Biologics for Rotator Cuff Repair

Orthobiologics: a review

PURPOSE

The use of biologic materials in orthopaedics (orthobiologics) has gained significant attention over the past years. To enhance the body of the related literature, this review article is aimed at summarizing these novel biologic therapies in orthopaedics and at discussing their multiple clinical implementations and outcomes.

METHODS

This review of the literature presents the methods, clinical applications, impact, cost-effectiveness, and outcomes, as well as the current indications and future perspectives of orthobiologics, namely, platelet-rich plasma, mesenchymal stem cells, bone marrow aspirate concentrate, growth factors, and tissue engineering.

RESULTS

Currently available studies have used variable methods of research including biologic materials as well as patient populations and outcome measurements, therefore making comparison of studies difficult. Key features for the study and use of orthobiologics include minimal invasiveness, great healing potential, and reasonable cost as a nonoperative treatment option. Their clinical applications have been described for common orthopaedic pathologies such as osteoarthritis, articular cartilage defects, bone defects and fracture nonunions, ligament injuries, and tendinopathies.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthobiologics-based therapies have shown noticeable clinical results at the short- and mid-term. It is crucial that these therapies remain effective and stable in the long term. The optimal design for a successful scaffold remains to be further determined.

Use of biologics in rotator cuff disorders: Current concept review

Poor tendon to bone healing following rotator cuff repair has led to the continued interest and investigation into biological augmentation. The biology of tendinopathy is not fully understood and consequently the availability of disease modifying therapeutic targets is limited. A ceiling of benefit has been reached by mechanical optimisation of rotator cuff repair and thus, in order to improve healing rates, a biological solution is required. This review focuses on the strategies to biologically augment rotator cuff disorders with an emphasis on rotator cuff repair. Leucocyte rich platelet rich plasma has been shown to improve healing rates without clinically relevant improvements in outcome scores. Similarly, improved healing rates have also been reported with bone marrow stimulation and in long-term follow-up with bone marrow concentrate. Extracellular matrix (ECM) and synthetic scaffolds can increase healing through mechanical and or biological augmentation. A potential third category of scaffold is bio-inductive and has no mechanical support. Studies involving various scaffolds have shown promising results for augmentation of large to massive tears and is likely to be most beneficial when tendon quality is poor, however level I evidence is limited.

The clinical efficacy of leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the arthroscopic treatment of rotator cuff injury has been reported in the literature. However, conclusions have been inconsistent and more often related to differences in the types of PRP used. Therefore, to minimize these differences, we performed a meta-analysis of only studies investigating leukocyte-poor PRP to evaluate whether PRP promotes and improves the effects of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of leukocyte-poor PRP in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. The available data were extracted, and the methodologic quality of the included studies was evaluated by the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool.

RESULTS

In total, 10 randomized controlled trials involving 742 patients were included. The results of the meta-analysis showed that treatment with leukocyte-poor PRP performed better than the control treatment in relieving postoperative pain in the short-term (mean difference [MD], -0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.79 to -0.35; P < .0001) and medium- and long-term (MD, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.34 to -0.03; P = .02) follow-up groups. However, the changes in the MD in the visual analog scale score were below the minimal clinically important difference. Regarding the Constant shoulder (MD, 3.35; 95% CI, 1.68-5.02; P < .0001) and University of California, Los Angeles (MD, 1.73; 95% CI, 0.94-2.52; P < .0001) scores, statistically significant differences were found in favor of leukocyte-poor PRP over the control treatment. However, the changes in the MD in both the Constant and University of California, Los Angeles scores were below the minimal clinically important difference. Moreover, during medium- and long-term follow-up, the retear rate in the leukocyte-poor PRP group was lower than that in the control group regardless of the rotator cuff tear size (small and medium [<3 cm] [risk ratio (RR), 0.64; 95% CI, 0.43-0.97; P = .03] vs. medium and large [>3 cm] [RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.34-0.77; P = .001]) and surgical repair method (single-row repair [RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.87; P = .007] vs. double-row suture bridge repair [RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38-0.84; P = .005]).

CONCLUSION

According to our study, leukocyte-poor PRP can significantly reduce the postoperative retear rate in the medium and long term regardless of the tear size and the method used for rotator cuff repair. However, the use of leukocyte-poor PRP failed to show clinically meaningful effects in terms of postoperative pain and patient-reported outcomes.

Cost of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repairs Is Primarily Driven by Procedure-Level Factors: A Single-Institution Analysis of an Ambulatory Surgery Center

PURPOSE

To identify intraoperative drivers of cost associated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repairs (RCRs) through analysis of an institutional database.

METHODS

This was a single-institution retrospective review of arthroscopic RCRs performed at an ambulatory surgical center between November 2016 and July 2019. Patient-level factors analyzed included age, sex, insurance type (private, Medicare, Medicaid, self-pay, and other government), American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (I, II, III, and missing), and Charlson comorbidity index (0, 1, 2, and ≥3). Procedure-level factors included use of biologics (decellularized dermal allograft or bioinductive healing implant), anesthesia type (regional block, monitored anesthesia care, or general), number of anchors and sutures, additional procedures (biceps tenodesis, distal clavicle resection, subacromial decompression), and operative time. Multivariate linear regression analysis was used to identify factors significantly associated with higher or lower charges.

RESULTS

A total of 712 arthroscopic RCRs were included. The risk-adjusted operative charges were $19,728 (95% confidence interval $16,543 to $22,913). The above factors predicted nearly 65% of the variability in operative charges. The only patient-level factor significantly associated with lower charges was female sex (- $1,339; P = .002). Procedure-level factors significantly associated with higher charges were use of biologics (+ $17,791; P < .001), concurrent open biceps tenodesis (+ $4,027; P < .001), distal clavicle resection (+ $2,266; P = .039), use of regional block (+ $1,256; P = .004), number of anchors (+ $2,245/anchor; P < .001), and increasing operative time ($26/min). Other factors had no significant association.

CONCLUSIONS

Procedural factors are the most significant drivers of operative cost in arthroscopic RCRs, such as quantity and type of implants; additional procedures such as biceps tenodesis and distal clavicle resection; and perioperative conditions such as type of anesthesia and total operating room time. Overall, patient-level factors were not shown to correlate well with operative costs, other than lower charges with female sex.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, economic study.

Biologic Augmentation of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Using Minced Autologous Subacromial Bursa

Failure of rotator cuff repair surgery can be attributed to a variety of factors, including insufficient biologic environment to support healing. The subacromial bursal tissue has been shown to have a reservoir of mesenchymal stem cells and is a potential source for biologic augmentation during rotator cuff repair. We have developed a technique to capture the subacromial bursal tissue during subacromial bursectomy and then reimplant the tissue on the bursal surface of the rotator cuff tendon after rotator cuff repair. Our goal is to describe our technique of subacromial tissue collection and reimplantation that obviates the need of suturing a whole sleeve of bursal tissue while improving cell yield for rotator cuff healing.

Platelet-Rich Plasma

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a promising treatment for musculoskeletal maladies and clinical data to date have shown that PRP is safe. However, evidence of its efficacy has been mixed and highly variable depending on the specific indication. Additional future high-quality large clinical trials will be critical in shaping our perspective of this treatment option. The heterogeneity of PRP preparations, both presently and historically, leads sweeping recommendations about its utility impossible to make. This heterogeneity has also made interpreting existing literature more complicated.

Current Clinical Recommendations for Use of Platelet-Rich Plasma

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review evaluates current clinical literature on the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), including leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) and leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP), in order to develop evidence-based recommendations for various musculoskeletal indications.

RECENT FINDINGS

Abundant high-quality evidence supports the use of LR-PRP injection for lateral epicondylitis and LP-PRP for osteoarthritis of the knee. Moderate high-quality evidence supports the use of LR-PRP injection for patellar tendinopathy and of PRP injection for plantar fasciitis and donor site pain in patellar tendon graft BTB ACL reconstruction. There is insufficient evidence to routinely recommend PRP for rotator cuff tendinopathy, osteoarthritis of the hip, or high ankle sprains. Current evidence demonstrates a lack of efficacy of PRP for Achilles tendinopathy, muscle injuries, acute fracture or nonunion, surgical augmentation in rotator cuff repair, Achilles tendon repair, and ACL reconstruction. PRP is a promising treatment for some musculoskeletal diseases; however, evidence of its efficacy has been highly variable depending on the specific indication. Additional high-quality clinical trials with longer follow-up will be critical in shaping our perspective of this treatment option.