Dataset Information

A Pilot Study Evaluating the Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy for Treating Degenerative Tendinopathies: A Randomized Control Trial with Synchronous Observational Cohort.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

This pilot study aimed to inform future research evaluating the effectiveness of Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) injection for tendinopathy.

Design

Randomized control trial (RCT) and synchronous observational cohort studies. For the RCT, consecutive consenting patients treated at an academic sports medicine clinic were randomly assigned to either a PRP or placebo control group.

Setting

The Glen Sather Sport Medicine Clinic, Edmonton, Canada.

Patients

The RCT included 9 participants with rotator cuff tendinopathy. The cohort study included 178 participants with a variety of tendinopathies.

Interventions

Patients receiving PRP were injected with 4 ml of platelets into the supraspinatus and/or infraspinatus, while patients in the placebo group were injected with 4 ml of saline. All participants undertook a 3-month standardized, home-based, daily exercise program.

Main outcome measures

Participants in the RCT were re-evaluated 3, and 6 months post-injection. Change scores before and after injection on pain, disability and MRI-documented pathology outcomes were compared. In the cohort study, pain and disability were measured at 1, 2 and 3 months post-injection.

Results

For the RCT, 7 participants received PRP and 2 received placebo injections. Patients receiving PRP reported clinically important improvements in pain (>1.5/10 on VAS), disability (>15 point DASH change), and tendon pathology while those receiving placebo injections did not. In the observational cohort, statistically and clinically significant improvements in pain and disability were observed.

Conclusion

This pilot study provides information for planning future studies of PRP effectiveness. Preliminary results indicate intratendinous, ultrasound-guided PRP injection may lead to improvements in pain, function, and MRI-documented tendon pathology.

Trial registration

Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN68341698.

SUBMITTER: Wesner M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4743976 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated ultrasound (US)-guided injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as conservative treatment of tendinopathies.Materials and methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, OVID, and the Cochrane Library to identify randomized controlled trials (RCT) on the use of US-guided PRP for tendinopathies.ResultsWe found 33 RCT (2,025 subjects) that met our inclusion criteria: 8 in lateral epicondylitis, 5 in plantar fasciitis, 5 in Achilles tendinopathy, 7 in rotator cuff tendinopathy, 3 in patellar tendinopathy and 5 in carpal tunnel syndrome. PRP, given as a single injection (20 trials) or multiple injections (13 trials), was compared to US-guided injection of steroids, saline, autologous whole blood, local anesthetic, dry needling, prolotherapy, bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells, or with non-injective interventions. The outcomes more commonly reported included pain and functional measures, subgrouped as in the short-term (<3 months from the intervention), medium-term (3 to 6 months) or long-term (≥12 months). No clear between-group differences in these outcomes were observed in patients with lateral epicondylitis, plantar fasciitis, or Achilles, rotator cuff or patellar tendinopathy. In patients with carpal tunnel syndrome, visual analog scale scores for pain at 3 and 6 months and Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire severity scores at 1, 3 and 6 months were significantly lower in PRP recipients than in controls. The certainty of evidence of all these comparisons was graded as low or very low due to risk of bias, imprecision and/or inconsistency. Pain at the injection site was more common among PRP recipients than among controls receiving other US-guided injections.DiscussionIn patients with tendinopathies, a trend towards pain reduction and functional improvement from baseline was observed after US-guided PRP injection, but in the majority of the comparisons, the effect size was comparable to that observed in control groups.

Project description:BackgroundAutologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a treatment that contains fibrin and high concentrations of growth factors with the potential to improve the healing of chronic wounds. This is the first update of a review first published in 2012.ObjectivesTo determine whether autologous PRP promotes the healing of chronic wounds.Search methodsIn June 2015, for this first update, we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library): Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also searched for ongoing and unpublished clinical trials in the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (searched January 2015). We did not impose any restrictions with respect to language, date of publication, or study setting.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared autologous PRP with placebo or alternative treatments for any type of chronic wound in adults. We did not apply any date or language restrictions.Data collection and analysisWe used standard Cochrane methodology, including two reviewers independently selecting studies for inclusion, extracting data, and assessing risk of bias.Main resultsThe search identified one new RCT, making a total of 10 included RCTs (442 participants, 42% women). The median number of participants per RCT was 29 (range 10 to 117). Four RCTs recruited people with a range of chronic wounds; three RCTs recruited people with venous leg ulcers, and three RCTs considered foot ulcers in people with diabetes. The median length of treatment was 12 weeks (range 8 to 40 weeks).It is unclear whether autologous PRP improves the healing of chronic wounds generally compared with standard treatment (with or without placebo) (risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.50; I(2) = 27%, low quality evidence, 8 RCTs, 391 participants). Autologous PRP may increase the healing of foot ulcers in people with diabetes compared with standard care (with or without placebo) (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.49; I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence, 2 RCTs, 189 participants). It is unclear if autologous PRP affects the healing of venous leg ulcers (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.27; I(2) = 0% ). It is unclear if there is a difference in the risk of adverse events in people treated with PRP or standard care (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.29 to 3.88; I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence from 3 trials, 102 participants).Authors' conclusionsPRP may improve the healing of foot ulcers associated with diabetes, but this conclusion is based on low quality evidence from two small RCTs. It is unclear whether PRP influences the healing of other chronic wounds. The overall quality of evidence of autologous PRP for treating chronic wounds is low. There are very few RCTs evaluating PRP, they are underpowered to detect treatment effects, if they exist, and are generally at high or unclear risk of bias. Well designed and adequately powered clinical trials are needed.

Project description:PurposeTo perform a systematic review on clinical and radiologic outcomes for meniscus tears treated nonoperatively with platelet-rich plasma (PRP).MethodsA literature search was performed according to the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using keywords and Boolean operators in SCOPUS, PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials in April 2023. Inclusion criteria were limited to Level I to IV human studies reporting on outcomes of meniscus tears treated nonoperatively with PRP.ResultsA total of 6 studies, consisting of 184 patients, were identified. There was 1 Level I study and 5 Level IV studies. Mean patient age was 47.8 ± 7.9 years, with 62% (n = 114/184) being female. The medial meniscus was treated in 95.7% (n = 157/164) of patients. Mean follow-up ranged from 75.9 days to 31.9 months. Meniscus tears were generally described as chronic, degenerative, or intrasubstance. In 4 studies, magnetic resonance imaging revealed variable improvement in meniscus grade with complete healing in 0% to 44% of patients and partial healing in 0% to 40% of patients. Four of 5 studies reported significant statistical improvement in pain from baseline to final follow-up. Studies reporting on clinical outcomes showed significant improvements Lysholm score (2 studies), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score total score (2 studies), and Tegner score (1 study). Successful return to sport occurred in 60% to 100% of patients. Two studies reported that most patients were either very satisfied or satisfied following treatment.ConclusionsThe use of PRP injections for the treatment of meniscus tears led to variable results based on postoperative magnetic resonance evaluation and improvements in clinical outcomes, although the clinical significance remains unclear. The heterogeneity of PRP protocols, short-term follow-up, and lack of comparative studies limit findings.Level of evidenceLevel IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

Project description:Vivostat Platelet-Rich Fibrin® (PRF) is an autologous platelet concentrate used for the local treatment of chronic or complicated wounds. Still, its application for this indication is not evidence-based. Therefore, we performed this monocentric retrospective pilot study investigating the clinical outcome of a local treatment of chronic or complicated wounds in 35 patients (23 male, 12 female, mean age 68.7 years) treated with Vivostat PRF®. This study population is the largest among published studies analyzing the clinical efficacy of Vivostat PRF® on chronic wounds so far. Using the perpendicular method we divided the wounds into three sizes (<10, 10-30, and >30 cm2). The clinical efficacy of the Vivostat PRF treatment was the primary endpoint and was divided into three groups of increasing degrees of wound improvement: (1) no improvement of the wound (wound area was not reduced > 10% under Vivostat PRF® treatment), (2) improvement of the wound (reduced area > 10% under Vivostat PRF® treatment) and (3) complete epithelialization (wounds that were completely re-epithelialized after Vivostat PRF® treatment). We included patients' diagnosis and concomitant diseases (peripheral arterial occlusive disease (PAOD)), chronic venous insufficiency (CVI)), diabetic foot syndrome (DFS)) in our data analysis in order to investigate their potential impact on the wound healing capacity of Vivostat PRF®. Our results show that in the entire study population, 13 out of 35 (37.1%) patients experienced wound improvement and 14 out of 35 (40%) patients showed complete epithelialization of their wound under Vivostat PRF® treatment. In summary, 77.1% of the treated patients benefited from the Vivostat PRF® therapy. These positive wound healing effects were all observed within the first three to six Vivostat PRF® applications. Subgroup analyses showed that Vivostat PRF® appeared to be more efficient in patients without CVI in comparison to patients with CVI (p = 0.02). Moreover, Vivostat PRF® treatment seems to be particularly efficient in PAOD-related wounds with a reduced crural arterial blood supply (p = 0.01). Additionally, we performed an experimental human in vivo study on ten male students where we artificially generated bilateral gluteal wounds and analyzed the influence of the Vivostat PRF® treatment on the expression of two genes (human beta Defensin-2, ((hBD-2) and human beta-Defensin-3 (hBD-3)) in keratinocytes of resected wound specimens that are induced during wound healing. Interestingly, this analysis revealed that only seven of out ten individuals showed a relevant hBD-2 and hBD-3 gene induction after Vivostat PRF® treatment. This led to the novel "key-lock-hypothesis". With the goal of an individualized precision medicine approach with optimized wound treatment strategies in the future, this is an important observation that demands further experimental and clinical studies.