Bone marrow lesions are a radiographic indication of bony pathology closely associated with advanced osteoarthritis of the adjacent joint. Injection of autologous orthobiologic products, including bone marrow concentrate and platelet-rich plasma, have demonstrated safety and efficacy in treating both advanced osteoarthritis (via intraarticular injection) and associated bone marrow lesions (via intraosseous injection). The relative efficacy of intraarticular versus intraosseous injection of orthobiologics has not been evaluated at the present time.
The objective was to evaluate differences in orthobiologic bone marrow lesions treatment, either as a collateral result of intraarticular injection with bone marrow concentrate and platelet products alone, or intraosseous plus intraarticular injection as measured by patient reported outcomes.
This study employed a prospective case-matched cohort design.
This study took place at a single outpatient interventional orthopedic pain clinic.
Using data from a prospective orthobiologic treatment registry of knee patients, a population of knee osteoarthritis with bone marrow lesions patients who had undergone only intraarticular knee injections of bone marrow concentrate and platelets (for symptomatic advanced osteoarthritis) were age, gender, and disease severity case-matched to a series of advanced osteoarthritis and bone marrow lesions patients who underwent intraosseous plus intraarticular injections. Self-reported patient outcomes for Numeric Pain Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee, lower extremity functional scale, and a modified single assessment numeric evaluation were compared between the 2 treatment groups.
Eighty patients were included, 40 in each group. Although pain and functional outcome scores were significantly improved in both treatment groups, there was no statistically significant differences in patient reported outcomes based on the type of treatment.
There are several limitations to this study, including multiple providers performing the injections, varying onset of symptoms to treatment, and additional injections after their initial treatment, that were not controlled. In addition, increasing the sample size may be beneficial as well, particularly with the large bone marrow lesions group, which did suggest possible improvement with intraosseous plus intraarticular over the intraarticular, although was not statistically significant in our sample. Limited data availability for this cohort as well as some missing data are other limitations to consider.
Treating knee bone marrow lesions with intraosseous bone marrow concentrate and platelet products did not affect patient reported outcomes.