Evidence for Utilization of Injectable Biologic Augmentation in Primary Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review of Data From 2010 to 2022. Issue 2 (3rd February 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bono, Olivia J.; Jenkin, Bryan; Forlizzi, Julianne; Mousad, Albert; Le Breton, Stephen; MacAskill, Meghan; Mandalia, Krishna; Mithoefer, Kai; Ramappa, Arun; Ross, Glen; Shah, Sarav S.
• Is Part Of: Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. Volume 11:Issue 2(2023)
• Publication Date: 2023-02-03
• Subjects: rotator cuff repair -- augmentation -- injectable biologics -- platelet-rich plasma; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Arthroscopy -- Periodicals; Arthroplasty -- Periodicals; Knee -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.7
• DOI: 10.1177/23259671221150037
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2325-9671

Abstract

Background: Biologic healing after rotator cuff repair remains a significant challenge. Injectable biologic augmentation may improve tissue quality at the suture-tendon interface. Purpose: To investigate the effect of injectable biologic supplementation in rotator cuff repair and to assess the quality and adherence to evolving reporting standards. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Included were 40 studies: 29 preclinical (in vivo animal models) and 11 clinical. Each clinical study was assessed for quality, risk of bias, and adherence to relevant MIBO (Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics) guidelines. The outcomes of interest were reported load to failure, load to gap, gap size, and stiffness in the preclinical studies, and healing rate and any patient-reported outcome measures in the clinical studies. Results: Injectables reported included growth factors (eg, transforming growth factor–beta 3, erythropoietin), bone marrow–derived mesenchymal stem cells and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs), and other agents such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid. The most common findings for preclinical injectables were increased load to failure (16/29 studies; 55.2%) and improved collagen histological quality (11/29 studies; 37.9%). All 11 clinical studies (10 PRP, 1 ADSC) indicated no adverse events, with similar or improved patient-reported outcomes compared with repairs in the control groups. In 1 study utilizing an innovative delivery technique, a concentrated PRP globule with fibrin matrix was shuttled over a suture to maintain concentrated PRP at the repair site and demonstrated a significant decrease in retears ( P = .03) at a 31-month follow-up. A matched-cohort study investigating augmentation with ADSCs demonstrated a significantly lower retear rate in the ADSC-augmented group than the control group at a 28-month follow-up ( P < .001). On average, the clinical studies adhered to 66% of relevant MIBO reporting guidelines and had a low risk of bias. Conclusion: Approximately 83% of preclinical studies found a positive biomechanical or histological effect, with no studies showing an overall negative effect. Clinically, utilization of innovative delivery techniques may reduce the risk of arthroscopic washout of PRP and improve retear rates. ADSCs were shown to reduce retear rates at a 28-month follow-up.