This multicenter, randomized, triple-blind, controlled trial, will enroll 108 patients who will block-randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention or control group. The main question to answer are the clinical efficacy of SVF as adjuvant therapy to PRP on functionality and tissue regeneration for knee osteoarthritis.
Background: Osteoarthritis, the most common joint disease, has a high social and individual impact and the development of therapeutic options is a public health priority. It's multifactorial etiology is still a source of active research Most common conservative treatments for osteoarthritis treatment include painkillers, active physical therapies, orthotics, infiltrations of corticosteroids, hyaluronic acid (HA), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). PRP may be beneficial in osteoarthritis by interfering with catabolic and inflammatory events and by subsequently promoting anabolic responses. Activation of PRP releases biologically active components, including platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), transforming growth factor-β (PGF-β), type I insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). These proteins are responsible for a range of critical tissue healing roles such as chondrocyte and mesenchymal stem cells proliferation, bone and vessel remodelling, inflammatory modulation and collagen synthesis. For osteoarthritis, an improvement of clinical outcomes has been found in several clinical trials, presumably associated with the chondroprotective effect of PRP. Nevertheless, an in-vivo effect on human cartilage regeneration is not yet demonstrated despite the numerous studies approaching the subject. Preclinical models elucidated how injected Adipose Derived- Mesenchymal Stem Cells (AD-MSC) coordinate the cartilage regeneration process through paracrine mechanisms, producing cytokines and trophic bioactive factors that stimulate cellular proliferation, reduce inflammation, fibrosis, oxidative stress, and chondrocytes senescence. Stromal Vascular Fraction (SVF), a product from specific adipose tissue processing, contains mesenchymal stem cells, endothelial precursor cells, T regulatory cells, macrophages, smooth muscle cells, pericytes and preadipocytes. SVF extraction and injection techniques have been recently used as an alternative to harvest AD-MSC due to its logistic simplicity and feasibility in clinical practice. SVF injections produce a clinically significant effect on the treatment of knee osteoarthritis, and a possible improvement in cartilage quality. This clinical trial aims to assess the clinical efficacy of SVF as adjuvant therapy to PRP on functionality and tissue regeneration on osteoarthritis.
Study Type
Procedure to prepare SVF: In the operations room and after aseptic technic, local anesthesia is applied in the liposuction incision site with lidocaine 1% without epinephrine subcutaneously. 60 ml of tumescent solution are injected. After 15-20 minutes waiting, 15 ml of lipoaspiration per side are recollected into a double syringe. This is centrifuged for 4 minutes at 2.500 rpm and the remaining fat is separated from the other fractions. Two 1.4 mm GEMS syringes are attached together, and fat is transferred at least 30 times from one syringe to the other. Syringe content is again centrifugated for 4 minutes. The oil is discarded and approximately 1.5ml SVF fraction remains.
Procedure to prepare PRP: 15 cm of peripheral blood obtained by venipuncture are centrifugated at 1500 RPM during 5 minutes. Using PRP Arthrex kit platelets poor plasma is discarded and 1-3 mm of PRP are ready to be injected
WOMAC
Functional improvement measured with the 0%-100% normalized Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, where 0% indicates complete absence of symptoms and 100% indicates maximal possible symptoms severity
Time frame: 6 months
VAS
The absolute difference (changes from baseline to other time points) in pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) during maximal physical activity performed by the patient, between the treatment and control arms on a 0 to 10 scale. 0: no pain, 10: maximal pain
Time frame: 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months
WOMAC
The absolute difference (changes from baseline to other time points) between the treatment and control arms on the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index on knee osteoarthritis cases. From 0 to 100, being 0: no limitation, 100: extreme limitation
Time frame: 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months
Return to work
The absolute difference between the treatment and control arms on length of time to return work in days
Time frame: 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months
Return to sport
The absolute difference between the treatment and control arms on length of time to return to sports in days
Time frame: 1, 2, 3, 6, and 12 months
AMADEUS SCORE
The absolute difference (changes from baseline to other time points) between the treatment and control arms on Affected cartilage quality on MRI using Area Measurement And Depth Underlying Structures (AMADEUS) score. (0 worst, 100 best)
Time frame: 6 and 12 moths
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE
Enrollment
108
WORMS
The absolute difference (changes from baseline to other time points) between the treatment and control arms on Whole-Organ Magnetic Resonance Imaging Score score. (0 normal structure, 332 most severe grade).
Time frame: 6 Months, 12 months
MOCART
The absolute difference (changes from baseline to other time points) between the treatment and control arms on Magnetic Resonance Observation of Cartilage Repair Tissue score. (0 = poor cartilage repair, 100 complete and normal cartilage repair)
Time frame: 6 months, 12 months