Effects of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Tear Size Reduction in Partial-Thickness Tear of the Supraspinatus Tendon Compared to Corticosteroids Injection
Sports medicine - open. 2023;9(1):11
OBJECTIVES Corticosteroid (CS) injection is commonly used in partial-thickness rotator cuff tears to decrease pain. However, this could result in unwanted side effects, such as tendon rupture. Alternatively, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection is frequently used to treat tendinopathies because it enhances healing. This study aimed to compare the differences in tear size and functional scores between intralesional PRP and subacromial CS injections. METHODS Patients with symptomatic partial-thickness tears of the supraspinatus tendon who underwent conservative treatment for ≥ 3 months were enrolled. All patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to confirm the diagnosis. Fourteen and 15 patients were randomized to receive intralesional PRP and subacromial CS injections, respectively. Tears were measured in the coronal and sagittal planes. The patients underwent another MRI 6 months after the injection. Tear size was compared between the two MRI results. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder score (ASES) and Constant-Murley score (CMS) were also obtained. RESULTS The baseline data were similar between the groups. In the coronal plane, PRP and CS showed tear size reductions of 3.39 mm (P = 0.003) and 1.10 mm (P = 0.18), respectively. In the sagittal plane, PRP and CS showed tear size reductions of 2.97 mm (P = 0.001) and 0.76 mm (P = 0.29), respectively. Functional scores improved 6 months after injection in both groups, but PRP showed better functional scores than CS (P = 0.002 for ASES, P = 0.02 for CS). CONCLUSION Intralesional PRP injection can reduce the tear size in partial-thickness tears of the supraspinatus tendon. Subacromial steroid injection did not significantly affect the tear size. While CS improved functional scores compared with baseline, PRP resulted in better improvement 6 months post-injection. Trial registration Thai Clinical Trials Registry, TCTR20210428004. Registered 28 April 2021-retrospectively registered, TCTR20210428004 .
Three doses of PRP therapy may be more effective than one dose of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association. 2023
PURPOSE This study aims to compare the efficacy of a single dose of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) with multiple doses of PRP therapy in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). METHODS PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Cochrane Library, grey literature and bibliographic references were searched from inception to May 2022. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of single versus multiple doses of PRP for KOA were included. Literature retrieval and data extraction were conducted by three independent reviewers. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on type of study, research subjects, intervention, outcome, language and availability of data. Pooled analysis of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores and adverse events were conducted. RESULTS Seven studies (all RCTs) of high methodological quality involving 575 patients were included. Age of patients included in this study ranged from 20 to 80, with a balanced gender ratio. Single dose PRP therapy resulted in significantly better VAS scores compared to triple dose PRP therapy at 12 months (P<0. 0001), with no significant change in VAS scores between double and single dose PRP at 12 months. Regarding adverse events, double dose (P=0.28) and triple dose (P=0.24) therapy had no significant differences in safety from single dose therapy. CONCLUSION While there is a paucity of large high-quality Level I studies, current best evidence suggests that two or three doses of PRP for KOA are as effective as one dose of PRP at providing pain relief and improvement in function up to 1 year following administration.
Comparison of Clinical and Functional Outcomes after Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection and Corticosteroid Injection for the Treatment of de Quervain's Tenosynovitis
Journal of wrist surgery. 2023;12(2):135-142
Background Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has local anti-inflammatory actions, which is being used as a treatment in various tendinopathies. Purpose The aim of the study is to compare the clinical results of PRP injection and corticosteroid injection in the management of de Quervain's tenosynovitis (DQTSV). Patients and Methods In this prospective study, 60 patients of DQTSV, fulfilling the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, were randomised into two groups. In group 1 ( n = 30), patients received a single injection of autologous PRP and in group 2 ( n = 30) they received a single injection of corticosteroid (methylprednisolone). All patients were followed up at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year for evaluation by Finkelstein test, visual analogue scale (VAS), DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) score, and Modified Mayo Wrist score (MMWS). Results In both the groups improvement occurred in Finkelstein test, VAS score, DASH score, and MMWS which were found to be statistically significant at all points of follow-ups when compared to the pre-intervention values. Comparison of scores between the two groups did not show any statistical significance. No complications were reported in PRP group. Statistically significant complications ( p -value = 0.026) like subcutaneous fat atrophy, depigmentation, and temporary increase in pain were seen in eight patients in the corticosteroid group with an overall complication rate of 26.67%. Conclusion Both the modalities are equally effective in the management of DQTSV remittance. PRP is equally effective as corticosteroid in reducing symptoms of first dorsal compartment stenosing tenosynovitis. PRP may have a lower complication profile, however, this benefit should be weighed against the slight increase in cost and time of PRP preparation and injection. Level of Evidence Level 2, prospective comparative study.
Effects of platelet-rich plasma on subchondral bone marrow edema and biomarkers in synovial fluid of knee osteoarthritis
The Knee. 2023;42:161-169
BACKGROUND The aim of the study was to investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on subchondral bone marrow edema (BME) and the level of biomarkers in synovial fluid of the knee osteoarthritis. METHODS Eighty-one patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis were randomly divided into two groups according to the number of inpatients. Forty-five cases were treated with intra-articular injection of PRP (PRP group), 36 cases were treated with sodium hyaluronate (SH group), and the clinical effects were evaluated using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores. The changes of subchondral BME were assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before and after treatment. The levels of TNFα, IL-6, MCP-1, MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 in synovial fluid were also detected. RESULTS All the patients completed the corresponding treatment and were followed up for 12 months without serious complications. After the treatment, the VAS and WOMAC scores of the two groups were significantly decreased, and the difference was statistically significant at different time points (P < 0.05). The VAS and WOMAC scores of the PRP group were better than those of the SH group (P < 0.05). MRI showed that the subchondral bone edema of the two groups were reduced in varying degrees, and the reduction was more noticeable in the PRP group (P < 0.05). The levels of TNFα, IL-6, MCP-1, MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 in two groups were decreased, and the difference was statistically significant at different time points (P < 0.05). However, the levels of TNFα, IL-6, MCP-1, MMP-1, MMP-3, and MMP-9 in the PRP group were significantly lower than those in the SH group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Intra-articular injection of PRP can significantly reduce the subchondral BME and the level of biomarkers in synovial fluid of the symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.
Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma injections for the treatment of osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Frontiers in medicine. 2023;10:1204144
BACKGROUND In recent years, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for osteoarthritis (OA) have been widely promoted in clinical practice, but their effectiveness is controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the efficacy and safety of PRP injections for the treatment of OA. METHODS We searched databases including Embase, Web of Science, Medline, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies. Two researchers (YQX and CG) performed literature screening, baseline data extraction, literature quality assessment, and heterogeneity analysis of RCTs from the retrieved studies. Based on the magnitude of heterogeneity I(2), random-effects or fixed-effects models were selected for the meta-analysis. RESULTS We included 24 RCTs comprising 1344 patients with OA who met the inclusion criteria, with the main types of morbidity being knee osteoarthritis (KOA), hip osteoarthritis (HOA), ankle osteoarthritis (AOA), and temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJOA). Our results indicate that PRP injections were effective in improving Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores in patients with KOA, HOA, and AOA compared to controls (AOA, MD = -1.15, CI = 95% [-1.74, -0.56], I(2) = 40%, P < 0.05; KOA, MD = -1.03, CI = 95% [-1.16, -0.9], I(2) = 87%, P < 0.05; TMJOA, MD = -1.35, CI = 95% [-1.74, -0.97], I(2) = 92%, P < 0.05) but showed no significant efficacy in patients with HOA (MD = -0.27, CI = 95% [-0.8, 0.26], I(2) = 56%, P>0.05). Compared to controls, PRP injections were effective in improving Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), including the patient's pain symptoms, activities of daily living (ADL), and adhesion symptomatology, but not for that of sports function (KOOS-pain, MD = 2.77, CI = 95% [0, 5.53], I(2) = 0%, P < 0.05; KOOS-symptoms, MD = 3.73, CI = 95% [0.76, 6.71], I(2) = 0%, P < 0.05; KOOS-ADL, MD = 3.61, CI = 95% [0.79, 6.43], I(2) = 0%, P < 0.05; KOOS-QOL, MD = 4.66, CI = 95% [0.98, 8.35], I(2) = 29%, P < 0.05, KOOS-sport, MD = 0.48, CI = 95% [-3.02, 3.98], I(2) = 0%, P > 0.05). PRP injections were effective in improving Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, including pain, stiffness, and functional joint motion, in patients with OA compared with the control group (WOMAC-pain, MD = -1.08, CI = 95% [-1.62, -0.53], I(2) = 87%, P < 0.05; WOMAC-stiffness, MD = -1.17, CI = 88% [-1.72, -0.63], I(2) = 87%, P < 0.05; WOMAC-function, MD = -1.12, CI = 95% [-1.65, -0.58], I(2) = 87%, P < 0.05). In addition, subgroup analysis showed that leukocyte-poor (LP) PRP injections were more effective than leukocyte-rich (LR) PRP injections in improving pain symptoms in patients with OA (VAS, LR-PRP, MD = -0.81, CI = 95% [-1.65, -0.03], I(2) = 83%, P = 0.06 > 0.05; LP-PRP, MD = -1.62, CI = 95% [-2.36, -0.88], I(2) = 92%, P < 0.05). A subgroup analysis based on injection sites showed that no statistical difference in efficacy between intra-articular (IA) combined with intra-osseous (IO) simultaneous PRP injections. IA PRP injections only improved VAS pain scores in patients with OA (IA+IO PRP injections, MD = -0.74, CI =95% [-1.29, -0.18], I(2) = 61%, P < 0.05; IA PRP injections, MD = -1.43, CI = 95% [-2.18, -0.68], I(2) = 87%, P < 0.05, test for subgroup differences, P > 0.05, I(2) = 52.7%). CONCLUSION PRP injection therapy can safely and effectively improve functional activity in patients with OA and produce positive analgesic effects in patients with KOA, TMJOA, and AOA. However, PRP injection therapy did not significantly reduce pain symptoms in patients with HOA. In addition, the analgesic effect of LP-PRP was greater than that of LR-PRP. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022362066.
Comparison of the effects of platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroid injection in rotator cuff disease treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery. 2023
BACKGROUND Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroids are used to treat rotator cuff diseases. However, few reviews have compared the effects of these two treatments. In this study, we compared the effects of PRP and corticosteroid injection on the prognosis of rotator cuff diseases. METHODS According to the Cochrane Manual of Systematic Review of Interventions, the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched comprehensively. Two independent authors screened suitable studies and performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of PRP and corticosteroid in the treatment of rotator cuff injuries were included, as measured by clinical function and pain during different follow-up periods. RESULTS Nine studies with 469 patients were included in this review. In short-term treatment, corticosteroids were superior to PRP in the improvement of constant, SST, and ASES scores (MD -5.08, 95%CI -10.26, 0.06; P = .05 and MD -0.97, 95%CI -1.68, -0.07; P = .03 and MD -6.67, 95%CI -12.85, -0.49; P = .03, respectively). No statistically difference was observed between the two groups at mid-term (P> .05), and the recovery of the SST and ASES scores in PRP treatment was significantly better than that in corticosteroid treatment in the long-term (MD 1.21, 95%CI 0.68, 1.74; P < .00001 and MD 6.96, 95%CI 3.90, 9.61; P < .00001, respectively). In pain reduction based on VAS score, corticosteroids led to better pain reduction (MD 0.84, 95%CI 0.03, 1.64; P = .04), but no significant difference was observed in pain reduction between the two groups in the any term (P> .05). However, these differences did not reach the minimum clinically important difference. CONCLUSION Current analysis showed that corticosteroids have better efficacy in short-term, whereas PRP is more beneficial for long-term recovery. However, no difference was observed in the mid-term efficacy between the two groups. RCTs with longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes are also needed to determine the optimal treatment.
Effects of platelet-rich plasma and prolotherapy on supraspinatus tendinopathy: a double blind randomized clinical trial
The Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness. 2023;63(5):674-684
BACKGROUND Supraspinatus tendinopathy is a significant cause of pain and function loss. It has been suggested that platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and prolotherapy are effective treatments for this condition. This study was done to assess and compare the effects of PRP and prolotherapy on shoulder function and pain. The secondary aim was to evaluate the effect of the treatment on shoulder range of motion, supraspinatus tendon thickness, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects. METHODS This was a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. The study included 64 patients over the age of 18 who had supraspinatus tendinopathy and had not responded to at least three months of conventional treatment. Patients were assigned to either receive 2 mL of PRP (N.=32) or prolotherapy (N.=32). The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included shoulder range of motion (ROM), supraspinatus tendon thickness, and adverse effects, which were measured at baseline, 3, 6, and 6 months after injection. At six months, patient satisfaction was assessed. RESULTS Repeated measures ANOVA showed there was a statistically significant effect of time on total SPADI scores (F [2.75, 151.11], = 2.85, P=0.040) and the NRS (F [2.69, 147.86], = 4.32, P=0.008) within each group. There were no other significant changes over time or between groups. Significantly more patients in the PRP group experienced increased pain lasting less than two weeks after injection (χ(2)=11.94, P=0.030). CONCLUSIONS PRP and prolotherapy resulted in improved shoulder function and pain for patients with chronic supraspinatus tendinopathy who did not response to conventional treatment.
Platelet-rich plasma injection for the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research. 2023;18(1):373
BACKGROUND Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection for ankle osteoarthritis (OA) treatment showed contradictory results. This review was aimed to pool individual studies which assessed the efficacy of PRP for ankle OA treatment. METHODS This study was conducted following the preferred report items of systematic review and meta-analysis guideline. PubMed and Scopus were searched up to January 2023. Meta-analysis, or individual randomised controlled trial (RCT), or observational studies were included if they involved ankle OA with aged ≥ 18 years, compared before-after receiving PRP, or PRP with other treatments, and reported visual analog scale (VAS) or functional outcomes. Selection of eligible studies and data extraction were independently performed by two authors. Heterogeneity test using Cochrane Q test and the I(2)-statistic were assessed. Standardised (SMD) or unstandardised mean difference (USMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated and pooled across studies. RESULTS Three studies from meta-analysis and two individual studies were included, which consisted of one RCT and four before-after studies with 184 ankle OAs and 132 PRP. The average age was 50.8-59.3 years, and 25-60% of PRP injected cases were male. The number of primary ankle OA was accounted to 0-100%. When compared to before treatment, PRP significantly reduced VAS and functional score at 12 weeks with pooled USMD of - 2.80, 95% CI - 3.91, - 2.68; p < 0.001 (Q = 82.91, p < 0.001; I(2) 96.38%), and pooled SMD of 1.73, 95% CI 1.37, 2.09; p < 0.001 (Q = 4.87, p = 0.18; I(2) 38.44%), respectively. CONCLUSION PRP may beneficially improve pain and functional scores for ankle OA in a short-term period. Its magnitude of improvement seems to be similar to placebo effects from the previous RCT. A large-scale RCT with proper whole blood and PRP preparation processes is required to prove treatment effects. Trial registration PROSPERO number CRD42022297503.
Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy Versus Platelet Rich Plasma Injection in Patients of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial From a Tertiary Center of Eastern India
Introduction Plantar fasciitis is a degenerative condition of the plantar fascia that leads to heel and sole pain. Physical modalities, physiotherapy, medication, and orthoses have been tried before as treatments. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) and the injection of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) are generally effective in the treatment of plantar fasciitis, which might be resistant to other conservative measures. The present study compares the efficacy of ESWT and PRP injection in respect of symptomatic relief, functional improvement, and change in plantar fascia thickness (PFT). Methods Seventy-two patients were enrolled and randomized into two groups. Patients in the first group received ESWT, whereas patients in the second group received PRP injections. Patients were evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, along with PFT measurement (using ultrasonography) before the treatment and at days 15, 30, and 90 after the treatment. The X(2) test was used to compare qualitative variables, and the paired T-test was used to evaluate quantitative data. Quantitative variables had a normal distribution with a standard deviation, and the significance level was set at P-value=0.05. Results On day 0, the mean VAS of the ESWT and PRP groups were 6.44±1.11 and 6.78±1.17, respectively (p=0.237). On day 15, the mean VAS of the ESWT and PRP groups were 4.67±1.45 and 6.67±1.35, respectively (p<0.001). At day 30, the mean VAS of the ESWT and PRP groups were 4.97±1.46 and 4.69±1.39, respectively (p=0.391). On day 90, the mean VAS of the ESWT and PRP groups were 5.47±1.63 and 3.36±0.96 (p<0.001). On day 0, the mean PFTs of the ESWT and PRP groups were 4.73±0.40 and 5.19±0.51, respectively (p<0.001). At day 15, the mean PFT of the ESWT and PRP groups were 4.64±0.46 and 5.11±0.62, respectively (p<0.001) which changed to 4.52±0.53 and 4.40±0.58 at day 30 (p<0.001), and to 4.40±0.50 and 3.82±0.45 at day 90 (p<0.001). The mean AOFAS of the ESWT and PRP groups were 68.39±5.88 and 64.86±8.95 on day 0 (p=0.115), 72.58±6.26 and 67.22±10.47 on day 15 (p=0.115), 73.22±6.92 and 74.72±7.52 on day 30 (p=0.276), and 72.75±7.90 and 81.08±6.01 on day 90, respectively (p<0.001). Conclusion Both PRP injection and ESWT are very effective methods to improve pain and cause reduced plantar fascia thickness in patients with chronic plantar fasciitis non-responsive to other conservative measures. PRP injection is more effective at a longer duration as compared to ESWT.
Corticosteroid, Platelet-Rich Plasma, and Ozone Injections for Sinus Tarsi Syndrome
Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association. 2023;113(1)
BACKGROUND Sinus tarsi syndrome is characterized by permanent pain on the anterolateral side of the ankle due to chronic inflammation characterized by fibrotic tissue remnants and synovitis accumulation after repeated traumatic injuries. Few studies have documented the outcome of injection treatments for sinus tarsi syndrome. We sought to determine the effects of corticosteroid and local anesthetic (CLA), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), and ozone injections on sinus tarsi syndrome. METHODS Sixty patients with sinus tarsi syndrome were randomly divided into three treatment groups: CLA, PRP, and ozone injections. Outcome measures were visual analog scale, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scale (AOFAS), Foot Function Index, and Foot and Ankle Outcome Score before injection compared with 1, 3, and 6 months after injection. RESULTS At the end of months 1, 3, and 6 after injection, significant improvements were observed in all three groups compared with baseline (P < .001 for all). At months 1 and 3, improvements in AOFAS scores were similar in the CLA and ozone groups; those in the PRP group were lower (P = .001 and P = .004, respectively). At month 1, improvements in Foot and Ankle Outcome Score were similar in the PRP and ozone groups and higher in the CLA group (P < .001). At 6-month follow-up, there were no significant differences in visual analog scale and Foot Function Index results among the groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS Ozone, CLA, or PRP injections could provide clinically significant functional improvement for at least 6 months in patients with sinus tarsi syndrome.