Platelet-Rich Plasma Vs Autologous Blood Vs Corticosteroid Injections in the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review, Pairwise and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Comparing autologous blood, corticosteroid, and a combined injection of both for treating lateral epicondylitis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Because lateral epicondylitis is a common musculoskeletal disorder that affects the forearm's extensor tendons, an effective therapeutic approach should reverse the degeneration and promote regeneration. This study aimed to compare the efficacies of autologous blood (AB) injection, corticosteroid (CS) injection, and a combined injection of both in treating lateral epicondylitis (LE), hypothesizing that the combined approach might offer immediate symptom resolution and a lower recurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 120 patients diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis were systematically distributed among three distinct therapeutic injection groups. Those in the AB group were administered 1 ml of autologous venous blood mixed with 2 ml of 2% prilocaine HCl. Participants in the CS category were given 1 ml of 40 mg methylprednisolone acetate mixed with 2 ml of 2% prilocaine HCl. Meanwhile, patients in the combined group received a mixture containing 1 ml each of autologous venous blood and 40 mg methylprednisolone acetate along with 1 ml of 2% prilocaine HCl. Prior to receiving their respective injections, a comprehensive assessment of all participants was carried out. Follow-up assessments were subsequently conducted on days 15, 30, and 90 utilizing metrics of the patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) and measurements of hand grip strength (HGS).

RESULTS

One patient dropped out from the combined group, and 119 patients completed the trial. No complications were recorded during the course of follow-up. By day 15, all groups had demonstrated significant PRTEE improvement, with CS showing the most pronounced reduction (p = 0.001). However, the benefits of CS had deteriorated by day 30 and had deteriorated further by day 90. The AB and AB + CS groups demonstrated sustained improvement, with AB + CS revealing the most effective treatment, achieving a clinically significant improvement in 97.4% of the patients. The improved HGS parallelled the functional enhancements, as it was more substantial in the AB and AB + CS groups (p = 0.001), corroborating the sustained benefits of these treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that while AB and CS individually offer distinct benefits, a combined AB + CS approach optimizes therapeutic outcomes, providing swift and sustained functional improvement with a lower recurrence rate. These findings have substantial clinical implications, suggesting a balanced, multimodal treatment strategy for enhanced patient recovery in LE.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Randomized clinical trial, level 1 evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT06236178.

Nonoperative and Operative Soft-Tissue, Cartilage, and Bony Regeneration and Orthopaedic Biologics of the Elbow and Upper Extremity: An Orthoregeneration Network Foundation Review

Orthoregeneration is defined as a solution for orthopaedic conditions that harnesses the benefits of biology to improve healing, reduce pain, improve function, and, optimally, provide an environment for tissue regeneration. Options include drugs, surgical intervention, scaffolds, biologics as a product of cells, and physical and electromagnetic stimuli. The goal of regenerative medicine is to enhance the healing of tissue after musculoskeletal injuries as both isolated treatment and adjunct to surgical management, using novel therapies to improve recovery and outcomes. Various orthopaedic biologics (orthobiologics) have been investigated for the treatment of pathology involving the elbow and upper extremity, including the tendons (lateral epicondylitis, medial epicondylitis, biceps tendonitis, triceps tendonitis), articular cartilage (osteoarthritis, osteochondral lesions), and bone (fractures, nonunions, avascular necrosis, osteonecrosis). Promising and established treatment modalities include hyaluronic acid; botulinum toxin; corticosteroids; leukocyte-rich and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma; autologous blood; bone marrow aspirate comprising mesenchymal stromal cells (alternatively termed medicinal signaling cells and frequently mesenchymal stem cells [MSCs]) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate; MSCs harvested from adipose and skin (dermis) sources; vascularized bone grafts; bone morphogenic protein scaffold made from osteoinductive and conductive β-tricalcium phosphate and poly-ε-caprolactone with hydrogels, human MSCs, and matrix metalloproteinases; and collagen sponge. Autologous blood preparations such as autologous blood injections and platelet-rich plasma show positive outcomes for nonresponsive tendinopathy. In addition, cellular therapies such as tissue-derived tenocyte-like cells and MSCs show a promising ability to regulate degenerative processes by modulating tissue response to inflammation and preventing continuous degradation and support tissue restoration.

Evaluation of the efficiency of an ultrasound-supported infiltration technique in patients with tennis elbow applying the ITEC medical device: a multicenter study

Background

The treatment of lateral epicondylitis remains unsatisfactory in certain cases. The aim of this study is to investigate the efficiency of an ultrasound-guided infiltration combined with fenestration of the extensor tendon postulating a 50% reduction in pain on exertion within 6 months.

Methods

In a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter study design, 68 patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis and symptoms lasted for at least 6 weeks were included. Each hospital has been assigned for Traumeel (A), autologous whole blood (B), or dextrose (C) in advance. Preinterventional, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months after infiltration, patient-related outcome parameter, and dorsal wrist extension strength were documented. Preinterventional (obligate) and after 6 months (optional) radiological evaluation (magnetic resonance imaging) was performed.

Results

The Visual Analog Scale showed a significant reduction after 6 months in all groups (A. 4.8-2.5, B. 6.2-2.3, C. 5.8-2.4). Similar results could be observed with Subjective elbow value, Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Score, Mayo Elbow Performance Score, and Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation. The loss of strength could be completely compensated after about 6 months. Magnetic resonance imaging did not fully reflect clinical convalescence. Re-infiltrations were sometimes necessary for final reduction of symptoms (A = 11, B = 8, C = 4). Switching to surgical intervention was most frequently observed in group C (A = 2, B = 1, C = 5). In 14.5% of the cases, no improvement of the symptoms could be achieved with this method.

Conclusion

The primary hypothesis of a significant long-term pain reduction of at least 50% could be achieved regardless of the medication chosen.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Has Better Results for Long-term Functional Improvement and Pain Relief for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Corticosteroids (CS) have shown good short-term performance in terms of pain relief and functional improvement. However, the safety and long-term efficacy of this treatment remains controversial. Several studies have reported good results of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of tendinopathies. However, whether its use in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) is superior to that of CS remains controversial.

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of original studies to determine whether the prognosis of LE patients treated with PRP is better than that of CS.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers searched online databases from January 2000 to July 2022 according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to evaluate prospective studies of PRP versus CS injection for LE. A third author addressed any discrepancies. Evidence quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Risk ratios for dichotomous variables and mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables were used to compare clinical outcomes. P values <.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials with 730 patients were included in this review. PRP provided a significantly worse short-term (<2 months) improvement in the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score (MD, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.44]; I2 = 85%; P = .0003) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score (MD, 10.23 [95% CI, 9.08 to 11.39]; I2 = 67%; P < .0001) but better long-term (≥6 months) improvement in the VAS score (MD, -2.18 [95% CI, -3.13 to -1.22]; I2 = 89%; P < .0001), DASH score (MD, -8.13 [95% CI, -9.87 to -6.39]; I2 = 25%; P < .0001), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MD, 16.53 [95% CI, 1.52 to 31.53]; I2 = 98%; P = .03) than CS. The medium-term (2-6 months) reduction in the VAS score was not significantly different between the 2 groups. After sensitivity analysis, none of the results changed except for the short-term VAS scores (MD, 0.53 [95% CI, -0.13 to 1.19]; I2 = 78%; P = .12).

CONCLUSION

Both PRP and CS injections are effective treatments for patients with LE. CS provides better short-term (<2 months) functional improvement and may be more advantageous in terms of short-term pain relief, while PRP provides better long-term (≥6 months) functional improvement and better performance regarding long-term pain relief.

Platelet-rich plasma versus corticosteroid: a randomized controlled trial on tennis elbow patients resistant to nonsurgical treatments

Background

Although some studies on tennis elbow indicate corticosteroid (CS) effectiveness in the short term, according to the role of race, this study evaluates the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) compared with CS for a more cost-effective treatment.

Methods

This randomized controlled trial included 30 positive-resisted wrist extension patients with a minimum five visual analog scale (VAS) pain score. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment or control groups via computer-generated randomization and were matched for baseline and clinical characteristics. Cases received either 40 mg of prednisolone acetate or 2 ml of PRP, followed for 1 month. VAS and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores were the primary outcomes.

Results

The median VAS and the mean DASH scores had a statistically significant difference in the PRP and CS groups before and after injection (P<0.001).The mean DASH difference between preinjection and follow-up time in the PRP and CS groups was 59.72±14.17 and 43.16±10.87, respectively, with a mean difference of 16.55 (95% CI 7.10-26.00) and a significant difference (P=0.001).The mean VAS pain score difference in preinjection and follow-up time had a statistically significant difference between the PRP and CS groups (P=0.026), and the mean VAS pain score difference in the CS group was 6.46±1.50 and 7.73±0.96 in the PRP group.

Conclusion

In conclusion, larger studies with parallel groups and more diverse CS doses and types with baseline matching are needed to confirm the short-term benefits of PRP. Investigating the effects of different CS doses using ultrasound techniques is recommended.

Nonoperative Management of Lateral Epicondyle Tendinopathy: An Umbrella Review

Objective

The primary objective of this review was to summarize systematic reviews and meta-analyses reporting on nonoperative management of lateral epicondyle tendinopathy.

Methods

An umbrella review of all published systematic reviews and meta-analyses was performed. Three databases were searched using the key words "tennis elbow," "lateral epicondylitis," "non-operative," and "non-surgical modalities." The search was limited to English-language systematic reviews and meta-analyses between the years of 2000 and 2022.

Results

There were 114 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, of which 35 met our inclusion criteria. These articles reviewed the following nonoperative management strategies: ultrasound, shockwave therapy, injection procedures, low-level laser therapy, joint mobilizations, exercise therapy, and electrophysical modalities. Exercise therapy was beneficial in decreasing pain regardless of dosage or type. Conflicting results were seen with ultrasound, laser, and shockwave therapy. Corticosteroid injections provided the most short-term pain relief, and platelet-rich plasma and autologous blood injections were most effective in the long term.

Conclusion

A variety of nonoperative interventions were found to be effective for short- and long-term pain relief as well as functional improvement, with most interventions indicating mixed results. Due to variations in study populations and study quality, results should be interpreted with caution.

Comparison of the Clinical Results of Platelet-Rich Plasma, Steroid and Autologous Blood Injections in the Treatment of Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study is to compare the efficacy of PRP, steroids, and autologous blood injection in patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis.

METHOD

A total of 120 patients comprised our study. Three groups of 40 patients each received only one of the following: PRP, steroids, or autologous blood injections. Thereafter, VAS (visual analog scale), DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), and Nirschl scores of those treated were evaluated in the second week, the fourth week, the third month, and the sixth month.

RESULTS

The baseline evaluation revealed no significant change in VAS, DASH, and Nirschl scores among the three groups (p > 0.050). At the second week evaluation, patients treated with steroids showed significant improvement compared to patients treated with PRP and autologous blood (p < 0.001). The fourth-week evaluation revealed the VAS, DASH, and Nirschl scores of the patients treated with steroids to have improved more significantly than those of patients treated with PRP and autologous blood (p < 0.001). The third month, when the results of all three groups were compared, revealed similar results (p > 0.050). The sixth-month evaluation, when the results of all three groups were compared, revealed the autologous blood and PRP applications provided significantly better results than the group treated with steroids (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We concluded that steroid administration is effective in the short term, while PRP and autologous blood applications are more effective than steroid administration in the long term.

Assessment of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses on Platelet-Rich Plasma Treatment in Orthopaedics: A Cross-sectional Analysis

Background

Systematic reviews on the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in orthopaedic surgery are abundant in current published literature. However, a beautification of results (referred to as spin) has been noted in abstracts across various aspects of medicine.

Purpose

To determine the prevalence of spin in systematic reviews of PRP-related orthopaedic surgery abstracts.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Murad and Wang guidelines, we conducted a search in Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Database for reviews on PRP-related orthopaedic surgery. The search included studies published from inception until June 30, 2021. Included were systematic reviews written in English that involved the use of PRP in the treatment of orthopaedic injuries in human participants. The abstracts of the included reviews were evaluated for the top 9 types of spin as described by Yavchitz et al in 2016. We determined the relationship between spin and study characteristics using odds ratios.

Results

Of an initial 1560 studies, 176 were included. We found that 50 studies (28.4%) contained at least 1 form of spin. The 2 most common forms of spin found in our sample were type 5 ("Conclusion claims the beneficial effect of treatment despite high risk of bias"; n = 27 [15.3%]) and type 3 ("Selective reporting or overemphasis of efficacy in outcomes favoring beneficial effect of intervention"; n = 18 [10.2%]). No statistical significance was found between study characteristics and the presence of spin.

Conclusion

Spin was present in 28% of the systematic reviews that covered PRP-related orthopaedic treatments. Spin was not associated with general study characteristics, including adherence to PRISMA guidelines or funding. Journals and authors should be aware of spin in articles and avoid its usage.

The Use of Biologics in NFL Athletes: An Expert Consensus of NFL Team Physicians

Background

There is a lack of published information outlining the use of biologics in National Football League (NFL) athletes and limited data to guide biologic treatment strategies.

Purpose

To develop a consensus on the use of biologics among NFL team physicians.

Study Design

Consensus statement.

Methods

A working group of 6 experts convened a consensus process involving NFL team physicians using validated Delphi methodology. Physicians from 32 NFL teams as well as NFL London were invited to take part. This iterative process was used to define statements on the use of biologics in NFL athletes. A recent scoping review exploring biologics in professional athletes was used to inform the first of 3 rounds of surveys, with statements considered under 7 headings: biologics in general, challenges of treating NFL athletes, terminology/nomenclature, autologous blood products, cell-based therapies, guidance for NFL team physicians, and biologic research in the NFL. In addition to rating agreement, experts were encouraged to propose further items or modifications. Predefined criteria were used to refine item lists after each survey. For a consensus within the final round, defined a priori, items were included in the final information set if a minimum of 75% of respondents agreed and fewer than 10% disagreed.

Results

Physicians from 26 NFL teams and NFL London responded to the initial invitation to participate in the Delphi process; 88.9% of participating team physicians completed the round 1 survey, with response rates of 87.5% in round 2 and 95.2% in round 3. After 3 rounds, 47 statements reached a consensus. A consensus was achieved that platelet-rich plasma has a positive impact on patellar tendinopathy and on symptoms in early osteoarthritis but not for other indications. NFL team physicians agreed that while cell therapies have the potential to improve symptoms, the misrepresentation of uncharacterized preparations as "stem cells" has contributed to the widespread use of unproven therapies.

Conclusion

This study established an expert consensus on 47 statements relating to the use of biologics in NFL athletes. In addition to providing clinical guidance for the use of biologics in NFL athletes, this study identified key areas for future focus including the development of athlete education materials.

Standardised Tendon Fenestration with ITEC-Technique for Lateral Epicondylosis with Injection of Betamethasone versus Autologous Blood

Background: Infiltration is one of the treatment options for lateral epicondylosis, a degenerative process in the tendon of the musculus extensor carpi radialis brevis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of a standardised fenestration technique, the Instant Tennis Elbow Cure (ITEC) technique, with injection of betamethasone versus autologous blood. Methods: A prospective comparative study was performed. Twenty-eight patients received an infiltration with 1 mL betamethasone, in combination with 1 mL 2% lidocaine. Twenty-eight patients received an infiltration with 2 mL autologous blood. Both infiltrations were administered using the ITEC-technique. The patients were evaluated at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) and Nirschl staging. Results: At the 6-week follow-up, the corticosteroid group showed significantly better results for VAS. At the 3-month follow-up, no significant differences were observed for all three scores. At the 6-monthfollow-up, the autologous blood group showed significantly better results for all three scores. Conclusions: Standardised fenestration using the ITEC-technique with corticosteroid infiltration is more effective in reducing pain at the 6-week follow-up. At the 6-month follow-up, the use of autologous blood is more effective in pain reduction and functional recovery. Level of Evidence: Level II.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections Decrease the Need for Any Surgical Procedure for Chronic Epicondylitis versus Conservative Treatment-A Comparative Study with Long-Term Follow-Up

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections may alleviate symptoms of chronic medial or lateral epicondylitis. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a total of 55 patients with chronic ME or LE who had undergone at least 6 months of any conservative treatment before intervention. The patients were divided into two groups: the PRP group (n = 25), who received a single injection of autologous PRP to the medial or lateral epicondyle, and the PT group (n = 30), who continued with PT and pain medication. The primary outcome measures were pain and functional outcomes measured in terms of the following: Patient Related Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), which were detected at preintervention, 6-, 12-, 24-, and 36-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included complications and the need for any surgery at follow-up. Results: Primary outcome measurements showed significantly better results favoring the PRP group (6-month PRTEE total 43.2 ± 19.2 vs. 62.8 ± 24.0, p < 0.001; 12-month PRTEE total 6.9 ± 15.0 vs. 28.1 ± 24.4, p < 0.001; 24-month PRTEE total 4.8 ± 9.8 vs. 12.7 ± 14.5, p = 0.029), and significantly better results in VAS and DASH sub-scores. The PRP group required significantly fewer surgical procedures (n = 0/0% vs. n = 6/20%, p = 0.027) at follow-up (mean 38.3 ± 12.3 months), and one case of prolonged pain after injection was detected. Conclusions: Patients who underwent PRP injections for epicondylitis resulted in better pain and functional outcomes compared to physiotherapy, and this improvement lasted at least 24 months. They required fewer surgical procedures and achieved faster recovery than the PT group. We recommend PRP for chronic epicondylitis of the elbow before considering surgery when other treatments have failed.

Polymorphic Variants of the PDGFRB Gene Influence Efficacy of PRP Therapy in Treating Tennis Elbow: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Differences in response to PRP (platelet-rich plasma) therapy may be linked to the variability of growth factors and their receptor's genes. Considering that, we checked whether the platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta gene (PDGFRB) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) affect the effectiveness of PRP therapy in treating tennis elbow patients.

METHODS

The treatment efficacy was analyzed over time (2, 4, 8, 12, 24, 52, and 104 weeks after PRP injection) on 107 patients (132 elbows) using PROMs (patient-reported outcome measures), namely VAS (Visual Analog Scale), QDASH (quick version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) and PRTEE (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation). Five polymorphisms of the PDGFRB gene (rs4324662, rs758588, rs3828610, rs3756311, and rs3756312) were genotyped.

RESULTS

The CC (rs3828610) and GG (rs3756311 and rs3756312) genotypes had a particularly strong impact on the effectiveness of the therapy, as measured by the values of PROMs, both in additive as well as dominant/recessive models. These homozygotes were also characterized by significantly higher values of MPV (mean platelet volume).

CONCLUSIONS

The PDGFRB gene SNPs affect the effectiveness of PRP therapy in treating tennis elbow patients and it may result from the differentiated metabolic activity of platelets in particular genotype variants.

Comparison of Hyaluronate & Steroid Injection in the Treatment of Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis and Evaluation of Treatment Efficacy With MRI: A Single-Blind, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Clinical Study

Introduction: Injection therapy in refractory cases of lateral epicondylitis might relieve symptoms, although no consensus exists on which material to use. Corticosteroids are widely used but recent literature indicated possible tenotoxic effects and inefficacy in mid- and long-term follow-up (FU). Hyaluronate/hyaluronic acid (HA) might be of better clinical efficacy. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) might reflect the clinical changes in the short-term FU.

Methods: A single-blind, prospective, randomized controlled study was designed. A total of 80 patients were included. A total of 40 patients received a single triamcinolone injection and 40 received a hyaluronic acid (HA) injection. Follow-up was repeated at six and 12 weeks. The shortened disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire (Q-DASH) score; visual analog scale (VAS) for pain at rest, and hand grip strength were collected. Dynamometer measurements were done at baseline and FU examinations. The MRI images at baseline and 12 weeks FU were evaluated.

Results: There were significant differences between the groups favoring the triamcinolone group at six weeks. At 12 weeks, no differences existed between the groups in any of the parameters. The MRI grades were nonsignificantly different between baseline and at 12 weeks.

Conclusion: Both triamcinolone and HA were shown to relieve pain and increase functional outcomes. However, the effects were short-lived. The MRI did not show significant differences at 12 weeks, although clinical improvements were substantial.

Challenges and perspectives of tendon-derived cell therapy for tendinopathy: from bench to bedside

Tendon is composed of dense fibrous connective tissues, connecting muscle at the myotendinous junction (MTJ) to bone at the enthesis and allowing mechanical force to transmit from muscle to bone. Tendon diseases occur at different zones of the tendon, including enthesis, MTJ and midsubstance of the tendon, due to a variety of environmental and genetic factors which consequently result in different frequencies and recovery rates. Self-healing properties of tendons are limited, and cell therapeutic approaches in which injured tendon tissues are renewed by cell replenishment are highly sought after. Homologous use of individual’s tendon-derived cells, predominantly differentiated tenocytes and tendon-derived stem cells, is emerging as a treatment for tendinopathy through achieving minimal cell manipulation for clinical use. This is the first review summarizing the progress of tendon-derived cell therapy in clinical use and its challenges due to the structural complexity of tendons, heterogeneous composition of extracellular cell matrix and cells and unsuitable cell sources. Further to that, novel future perspectives to improve therapeutic effect in tendon-derived cell therapy based on current basic knowledge are discussed.

Standardized Tendon Fenestration with Injection of Autologous Blood for Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) of the elbow is often treated with conservative methods. Several techniques including injections with different substances are widely performed. No standardization exists. This prospective study describes the results of the short-term follow-up of 56 patients with mean age 48 years (range: 30–68 years) treated with the Instant Tennis Elbow Cure Medical device, which fenestrates the injured tendon in a standardized way through a holder of 12 small needles. Depth and position of the needles are determined beforehand by ultrasonography. Unprepared autologous blood was injected through the holder in the tendon. Visual analog pain scale (VAS) decreased significantly in rest by 61% and during activity by 47% after 6 weeks. VAS decreased significantly in rest by 79% and during activity by 66% after 3 months. VAS did not remain significantly different after 6 months. Satisfaction rates were 71% after 6 weeks and 82% after 6 months. This suggests that the therapeutical effect sustains and in some cases increases over time. Patient Related Tennis Elbow Evaluation score ameliorated after 3 months by 71%. Comparative studies are needed to confirm this effect versus other techniques as physiotherapy, shockwave therapy, and injections with other substances.

Comparative Efficacy of Nonoperative Treatments for Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

An evolved understanding of the pathophysiology of greater trochanteric pain syndrome has led to a number of proposed nonoperative management strategies. The objective of this review was to compare the efficacy of the various nonoperative treatments for greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS).

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

SETTING

PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, SCOPUS, and Web of Science were searched to January 2020.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing nonoperative treatment for GTPS.

INTERVENTIONS

Nonoperative treatment strategies for GTPS including injections of corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma, hyaluronic acid, dry needling, and structured exercise programs and extracorporeal shockwave therapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Pain and functional outcomes. Bayesian random-effects model was performed to assess the direct and indirect comparison of all treatment options.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials and 1034 patients were included. For pain scores at 1 to 3 months follow-up, both platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and shockwave therapy demonstrated significantly better pain scores compared with the no treatment control group with PRP having the highest probability of being the best treatment at both 1 to 3 months and 6 to 12 months. No proposed therapies significantly outperformed the no treatment control group for pain scores at 6 to 12 months. Structured exercise had the highest probability of being the best treatment for improvements in functional outcomes and was the only treatment that significantly improved functional outcome scores compared with the no treatment arm at 1 to 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that PRP and shockwave therapy may provide short-term (1-3 months) pain relief, and structured exercise leads to short-term (1-3 months) improvements in functional outcomes.

Platelet-rich plasma therapy ensures pain reduction in the management of lateral epicondylitis - a PRISMA-compliant network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Analyze the effectiveness of PRP therapy in comparison to other available treatments in the management of lateral epicondylitis (LE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted electronic database searches in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until June 2021 for RCTs analyzing the efficacy of PRP in the management of LE. VAS for pain, DASH score, and PRETEE score were the outcomes analyzed. The analysis was performed in R-platform using MetaInsight and interventions were ranked based on p-score approach. Cochrane's CINeMA approach was used for quality appraisal.

RESULTS

Twenty-five RCTs with 2040 patients were included in the network analysis. Compared to saline control, only leukocyte-rich-PRP resulted in significant pain relief (WMD=-14.8,95% CI [-23.18,-6.39];low confidence) compared to steroid, local anesthetic, laser, and surgery. On analyzing DASH scores and PRETEE scores, none of the above-mentioned treatment methods were superior to saline control. In subgroup analysis, leucocyte-rich-PRP resulted in clinically significant improvement. Leucocyte-rich-PRP seems more promising with p-score of 0.415.

CONCLUSION

PRP therapy offers significant pain relief compared to saline control in the management of LE without similar improvement in functional outcome. With available low-quality evidence, PRP was the most promising therapy that needs further exploration to explore its usefulness in lateral epicondylitis.

Efficacy of Fu's Subcutaneous Needling on Myofascial Trigger Points for Lateral Epicondylalgia: A Randomized Control Trial

Lateral epicondylalgia (LE), a common overuse syndrome of the extensor muscle and tendons on the lateral epicondyle, causes persistent severe musculoskeletal pain on the outer part of the elbow. Fu's subcutaneous needling (FSN), a newly invented subtype of acupuncture and dry needling, is a new trend and potential treatment of LE by targeting the myofascial trigger points (MTrPs). However, no scientific evidence is available to support this method. This study aims to evaluate the distal FSN treatment on the LE by measuring pain-related scales, such as visual analog scale (VAS), pressure pain threshold (PPT), muscle tissue hardness (TH), pain-free grip (PFG), and the functional outcome by a patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire study. A total of 60 LE patients were randomly divided into FSN (n = 30) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS, n = 30) as the control group. Every subject was treated with three regimens and followed up for 15 days. Results showed that FSN has an immediate effect on VAS, PPT, TH, and PFG. Moreover, sustained effects on pain relief were followed up to 15 days. Pain remission was consistent with long-term PRTEE results. Overall, FSN is a safe and efficient therapy option for LE, significantly improving pain relief and activity difficulty with immediate, short-term, and long-term effectiveness. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03605563.

The effects of inclusion of minimal-dose corticosteroid in autologous whole blood and dextrose injection for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis

BACKGOUND

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders that causes pain.

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the effect of the inclusion of a minimal dose of corticosteroid in a solution comprising autologous whole blood (AWB), 20% dextrose, and 2% lidocaine for treating LE.

METHODS

In this randomized prospective trial LE patients were allocated to the CS+ group (n= 70; solution comprising 1 mL AWB, 1 mL 20% dextrose, 0.4 mL 2% lidocaine, and 0.1 mL (0.4 mg) dexamethasone palmitate; injected into the common wrist extensor tendon) or the CS- group (n= 70; same solution as above but without dexamethasone palmitate). Five injections were administered at monthly intervals. At each visit, pain intensity was evaluated using the numeric rating scale (NRS), and grip strength was measured using a hand-grip dynamometer.

RESULTS

In the CS+ and CS- groups, 1 and 10 patients dropped out, respectively. In both groups, the NRS scores at each evaluation were significantly lower than the pretreatment scores. The NRS scores from pretreatment to the second and third visits were significantly lower in the CS+ group than those in the CS- group. However, at the fourth and fifth visits, and 6 months after the last injection (the sixth visit), the degree of pain reduction between the groups was not significantly different. Grip strength increased significantly over time in both groups. At each evaluation, grip strength was significantly higher than that at the pretreatment stage. However, the degree of increase was not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of a minimal dose of corticosteroid in the AWB and 20% dextrose injection can reduce pain, especially during early treatment.

Clinical efficacy of local injection therapies for lateral epicondylitis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare the efficacy of local injection therapies for lateral epicondylitis in a Bayesian framework.

METHODS

We searched the Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus, and ProQuest, for randomized controlled trials published from inception to February 2021 in any languages. The injection therapies included corticosteroids (CSs), autologous blood (AB), botulinum toxin (BT), and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Placebo was the reference group for comparison. The study outcomes were pain, function, and strength, at 1, 3 and 6 months after injection.

RESULTS

Thirty-one trials were finally included in this network meta-analysis, comprising 1,948 patients. In the first month of treatment, CS and BT were more efficacious than placebo in terms of pain reduction, and CS was superior to BT. In the same follow-up time, CS was also superior to placebo in terms of functional improvement. In the third month of treatment, BT was the only intervention that was more efficient than placebo in pain relief. With regard to functional improvement, none of the treatments significantly had a higher effectiveness than placebo in the same period. Moreover, no therapies were found to be more efficient than placebo in the sixth month of treatment in terms of any study outcomes. In addition, we did not identify an intervention superior to placebo regarding strength improvement outcome in any times of follow-up.

CONCLUSION

CSs and BT are efficient in improving clinical outcomes of lateral epicondylitis in the short term. Also, the efficacy of CSs seems to be greater than BT. On the other hand, AB and PRP were not significantly more efficient than placebo in any times of follow-up.

American Medical Society for Sports Medicine Position Statement: Principles for the Responsible Use of Regenerative Medicine in Sports Medicine

ABSTRACT

Many sports medicine physicians are currently considering introducing regenerative medicine into their practice. Regenerative medicine and the subclassification of orthobiologics are a complicated topic and have produced widely varying opinions. Although there is concern by government regulators, clinicians, scientists, patient advocacy organizations, and the media regarding the use of regenerative medicine products, there is also excitement about the potential benefits with growing evidence that certain regenerative medicine products are safe and potentially efficacious in treating musculoskeletal conditions. Sports medicine physicians would benefit from decision-making guidance about whether to introduce orthobiologics into their practice and how to do it responsibly. The purpose of this position statement is to provide sports medicine physicians with information regarding regenerative medicine terminology, a brief review of basic science and clinical studies within the subclassification of orthobiologics, regulatory considerations, and best practices for introducing regenerative medicine into clinical practice. This information will help sports medicine physicians make informed and responsible decisions about the role of regenerative medicine and orthobiologics in their practice.

Editorial Commentary: Elbow Lateral Epicondylitis Treatment Using Platelet-Rich Plasma

The best treatment for elbow lateral epicondylitis is controversial. Multiple treatment interventions are used commonly, including physical therapy, corticosteroid injections, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, bracing, acupuncture, ultrasound-guided percutaneous tenotomy, open or arthroscopic surgical debridement, and recently, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or autologous blood injections. Patients in whom more traditional conservative measures have failed may benefit from PRP injections, although long-term outcomes after such injections are unclear. The complication rates of PRP injections are low. One PRP injection, if successful, could be a cost-effective alternative to surgery, but multiple injections are often recommended and third-party payers have historically rarely paid those medical claims, thus placing an increased financial burden on the patient.

The Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Improving Pain and Function in Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with Risk-of-Bias Assessment

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for lateral epicondylitis and evaluate its impact on pain and functional outcomes.

METHODS

This study followed Preferred Reporting Items and Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in September 2019 and repeated in April 2020 using electronic databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library. Baseline and 3-, 6-, and 12-month data were extracted for visual analog scale (VAS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), and modified Mayo Clinic performance index for the elbow (MAYO) scores. Only level 1 studies with patients who had not undergone surgery were included. Outcomes data, study design, demographic variables, PRP formulation, and comparator treatments were recorded. Statistical analyses of pooled weighted mean differences (WMDs) were performed and compared with estimated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values. The Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) was used to assess methodological quality, and the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment was performed.

RESULTS

This review included 16 level I studies, 9 of which (581 total patients, 281 receiving single injections of PRP) were quantitatively analyzed. The average age was 41.5 years, 56.8% of patients were female, and mean follow-up was 7.5 months. The mean CMS was 78.94 ± 12.74 (range 59 to 97), and 5 of 16 studies were at low risk for bias. Patients who received PRP had significantly improved VAS scores at 3 months (WMD -0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.03, -0.66; P < .01) and 6 months (WMD -0.74; 95% CI -0.98, -0.50; P < .01) compared with those who received autologous whole blood, though MAYO scores were statistically equivalent. Comparing PRP to corticosteroids, VAS and DASH scores were not significantly different at 3 months, although PRP was superior at 6 months for VAS (WMD -1.70; 95% CI -2.65, -0.75; P < .01) and DASH (WMD -6.23; 95% CI -10.78, -1.69; P < .01). Most differences in VAS and DASH scores exceeded the 5% absolute difference estimate for their respective MCIDs but fell short of the 10% estimate.

CONCLUSION

Considering the small number of comparable studies, lack of quantification of specific PRP content, considerable heterogeneity between randomized control trials, and most effect sizes being equivocal within the framework of 2 estimated MCID values, the authors can neither scientifically support nor discourage the usage of PRP for lateral epicondylitis despite finding statistically significant improvements in pain and functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, prognostic.

Biologics in professional and Olympic sport: a scoping review

AIMS

The aim of this study was to prepare a scoping review to investigate the use of biologic therapies in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in professional and Olympic athletes.

METHODS

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews and Arksey and O'Malley frameworks were followed. A three-step search strategy identified relevant published primary and secondary studies, as well as grey literature. The identified studies were screened with criteria for inclusion comprising clinical studies evaluating the use of biologic therapies in professional and Olympic athletes, systematic reviews, consensus statements, and conference proceedings. Data were extracted using a standardized tool to form a descriptive analysis and a thematic summary.

RESULTS

A total of 202 studies were initially identified, and 35 met criteria for the scoping review; 33 (94.3%) were published within the last eight years, and 18 (51.4%) originated from the USA. Platelet rich plasma was the most studied biologic therapy, being evaluated in 33 (94.3%) studies. Ulnar collateral ligament and hamstring injuries were the conditions most studied (nine (25.7%) studies and seven (20.0%) studies, respectively). Athletes most frequently participated in baseball, soccer, and American football. Only two (5.7%) studies were level 1 evidence, with interpretation and comparison between studies limited by the variations in the injury profile, biologic preparations, and rehabilitation protocols.

CONCLUSION

There is diverse use of biologic therapies in the management of musculoskeletal injuries in professional and Olympic athletes. There is currently insufficient high-level evidence to support the widespread use of biologic therapies in athletes. Further research priorities include the development of condition/pathology-specific preparations of biologic therapies, and of outcome measures and imaging modalities sufficiently sensitive to detect differences in outcomes, should they exist. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1189-1196.

Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Corticosteroid Injection for the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

BACKGROUND

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is one of the most commonly reported musculoskeletal disorders in the upper extremity. The mechanism of LE is repetitive motion that causes a strain of the extensor tendons. This consequently causes pain and tendinosis at the tendinous attachment site on the lateral epicondyle. Most cases of LE are treated nonoperatively with a variety of interventions, such as injections.

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review (SR) is to synthesize the current evidence on the efficacy of platelet rich plasma (PRP) injections versus corticosteroid (CS) injections as treatment interventions for LE.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review.

METHODS

Online databases were searched from database inception to February 24th, 2020 for relevant SR's evaluating PRP vs. CS injections as treatment methods for LE. Two independent researchers searched and screened for articles that were systematic reviews that directly compared PRP to CS injections for LE.

RESULTS

A total of five SR's were included in this review that were published between 2016 and 2020. CS injections were more efficacious for short-term pain relief, and PRP injections were more efficacious for long-term pain relief and improved function.

CONCLUSION

PRP injections appear to be a more effective long-term treatment option than CS injections for those with LE who did not respond to conservative management.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

1.

Hamid MS. Efficacy of prolotherapy in comparison to other therapies for chronic soft tissue injuries: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Introduction

Prolotherapy and other injections, primarily acting on pathways associated with maladaptive tissue repair, are recommended for recalcitrant chronic soft tissue injuries (CSTI). However, selection of injection is challenging due to mixed results. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare prolotherapy with other therapies, particularly injections, for CSTI and establish robustness of the results.

Methodology

Pubmed, Medline, SPORTDiscus and Google scholar were searched from inception to 4^th January 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving injection therapies (e.g. blood derivatives, corticosteroid, hyaluronic acid, botulinum toxin) for CSTI. The primary and secondary outcomes were pain and function, respectively, at (or nearest to) 6 months. Effect size (ES) was presented as standardised mean difference with 95% confidence interval (CI). Frequentist random effect NMA was used to generate the overall estimates, subgroup estimates (by region and measurement time point) and sensitivity analyses.

Results

A total of 91 articles (87 RCTs; 5859 participants) involving upper limb (74%), lower limb (23%) and truncal/hip (3%) injuries were included. At all time points, prolotherapy had no statistically significant pain benefits over other therapies. This observation remained unchanged when tested under various assumptions and with exclusion of studies with high risk of bias. Although prolotherapy did not offer statistically significant functional improvement compared to most therapies, its ES was consistently better than non-injections and corticosteroid injection for both outcomes. At selected time points and for selected injuries, prolotherapy demonstrated potentially better pain improvement over placebo (<4 months: shoulder [ES 0.65; 95% CI 0.00 to 1.30]; 4–8 months: elbow [ES 0.91; 95% CI 0.12 to 1.70]; >8 months: shoulder [ES 2.08; 95% CI 1.49, to 2.68]). Injections generally produced greater ES when combined with non-injection therapy.

Conclusion

While clinical outcomes were generally comparable across types of injection therapy, prolotherapy may be used preferentially for selected conditions at selected times.

Platelet-rich plasma injection vs corticosteroid injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To explore the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection regarding functional recovery, pain relief, and range of motion (ROM) of shoulder compared with the corticosteroid injection in patients with rotator cuff lesions treated non-operatively.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed by 2 authors in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases to identify relevant randomized controlled trial (RCTs) that were published up to July 20, 2020. The quality of the included RCTs was evaluated using the approach recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were applied to calculate the pooled effect sizes.

RESULTS

Six RCTs were included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis revealed that corticosteroid injection yielded statistically significant superior functional recovery (SMD = -0.80; 95% CI, -1.42 to -0.18; P = .01) and pain relief (MD = 1.59; 95% CI, 0.30-2.89; P = .02) compared with PRP injection for rotator cuff lesions during the short-term follow-up period. However, at the medium-term and long-term follow-up, no statistically significant difference was identified between the 2 groups. Regarding the ROM of shoulder, no statistically significant difference was found between the 2 groups during the whole follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

The current clinical evidence revealed short-term efficacy of corticosteroid injection and no significant medium- to long-term difference between corticosteroid and PRP injection in the treatment of rotator cuff lesions. Additional studies with longer follow-ups, larger sample sizes, and more rigorous designs are needed to draw more reliable and accurate conclusions.

Regenerative Injectable Therapies: Current Evidence

Regenerative medicine is a growing field of musculoskeletal treatments that focuses on amplifying the body's natural healing properties to improve function and pain after injury. Regenerative treatments are applied locally at the site of injury and work though different mechanisms, some of which are unexplained at this time. Current evidence demonstrates benefit for certain regenerative treatments, but further standardization of treatments and additional studies are required to provide additional data to support specific regenerative treatments. This review seeks to explore the evidence and discuss appropriate use of the most common regenerative treatments including platelet-rich plasma, prolotherapy, autologous mesenchymal stem cells, human-derived allograft products, and saline.

The use of biologics in professional and Olympic sport: a scoping review protocol

AIMS

The use of biologics in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in Olympic and professional athletes appears to be increasing. There are no studies which currently map the extent, range, and nature of existing literature concerning the use and efficacy of such therapies in this arena. The objective of this scoping review is to map the available evidence regarding the use of biologics in the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries in Olympic and professional sport.

METHODS

Best-practice methodological frameworks suggested by Arksey and O'Malley, Levac et al, and the Joanna Briggs Institute will be used. This scoping review will aim to firstly map the current extent, range, and nature of evidence for biologic strategies to treat injuries in professional and Olympic sport; secondly, to summarize and disseminate existing research findings; and thirdly, to identify gaps in existing literature. A three-step search strategy will identify peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature, including reviews, original research, and both published and unpublished ('grey') literature. An initial limited search will identify suitable search terms, followed by a search of five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) using keyword and index terms. Studies will be screened independently by two reviewers for final inclusion.

DISSEMINATION

We will chart key concepts and evidence, and disseminate existing research findings to practitioners and clinicians, through both peer reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature, online platforms (including social media), conference, and in-person communications. We will identify gaps in current literature and priorities for further study.

Electrical stimulation of whole blood for growth factor release and potential clinical implications

Clinicians have increasingly applied platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for wound healing treatments. Topical treatments commonly require biochemical agents such as bovine thrombin to activate PRP ex vivo for clotting and growth factor release to facilitate healing upon application to the wound of interest. Recent studies have explored electrical stimulation as an alternative to bovine thrombin for PRP activation due to the former's cost, workflow complexity and potentially significant side effects; however, both approaches require separating the PRP from whole blood (WB) prior to activation. Eliminating the separation (typically centrifugation) step would reduce the cost and duration of the clinical procedure, which may be critical in trauma and surgical applications. We hypothesize that electric pulses (EPs) can release growth factors from WB, as they do from PRP, without requiring centrifugation of WB into PRP. A pilot study for two donors demonstrates the potential for EP stimulated growth factor release from WB. This motivates future experiments assessing EP parameter optimization for WB activation and in vivo studies to determine the clinical benefits for topical treatments and, especially, for injections in orthopedic applications that already utilize non-treated/non-activated WB.