Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of intra-articular platelet rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid and platelet rich plasma alone in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Methods:The relevant literatures published between January 2010 and December 2021 on the randomized control study of intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid and injection of platelet rich plasma only in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis were searched. The bias risk of all the literatures included in the study was evaluated by Revman 5.3 software, and the data were processed and analyzed by Stata 16.0 software. The standardized mean difference ( SMD) was calculated for the difference of efficacy indexes, and the difference was compared by t- test. The odds ratio ( OR) was calculated for the difference of safety in-dex, and the difference was compared by t- test. Results:①A total of 7 relevant research literatures were in-cluded, all of which were in English. ②A total of 675 patients were included in the study, of which 330 patients were treated with intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid, and 345 patients were treated with intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma only. ③The VAS scores of patients with platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid injection combined with injection and platelet rich plasma injection alone were compared. After 1 and 3 months of injection, the VAS scores of patients with platelet rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid injection were compared with those of patients with platelet rich plasma injection only. There was no significant difference[ SMD(95% CI)=-0.02(-0.30, 0.27), t=-0.12, P=0.902; SMD(95% CI)=-0.40(-0.80, 0.00), t=-1.97, P=0.051]. After 6 months of injection, the VAS scores of patients with combined injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid were significantly lower than those of patients with injection of platelet rich plasma only, and the difference was statistically significant [ SMD(95% CI)=-0.33 (-0.55, -0.11), t=-2.98, P=0.012]. ④The WOMAC scores of patients with combined injection of platelet rich plasma, hyaluronic acid and platelet rich plasma only were compared. After 12 months of treatment, the WOMAC scores of patients with combined injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid were significantly higher than those of patients with PRP only, and the difference was statistically significant [ SMD(95% CI)=-0.30(-0.58, -0.03), t=-2.14, P=0.033]. ⑤The incidence of adverse events of platelet rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid was lower than that of platelet rich plasma only [ OR(95% CI)=0.55(0.33, 0.93), P=0.021]. Conclusion:Compared with intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma only, the short-term clinical efficacy of combined injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid is equivalent to that of injection of platelet rich plasma only, but the long-term clinical efficacy is significantly better, and the safety of combined injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid is significantly better.

Objective:To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis.Methods:The relevant literatures including the randomized control study of intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis published from January 2010 to December 2021 were searched. The bias risk of the included literatures was evaluated by Revman 5.3 software, and the data were processed and analyzed by Stata 16.0 software. The weighted mean difference ( WMD) was calculated for the difference ofefficacy indexes, and the difference was compared by t-test. The odds ratio ( OR) was calculated for the difference of safety index, and the difference was compared by t-test. Results:① A total of 10 literatures were included, all of which were in English. ② A total of 921 patients were included in the study, of which 479 patients were treated with intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma and 442 patients were treated with intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid. ③ Comparing the VAS scores of platelet rich plasma injection and hyaluronic acid injection, the visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of platelet rich plasma injection patients were significantly lower than those of hyaluronic acid injection patients after 6 and 12 months of injection treatment, and the difference was statistically significant [ WMD(95% CI)=-0.66(-1.25, -0.77), P=0.029; WMD(95% CI)= -0.90(-1.51, -0.29), P=0.004]. ④ The specific performance was that the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score of patients injected with platelet rich plasma after 6 and 12 months of injection treatment was significantly lower than that of patients injected with hyaluronic acid [ WMD(95% CI)=-0.76(-1.06, 0.45), P<0.001; WMD(95% CI)=-1.35(-2.05, -0.65), P<0.01]; After 3, 6 and 12 months of injection treatment, the WOMAC stiffness score of patients injected with platelet rich plasma was significantly lower than that of patients injected with hyaluronic acid [( WMD(95% CI)=-0.37(-0.66, -0.08), P=0.011; WMD(95% CI)=-0.30(-0.57, -0.04), P=0.023; WMD(95% CI)=-0.62(-0.92, -0.33), P<0.001]; After 3, 6 and 12 months of injection treatment, the WOMAC function score of patients injected with platelet rich plasma was significantly lower than that of patients injected with hyaluronic acid [ WMD(95% CI)=-1.90 (-2.53, -1.27), P<0.001; WMD(95% CI)=-5.77(-9.20, -2.34), P=0.001; WMD(95% CI)=-5.72(-8.62, -2.82), P<0.001]. ⑤There was no significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the two intra-articular injection methods [ OR(95% CI)=1.28(0.68, 2.42), P=0.440]. Conclusion:Compared with intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid, the short-term clinical efficacy of injection of platelet rich plasma is equivalent to that of injection of hyaluronic acid, but the long-term clinical efficacy is better, and the safety of the two methods is similiar.