Ashley Titan1, Michael Schär2, Ian Hutchinson3, Marco Demange4, Tony Chen5, Scott Rodeo6. 1. Department of Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California, U.S.A. 2. Orthopaedic Soft Tissue Research Program, Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, and the Department of Biomechanics, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, University of Bern, Insel Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. 3. Orthopaedic Soft Tissue Research Program, Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, and the Department of Biomechanics, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University at Albany-State University of New York, Albany, New York, U.S.A. 4. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. 5. Orthopaedic Soft Tissue Research Program, Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, and the Department of Biomechanics, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A. 6. Orthopaedic Soft Tissue Research Program, Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, and the Department of Biomechanics, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A. Electronic address: Rodeos@hss.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether (1) human leukocyte-platelet-rich plasma (L-PRP) or (2) leukocyte-platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) delivered on a hyaluronic acid (HA) scaffold at a bovine chondral defect, a simulated cartilage tear interface, in vitro would improve tissue formation based on biomechanical, histologic, and biochemical measures. METHODS: L-PRF and L-PRP were prepared from 3 healthy volunteer donors and delivered in conjunction with HA scaffolds to defects created in full-thickness bovine cartilage plugs harvested from bovine femoral condyle and trochlea. Specimens were cultured in vitro for up to 42 days. Treatment groups included an HA scaffold alone and scaffolds containing L-PRF or L-PRP. Cartilage repair was assessed using biomechanical testing, histology, DNA quantification, and measurement of sulfated glycosaminoglycan and collagen content at 28 and 42 days. RESULTS: L-PRF elicited the greatest degree of defect filling and improvement in other histologic measures. L-PRF-treated specimens also had the greatest cellularity when compared with L-PRP and control at day 28 (560.4 μg vs 191.4 μg vs 124.2 μg, P = .15); at day 48, there remained a difference, although not significant, between L-PRF versus L-PRP (761.1 μg vs 589.3 μg, P = .219) . L-PRF had greater collagen deposition when compared with L-PRP at day 42 (40.1 μg vs 16.3 μg, P < .0001). L-PRF had significantly greater maximum interfacial strength compared with the control at day 42 (10.92 N vs 0.66 N, P = .015) but had no significant difference compared with L-PRP (10.92 N vs 6.58 N, P = .536). L-PRP facilitated a greater amount of sulfated glycosaminoglycan production at day 42 when compared with L-PRF (15.9 μg vs 4.3 μg, P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of leukocyte-rich platelet concentrates in conjunction with a HA scaffold may allow for improvements in cartilage healing through different pathways. L-PRF was not superior to L-PRP in its biomechanical strength, suggesting that both treatments may be effective in improving biomechanical strength of healing cartilage through different pathways. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The delivery of platelet-rich concentrates in conjunction HA scaffolds may augment healing cartilaginous injuries.
PURPOSE: To determine whether (1) human leukocyte-platelet-rich plasma (L-PRP) or (2) leukocyte-platelet-rich fibrin (L-PRF) delivered on a hyaluronic acid (HA) scaffold at a bovinechondral defect, a simulated cartilage tear interface, in vitro would improve tissue formation based on biomechanical, histologic, and biochemical measures. METHODS: L-PRF and L-PRP were prepared from 3 healthy volunteer donors and delivered in conjunction with HA scaffolds to defects created in full-thickness bovine cartilage plugs harvested from bovine femoral condyle and trochlea. Specimens were cultured in vitro for up to 42 days. Treatment groups included an HA scaffold alone and scaffolds containing L-PRF or L-PRP. Cartilage repair was assessed using biomechanical testing, histology, DNA quantification, and measurement of sulfated glycosaminoglycan and collagen content at 28 and 42 days. RESULTS: L-PRF elicited the greatest degree of defect filling and improvement in other histologic measures. L-PRF-treated specimens also had the greatest cellularity when compared with L-PRP and control at day 28 (560.4 μg vs 191.4 μg vs 124.2 μg, P = .15); at day 48, there remained a difference, although not significant, between L-PRF versus L-PRP (761.1 μg vs 589.3 μg, P = .219) . L-PRF had greater collagen deposition when compared with L-PRP at day 42 (40.1 μg vs 16.3 μg, P < .0001). L-PRF had significantly greater maximum interfacial strength compared with the control at day 42 (10.92 N vs 0.66 N, P = .015) but had no significant difference compared with L-PRP (10.92 N vs 6.58 N, P = .536). L-PRP facilitated a greater amount of sulfated glycosaminoglycan production at day 42 when compared with L-PRF (15.9 μg vs 4.3 μg, P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of leukocyte-rich platelet concentrates in conjunction with a HA scaffold may allow for improvements in cartilage healing through different pathways. L-PRF was not superior to L-PRP in its biomechanical strength, suggesting that both treatments may be effective in improving biomechanical strength of healing cartilage through different pathways. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The delivery of platelet-rich concentrates in conjunction HA scaffolds may augment healing cartilaginous injuries.