Experts Achieve Consensus on a Majority of Statements Regarding Platelet-Rich Plasma Treatments for Treatment of Musculoskeletal Pathology.

PURPOSE: To establish consensus statements on platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for the treatment of musculoskeletal pathologies. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment of PRP using a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Thirty-five orthopaedic surgeons and sports medicine physicians participated in these consensus statements on PRP. The participants were composed of representatives of the Biologic Association, representing 9 international orthopaedic and musculoskeletal professional societies invited due to their active interest in the study of orthobiologics. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. RESULTS: There was consensus on 62% of statements about PRP. CONCLUSIONS: (1) PRP should be classified based on platelet count, leukocyte count, red blood count, activation method, and pure-plasma versus fibrin matrix; (2) PRP characteristics for reporting in research studies are platelet count, leukocyte count, neutrophil count, red blood cell count, total volume, the volume of injection, delivery method, and the number of injections; (3) the prognostic factors for those undergoing PRP injections are age, body mass index, severity/grade of pathology, chronicity of pathology, prior injections and response, primary diagnosis (primary vs postsurgery vs post-trauma vs psoriatic), comorbidities, and smoking; (4) regarding age and body mass index, there is no minimum or maximum, but clinical judgment should be used at extremes of either; (5) the ideal dose of PRP is undetermined; and (6) the minimal volume required is unclear and may depend on the pathology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Angiogenesis and Tissue Repair Depend on Platelet Dosing and Bioformulation Strategies Following Orthobiological Platelet-Rich Plasma Procedures: A Narrative Review.

Angiogenesis is the formation of new blood vessel from existing vessels and is a critical first step in tissue repair following chronic disturbances in healing and degenerative tissues. Chronic pathoanatomic tissues are characterized by a high number of inflammatory cells; an overexpression of inflammatory mediators; such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-1 (IL-1); the presence of mast cells, T cells, reactive oxygen species, and matrix metalloproteinases; and a decreased angiogenic capacity. Multiple studies have demonstrated that autologous orthobiological cellular preparations (e.g., platelet-rich plasma (PRP)) improve tissue repair and regenerate tissues. There are many PRP devices on the market. Unfortunately, they differ greatly in platelet numbers, cellular composition, and bioformulation. PRP is a platelet concentrate consisting of a high concentration of platelets, with or without certain leukocytes, platelet-derived growth factors (PGFs), cytokines, molecules, and signaling cells. Several PRP products have immunomodulatory capacities that can influence resident cells in a diseased microenvironment, inducing tissue repair or regeneration. Generally, PRP is a blood-derived product, regardless of its platelet number and bioformulation, and the literature indicates both positive and negative patient treatment outcomes. Strangely, the literature does not designate specific PRP preparation qualifications that can potentially contribute to tissue repair. Moreover, the literature scarcely addresses the impact of platelets and leukocytes in PRP on (neo)angiogenesis, other than a general one-size-fits-all statement that "PRP has angiogenic capabilities". Here, we review the cellular composition of all PRP constituents, including leukocytes, and describe the importance of platelet dosing and bioformulation strategies in orthobiological applications to initiate angiogenic pathways that re-establish microvasculature networks, facilitating the supply of oxygen and nutrients to impaired tissues.

Determination of rotator cuff tear reparability: an ultrasound-based investigation.

Background: The use of ultrasound as a viable diagnostic tool for routine office visit evaluation of rotator cuff integrity is slowly gaining acceptance in orthopedic practice. However, the reliability of accurately assessing rotator cuff tear reparability by ultrasound has limited evidence in the literature. The purpose of this study was to compare preoperative assessment of cuff tear reparability via ultrasound with the arthroscopic determination of reparability at the time of surgery. Methods: We prospectively collected preoperative ultrasound and arthroscopic imaging data on 145 patients (80 or 55% men and average age of 60.7 years) who underwent arthroscopic posterior superior rotator cuff repair. Three independent experienced orthopedic surgeons retrospectively reviewed all ultrasound studies and arthroscopic imaging and determined if the posterior superior rotator cuff tendon edge was able to be viewed via ultrasound and determined with the arthroscopic images if the tear was reparable. Results: On review of the ultrasound and arthroscopic data, if the edge of the rotator cuff tendon was able to be viewed on the coronal ultrasound image, it was most likely reparable with a positive predictive value of 97.6% and a positive likelihood ratio of 5.8. Sensitivity was 84.4%, and specificity was 76.9%. The negative predictive value was 37.5%, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.17. The interobserver reliability was 0.63, and the observers were unanimous in determining the tendon edge was able to be visualized in 99 of 145 cases (68%). Conclusion: Preoperative ultrasound evaluation of the shoulder for posterior superior rotator cuff tears is a useful tool for assessing rotator cuff integrity and may help predict intraoperative reparability of the tendon. This study demonstrates that if the cuff tear edge is able to be visualized, there is a high probability of successful arthroscopic restoration of the tendon to its native attachment. Conversely, if the tear edge is unable to be visualized, there is a moderate chance of the tear being irreparable. These results help expand the knowledge base of the usefulness of in-office ultrasound performed by the surgeon in predicting the results of surgical intervention for rotator cuff tears.

Bone Marrow Concentrate (BMC) Therapy in Musculoskeletal Disorders: Evidence-Based Policy Position Statement of American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP).

BACKGROUND: The use of bone marrow concentrate (BMC) for treatment of musculoskeletal disorders has become increasingly popular over the last several years, as technology has improved along with the need for better solutions for these pathologies. The use of cellular tissue raises a number of issues regarding the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) regulation in classifying these treatments as a drug versus just autologous tissue transplantation. In the case of BMC in musculoskeletal and spine care, this determination will likely hinge on whether BMC is homologous to the musculoskeletal system and spine. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to describe the current regulatory guidelines set in place by the FDA, specifically the terminology around "minimal manipulation" and "homologous use" within Regulation 21 CFR Part 1271, and specifically how this applies to the use of BMC in interventional musculoskeletal medicine. METHODS: The methodology utilized here is similar to the methodology utilized in preparation of multiple guidelines employing the experience of a panel of experts from various medical specialties and subspecialties from differing regions of the world. The collaborators who developed these position statements have submitted their appropriate disclosures of conflicts of interest. Trustworthy standards were employed in the creation of these position statements. The literature pertaining to BMC, its effectiveness, adverse consequences, FDA regulations, criteria for meeting the standards of minimal manipulation, and homologous use were comprehensively reviewed using a best evidence synthesis of the available and relevant literature. RESULTS/Summary of Evidence: In conjunction with evidence-based medicine principles, the following position statements were developed: Statement 1: Based on a review of the literature in discussing the preparation of BMC using accepted methodologies, there is strong evidence of minimal manipulation in its preparation, and moderate evidence for homologous utility for various musculoskeletal and spinal conditions qualifies for the same surgical exemption. Statement 2: Assessment of clinical effectiveness based on extensive literature shows emerging evidence for multiple musculoskeletal and spinal conditions. • The evidence is highest for knee osteoarthritis with level II evidence based on relevant systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies. There is level III evidence for knee cartilage conditions. • Based on the relevant systematic reviews, randomized trials, and nonrandomized studies, the evidence for disc injections is level III. • Based on the available literature without appropriate systematic reviews or randomized controlled trials, the evidence for all other conditions is level IV or limited for BMC injections. Statement 3: Based on an extensive review of the literature, there is strong evidence for the safety of BMC when performed by trained physicians with the appropriate precautions under image guidance utilizing a sterile technique. Statement 4: Musculoskeletal disorders and spinal disorders with related disability for economic and human toll, despite advancements with a wide array of treatment modalities. Statement 5: The 21st Century Cures Act was enacted in December 2016 with provisions to accelerate the development and translation of promising new therapies into clinical evaluation and use. Statement 6: Development of cell-based therapies is rapidly proliferating in a number of disease areas, including musculoskeletal disorders and spine. With mixed results, these therapies are greatly outpacing the evidence. The reckless publicity with unsubstantiated claims of beneficial outcomes having putative potential, and has led the FDA Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to issue multiple warnings. Thus the US FDA is considering the appropriateness of using various therapies, including BMC, for homologous use. Statement 7: Since the 1980's and the description of mesenchymal stem cells by Caplan et al, (now called medicinal signaling cells), the use of BMC in musculoskeletal and spinal disorders has been increasing in the management of pain and promoting tissue healing. Statement 8: The Public Health Service Act (PHSA) of the FDA requires minimal manipulation under same surgical procedure exemption. Homologous use of BMC in musculoskeletal and spinal disorders is provided by preclinical and clinical evidence. Statement 9: If the FDA does not accept BMC as homologous, then it will require an Investigational New Drug (IND) classification with FDA (351) cellular drug approval for use. Statement 10: This literature review and these position statements establish compliance with the FDA's intent and corroborates its present description of BMC as homologous with same surgical exemption, and exempt from IND, for use of BMC for treatment of musculoskeletal tissues, such as cartilage, bones, ligaments, muscles, tendons, and spinal discs. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the review of all available and pertinent literature, multiple position statements have been developed showing that BMC in musculoskeletal disorders meets the criteria of minimal manipulation and homologous use. KEY WORDS: Cell-based therapies, bone marrow concentrate, mesenchymal stem cells, medicinal signaling cells, Food and Drug Administration, human cells, tissues, and cellular tissue-based products, Public Health Service Act (PHSA), minimal manipulation, homologous use, same surgical procedure exemption.