Platelet-rich Plasma Injection Can Be a Viable Alternative to Corticosteroid Injection for Conservative Treatment of Rotator Cuff Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Department of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital, Sichuan University; Chengdu, China. Electronic address: longpangscu@163.com. West China medical school, Sichuan University; Chengdu, China. Electronic address: xuyang.eve@qq.com. Department of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital, Sichuan University; Chengdu, China. Electronic address: litao1023@wchscu.cn. Department of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital, Sichuan University; Chengdu, China. Electronic address: liyinghaoscu@foxmail.com. West China medical school, Sichuan University; Chengdu, China. Electronic address: zhu-jing2008@163.com. Department of Orthopedics, Orthopedic Research Institute, West China Hospital, Sichuan University; Chengdu, China. Electronic address: tangxin9388@163.com.
Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association. 2022
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to explore whether PRP injection can be a viable alternative to CS injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease. METHODS The study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched for English-written randomized
controlled trials (RCTs) which compared PRP and CS injections for patients with rotator cuff disease from January 1, 1990, to March 20, 2022. Two evaluators independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the level of evidence and methodological quality of the enrolled studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.3.3 software. RESULTS Thirteen non-surgical RCTs with 725 patients were included. Compared with CS, PRP provided statistically worse short-term (＜2 months) changes (Δ) of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) assessment, Δ the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Δ the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaires but better medium-term (2 to 6 months) Δ DASH, long-term (≥ 6 months) Δ Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Δ ASES and Δ SST. No statistical differences regarding pain reduction were found between the two groups. PRP injections led to worse short-term Δ forward flexion, Δ internal rotation but better medium-term Δ forward flexion and Δ external rotation. PRP had significantly lower rates of postinjection failure (requests for a subsequent injection or surgical intervention prior to 12 months) than CS. No outcome reached the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). After sensitivity analyses by excluding studies with substantial clinical and/or methodological heterogeneity, PRP showed better medium-term Δ ASES, Δ VAS, and long-term Δ VAS which reached the MCID. CONCLUSIONS Without the drawbacks of CS injection, PRP injection is not worse than CS injection in pain relief and function recovery at any time point of the follow-up. PRP injection may reduce rates of subsequent injection or surgery, and might provide better improvement in pain and function in the medium- to long-term. PRP injection can be a viable alternative to CS injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Systematic review of Level I and II studies.
