a Biologic Association member organization representative and asked to participate because of their active interest in the field of orthobiologics. Levels of consensus were delineated according to the number of votes for each statement: no consensus, <80%; consensus, 80% to 89%; strong consensus, 90% to 99%; unanimous, 100%.

RESULTS

The 26 consensus statements on orthobiologics resulted in 14 achieving unanimous consensus, 8 achieving strong consensus, 3 achieving consensus, and 1 did not achieve consensus. Overall, 85% of the statements reached either a unanimous or strong consensus. Of the statements regarding communication and transparency, 9 reached unanimous consensus, including information to convey and helpful tools to describe current orthobiologics, persistent misinformation, use of the word "stem cells," "off-label" use, and problems with the present regulatory environment. Five statements discussing the regulation of novel orthobiologics achieved unanimous consensus. These statements highlighted research regulation, safety, and suggested improvements to regulatory issues. The statement that did not achieve any consensus was on the regulatory processes that should be in place by an institution providing novel orthobiologic treatments. No statement reached a unanimous agreement on cost or ethical considerations.

CONCLUSIONS

This study successfully identified key consensus statements emphasizing the importance of ethics, transparency, and regulation in the use of orthobiologics, with 85% of statements reaching unanimous or strong consensus. These findings underscore the need for standardized communication, improved regulatory frameworks, and enhanced safety measures while highlighting persistent challenges in addressing cost and ethical considerations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V, expert opinion.

Narrative review and call to action on reporting and representation in orthobiologics research for knee osteoarthritis

Osteoarthritis affects a significant portion of U.S. adults, and knee osteoarthritis contributes to 80% of disease burden. Previous data have shown that non-White patient populations often report worse symptoms and less favorable outcomes following arthroplasty, a definitive treatment for knee osteoarthritis. There is a lack of demographics data on race/ethnicity, as well as socioeconomic status (SES) and social determinants of health (SDOH), in knee osteoarthritis treatment guidelines and knee arthroplasty research. In addition, there is underrepresentation of non-White patient populations in the existing treatment guidelines for knee osteoarthritis. Over the past decade, orthobiologics have emerged as an alternative to surgical intervention. Our hypothesis is that there would be a similar lack of reporting of demographics data and underrepresentation of non-White populations in studies pertaining to orthobiologics, including evaluating differences in outcomes. This study reviewed U.S.-based research in orthobiologics as a treatment option for knee osteoarthritis. We identified a lack of demographics reporting in terms of race/ethnicity, and none of the studies reported SES or SDOH. Non-White populations were underrepresented; White patients contributed to 80% or more of all study populations that reported race/ethnicity. None studied the correlation between symptoms and outcome measures, and the race/ethnicity, SES, and SDOH of the patients. Based on a review of existing literature, we strongly advocate for ongoing research encompassing patients of all races/ethnicities, SES, and SDOH, and an exploration into potential variations in symptoms and outcomes among distinct population subgroups. Furthermore, SES barriers may influence health care delivery on orthobiologics for disadvantaged populations.

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.

Regenerative Medicine in Orthopedic Surgery: Expanding Our Toolbox

Regenerative medicine leverages the body's inherent regenerative capabilities to repair damaged tissues and address organ dysfunction. In orthopedics, this approach includes a variety of treatments collectively known as orthoregeneration, encompassing modalities such as prolotherapy, extracorporeal shockwave therapy, pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, therapeutic ultrasound, and photobiomodulation therapy, and orthobiologics like platelet-rich plasma and cell-based therapies. These minimally invasive techniques are becoming prominent due to their potential for fewer complications in orthopedic surgery. As regenerative medicine continues to advance, surgeons must stay informed about these developments. This paper highlights the current state of regenerative medicine in orthopedics and advocates for further clinical research to validate and expand these treatments to enhance patient outcomes.

The chimera of reaching a universal consensus on platelet-rich plasma treatment for knee osteoarthritis: a review of recent consensus statements and expert opinion

INTRODUCTION

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent cause of disability worldwide, affecting millions and posing significant socioeconomic burdens. Various conservative measures like hyaluronic acid (HA) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections aim to manage OA symptoms and delay surgical interventions. Despite the increasing utilization of PRP, consensus on its efficacy remains elusive, reflecting the evolving landscape of OA management.

AREAS COVERED

This study reviews guidelines and recommendations on intra-articular PRP injections for OA globally, highlighting divergent perspectives among different medical societies. A comprehensive literature search identified 19 relevant guidelines, indicating a temporal and geographic evolution in attitudes toward PRP use. While some guidelines endorse PRP for mild-to-moderate OA, others express caution due to concerns about product standardization and clinical evidence heterogeneity.

EXPERT OPINION

The lack of universal consensus on PRP for OA underscores the complex interplay between clinical evidence, practice patterns, and evolving perspectives. Recent shifts toward endorsing PRP may reflect advancements in preparation techniques and personalized medicine approaches. However, challenges persist, including patient selection and product standardization. Efforts to develop consensus and refine PRP classification systems are essential for guiding clinical practice and advancing OA management.

Long term improvement of knee osteoarthritis after injection of single high/very high volume of very pure PRP: A retrospective analysis of patients optimally managed in dedicated centers

Introduction

PRP is gaining increasing interest for pain relief and improvement of joint function in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) but practices and results remain heterogeneous limiting its adoption as standard of care. Current international recommendations are to collect real-life evidence of efficacy with a systematic monitoring of PRP quality and patients' outcomes. We aimed to analyze the response of patients presenting KOA and treated with standardized PRP injection in routine care. We also investigated the potential contributing factors including patient's phenotype and PRP characteristics.

Methods

Patients with symptomatic KOA and that failed first-line therapy received a single injection of a qualified PRP prepared using medical devices allowing to recover a high/very high volume of very pure PRP. Visual analogue scale (VAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score were recorded at baseline and during 18 months follow-up.

Results

431 patients had available follow-up data at 3 months, 291 at 6 months, 137 at 12 months and 44 at 18 months. PRP induced a significant decrease of WOMAC score at all follow up endpoints (29.2 ± 19.2 at 3 months, p < 0.001 and 25.9 ± 19.7 at 12 months, p < 0.01, compared to 39.7 ± 18.9 at baseline). Similar results were observed for pain VAS (38.9 ± 23.3 at 3 months, p < 0.001 and 35.3 ± 24.1 at 12 months, p < 0.05, compared to 56.0 ± 20.7 at baseline). Changes at 12 months were correlated to baseline scores and to the level of improvement at 3 months. The proportion of OMERACT OARSI responders reached 56.2 % for the total cohort and 60.4 % for severe patients at 6 months. Treatment failure occurred for 8.4 % of patients. Age, BMI or Kellgren-Lawrence grade did not impact on efficacy.

Conclusion

This real-life study evidences the clinical benefit of a standardized high or very high-volume injection of very pure PRP in patients with KOA, including those with a severe grade. It opens perspectives in the positioning of such strategy to delay arthroplasty and provide insights on factors able to anticipate long term efficacy.

An Update on Orthobiologics: Cautious Optimism

Orthobiologics are rapidly growing in use given their potential to augment healing for multiple musculoskeletal conditions. Orthobiologics consist of a variety of treatments including platelet-rich plasma and stem cells that provide conceptual appeal in providing local delivery of growth factors and inflammation modulation. The lack of standardization in nomenclature and applications within the literature has led to a paucity of high-quality evidence to support their frequent use. The purpose of this review was to describe the current landscape of orthobiologics and the most recent evidence regarding their use.

The two-bucket problem of unproven stem cell interventions

The two-bucket problem of unproven stem cell interventions (SCIs) continues to bifurcate good (ethical) from bad (unethical) practices in the translation of stem cell medicine in ways that divert attention from other salient and challenging questions. It causes scholars to focus narrowly on reprimanding bad actors through legal and regulatory approaches and distracts from other important considerations such as how best to balance evidence with unmet patient needs and address misinformation about unproven stem cell interventions potentially changing patient behavior. The stem cell science community needs to consider a range of ethical practices and aim to address important questions that have yet not received sufficient consideration.

The Top 100 Most Cited Articles on Platelet-Rich Plasma Use in Regenerative Medicine-A Bibliometric Analysis-From the ESSKA Orthobiologic Initiative

Over the past few decades, more and more articles about platelet-rich plasma (PRP) use in regenerative medicine have been published. The aim of this study was to determine which articles have been most influential in this field by identifying and analyzing the characteristics of the 100 most cited articles. Articles on the use of PRP in regenerative medicine were identified via the Thomson ISI Web of Science database. A majority of the articles originated from the USA (36%). The top journal in terms of number of articles was American Journal of Sports Medicine (12%). Musculoskeletal system and orthopedics (54%) were the most popular fields of applications. Preclinical studies were the most represented study type, from which only 8 from 46 (17.4%) provided a complete numerical description of the injected product. Analysis showed a time-dependent trend of increasing quality of the clinical studies (p = 0.004), although none of them provided a complete biological characterization of the injected PRP. This study demonstrated that the use of PRP in regenerative medicine is a growing and popular area of research, mainly focused on orthopedic applications. Studies on PRP-derived exosomes, biological characterization, and correlation with clinical results might be areas of future trends.

Influencing Factors of Physical Activity in Patients with Lung Cancer Surgery and Its Correlation with Exercise Self-Efficacy and Perceived Social Support

Purpose

The aim of the study is to understand the current status of physical activity in patients with lung cancer surgery, explore its influencing factors, and analyze the correlation between physical activity and exercise self-efficacy and perception of social support.

Methods

The General Information Questionnaire was designed for 145 patients, Chinese version of EPIC-PAQ physical activity scale for lung cancer patients. The Exercise Self-Efficacy Scale (SEE) is used to evaluate the ability of people to organize and execute motor behaviors in various difficult situations. The Perceived Social Support Scale (PSSS) was used to emphasize individual self-understanding and self-feeling.

Results

The median and quartile of total physical activity scores in lung cancer surgery patients were 73.0 (34.8, 129.7) points; univariate analysis showed that there were statistically significant differences in physical activity levels among lung cancer surgery patients with different ages, work status before hospitalization, and perceived disease severity. The results of multivariate analysis showed that age, perceived disease severity, exercise self-efficacy, and total score of perceived social support affected the physical activity level of patients (P < 0.05). Efficacy were positively correlated with perceived social support (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

The level of physical activity of patients undergoing lung cancer surgery needs to be further improved. Physical activity is affected by patient age, perceived disease severity, exercise self-efficacy, and perceived social support and is positively correlated with exercise self-efficacy and perceived social support. Medical staff should provide targeted activity guidance according to the age and other characteristics of patients undergoing lung cancer surgery, enhance patients' exercise self-efficacy and comprehend social support, and improve their physical activity level, thereby promoting patients' early recovery.

Patients seeking stem cell therapies-a prospective qualitative analysis from a Regenerative Medicine Consult Service

Despite patient demand for stem cell therapies (SCTs) for musculoskeletal conditions, there remains limited research on why patients seek SCTs or their sources of information. We employ three questions into a consult intake form: (1) Why are you interested in stem cell treatment for your condition? (2) How did you find out about stem cell treatment for your condition? (3) Have you contacted a stem cell clinic? Responses analyzed, using a qualitative content analysis approach to identify themes reveal many patients seek SCTs to treat pain or delay surgery which may align with some current clinical evidence while other patients express motivations as expected outcomes (e.g., SCTs are better than standard of care or can regenerate tissue) which are not supported by current medical evidence. These differences suggests that patient-centered counseling may help patients by addressing misconceptions and increasing health literacy about expected outcomes of SCTs for treating musculoskeletal conditions.