Comparing Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma With Hyaluronic Acid for the Treatment of Hip Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hip osteoarthritis (HOA), a prevalent condition among those aged 55 years and above, is a significant cause of joint pain and functional impairment and it contributes to the overall burden of chronic pain experienced by the elderly population. While platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) injections have emerged as innovative therapeutic approaches for managing osteoarthritis, their effectiveness in HOA remains a subject of contention. Therefore, the objective of this review was to assess the efficacy of PRP versus HA in terms of pain relief and functional outcomes for the management of HOA. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases from 2013 to 2023 to identify pertinent randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A total of seven trials (478 participants) were included. The selected studies underwent quality assessment using the updated Cochrane risk of bias tool. The pain and functional outcomes were examined using measures of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain scale, visual analog scale (VAS), and Harris hip score (HHS). In the meta-analysis, standard mean differences (SMDs) along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to estimate overall effect magnitudes for continuous outcomes were extracted. Statistical significance was determined using p-values below 0.05. At six months, the PRP group experienced a significantly lower standard mean WOMAC pain score (SMD = -0.38, CI = -0.64 - 0.13; p = 0.03). No significant differences in WOMAC pain scores were noted at one to two months (SMD = 0.09, CI = -0.24, 0.43; p = 0.59), and at 12 months (SMD = -0.85, CI = -1.81, 0.12; p = 0.09). Similarly, for VAS, patients on PRP showed a slight improvement in their VAS scores at six months (SMD = -0.50, CI = -0.89, -0.12; p < 0.01). However, no significant differences in VAS between the PRP groups and the HA groups were observed at one to two months (SMD = -0.22, CI = -0.49, 0.04; p = 0.10) and at 12 months (SMD = -0.22, CI: -0.63, 0.19; p = 0.29). In terms of hip dysfunction, there was no statistically significant standard mean difference in HHS between the PRP and HA groups at six months (SMD = 0.02, CI = -0.40, 0.44; p = 0.93), and at 12 months (SMD = -0.31, CI = -0.32, 0.22; p = 0.73). This review and meta-analysis provide insights into emerging treatments for HOA, especially considering that PRP shows potential benefits and safety for patients with HOA during mid-term follow-up in a 12-month period. Nevertheless, it is necessary to conduct research that includes high-quality designs and larger sample sizes to validate the comparative efficacy of these treatments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".