Objective: The objective of this randomized study was to compare the efficacy of osteoarthritis knee arthroscopy and intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Methods: Forty patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the knee were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: arthroscopy (n=20) and PRP injection (n=20). The arthroscopy group underwent a minimally invasive surgical procedure to remove damaged cartilage and smooth joint surfaces, while the PRP group received intra-articular injections of autologous platelet-rich plasma. Pain scores, functional outcome measures, and radiographic evaluations were recorded at baseline and at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-treatment. Results: Both treatment groups improved pain scores and functional outcomes over the study. The arthroscopy group had a mean VAS pain reduction of 45% (± 10.5) at three months, while the PRP group had 38% (± 9.7). This difference was insignificant (p=0.14). At 6 months, arthroscopy reduced pain by 58% (± 12.3) and PRP by 51% (± 11.2) (p=0.26). The arthroscopy group had a mean pain reduction of 62% (± 13.8) at 12 months, while the PRP group had 56% (± 12.4) (p=0.35). Both groups improved functional outcome measures at each follow-up. At 3 months, the arthroscopy group had a greater knee ROM increase (38° ± 8.2) than the PRP group (30° ± 7.6) (p=0.04). At 6 and 12 months, knee ROM did not differ significantly between groups (p>0.05). Radiographs showed no significant differences in joint space narrowing or cartilage thickness between treatment groups at any time (p>0.05). Conclusion: Both osteoarthritis knee arthroscopy and intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injection were found to be effective treatment options for osteoarthritis of the knee. While arthroscopy demonstrated a greater improvement in knee range of motion at 3 months, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of pain reduction, functional outcome measures, or radiographic evaluations at any other time points. These findings suggest that PRP injection could be a viable alternative to arthroscopy in selected patients, considering its non-invasiveness and potential for fewer complications. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm these results and investigate long-term outcomes.

Objective: The objective of this randomized study was to compare the efficacy of osteoarthritis knee arthroscopy and intra-articular platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Methods: Forty patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis of the knee were randomly assigned to two treatment groups: arthroscopy (n=20) and PRP injection (n=20). The arthroscopy group underwent a minimally invasive surgical procedure to remove damaged cartilage and smooth joint surfaces, while the PRP group received intra-articular injections of autologous platelet-rich plasma. Pain scores, functional outcome measures, and radiographic evaluations were recorded at baseline and at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months post-treatment. Results: Both treatment groups improved pain scores and functional outcomes over the study. The arthroscopy group had a mean VAS pain reduction of 45% (± 10.5) at three months, while the PRP group had 38% (± 9.7). This difference was insignificant (p=0.14). At 6 months, arthroscopy reduced pain by 58% (± 12.3) and PRP by 51% (± 11.2) (p=0.26). The arthroscopy group had a mean pain reduction of 62% (± 13.8) at 12 months, while the PRP group had 56% (± 12.4) (p=0.35). Both groups improved functional outcome measures at each follow-up. At 3 months, the arthroscopy group had a greater knee ROM increase (38° ± 8.2) than the PRP group (30° ± 7.6) (p=0.04). At 6 and 12 months, knee ROM did not differ significantly between groups (p>0.05). Radiographs showed no significant differences in joint space narrowing or cartilage thickness between treatment groups at any time (p>0.05). Conclusion: Both osteoarthritis knee arthroscopy and intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injection were found to be effective treatment options for osteoarthritis of the knee. While arthroscopy demonstrated a greater improvement in knee range of motion at 3 months, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of pain reduction, functional outcome measures, or radiographic evaluations at any other time points. These findings suggest that PRP injection could be a viable alternative to arthroscopy in selected patients, considering its non-invasiveness and potential for fewer complications. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm these results and investigate long-term outcomes.