Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma injections in patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder

Is platelet-rich plasma a new solution for shoulder adhesive capsulitis? A systematic scoping review of the literature

Background

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has shown promising results for adhesive shoulder capsulitis (AC) in pre-clinical models. The aim of this review is to investigate the clinical outcomes of using PRP in AC.

Materials and Methods

We conducted a systematic scoping review of the literature using bibliographic databases from inception until the 9th of January 2022 [PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL]. Randomized studies were included if they investigated the use of PRP in human patients with a diagnosis of AC. Authors performed individual study quality assessments using the RoB 2 tool.

Results

We screened a total of 470 results and 6 were included in the final synthesis. Studies included data of 578 patients with 263 patients receiving PRP (45.5%). All studies used PRP as part of non-operative treatment. PRP was compared to another intervention in all six studies. Four of these studies found PRP to be more effective. No major adverse effects were reported in any study.

Conclusion

PRP is a safe treatment option that can be added to the investigative treatment arsenal of AC. Despite showing some favorable results, several limitations and patient-centered questions remain to be addressed by future studies.

Level of Evidence

IV.

Most Orthopaedic Platelet-Rich Plasma Investigations Don't Report Protocols and Composition: An Updated Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to assess the heterogeneity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) preparation and composition reporting for the treatment of musculoskeletal/orthopaedic pathologies.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify Level I and Level II studies from 2016 to 2022 that evaluated the use of PRP therapy for musculoskeletal pathologies. The search phrase used was "platelet-rich plasma clinical studies." Studies were assessed based on their reporting of the PRP preparation methods and reporting of PRP composition.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-four studies (in 120 articles) met inclusion criteria for analysis. Of these studies, 15 (12.1%) provided comprehensive reporting, including a clear, well-described, and reproducible preparation protocol that future investigators can follow. Thirty-three studies (26.6%) quantitatively reported the final PRP product composition.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the studies using PRP for the treatment of musculoskeletal/orthopaedic pathologies, less than 20% provided a clear, well-described, and reproducible PRP preparation protocol, and only one-fourth of studies reported on the final PRP product composition.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A diverse current reporting of PRP composition between studies provides a high heterogeneity of the term "PRP," which becomes a limitation for a comparison of studies using PRP.

Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection on Range of Motion, Pain, and Disability in Patients With Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the therapeutic effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection on range of motion, pain, and disability in patients with adhesive capsulitis (AC).

DATA SOURCES

The authors performed the literature search in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases in February 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospective studies comparing the outcomes of PRP with other intervention in patients with AC.

DATA EXTRACTION

The quality of included randomized trials was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2.0) tool. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool was applied to assess the quality of nonrandomized trials. The mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) was determined as the effect size for continuous outcomes, and outcome accuracy was determined using 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fourteen studies involving 1139 patients were included. Our meta-analysis revealed that PRP injection can significantly improve passive abduction (MD=3.91; 95% CI, 0.84-6.98), passive flexion (MD=3.90; 95% CI, 0.15-7.84), and disability (SMD=-0.50; 95% CI, -1.29 to -0.74) within 1 month after intervention. Moreover, PRP injection can significantly improve passive abduction (MD=17.19; 95% CI, 12.38-22.01), passive flexion (MD=17.74; 95% CI, 9.89-25.59), passive external rotation (MD=12.95; 95% CI, 10.04-15.87), pain (MD=-8.40; 95% CI, -16.73 to -0.06), and disability (SMD=-1.02; 95% CI, -1.29 to -0.74) 3 months after intervention. PRP injection can also significantly improve pain (MD=-18.98; 95% CI, -24.71 to -13.26), and disability (SMD=-2.01; 95% CI, -3.02 to -1.00) 6 months after intervention. In addition, no adverse effects of PRP injection were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

PRP injection may serve as an effective and safe treatment for patients with AC.

Platelet-Rich Plasma for Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review

Adhesive capsulitis (AC) is a common cause of shoulder pain seen in 3%-5% of the population. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is platelet-rich blood with pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory properties that has been proposed as a treatment option for patients with AC. The purpose of this study was to analyze outcomes of range of motion (ROM) and subjective outcomes, including the visual analog scale (VAS), disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH), and shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) scores. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched, and manuscripts were screened using defined preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) criteria. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion/exclusion using PICOS criteria and extracted data regarding ROM and subjective outcome scores. Nineteen total articles were included. Eleven of the 19 studies recorded ROM as a dependent variable. All articles reported improved ROM with PRP injection when compared to baseline. When recording degrees of shoulder ROM in different planes at the latest follow-up, there were a total of 67 comparative data points for PRP vs. control. Of the 67 comparisons, 62 (93%) had a larger final ROM in the PRP group. VAS scores were reported in 16 of the 19 studies, DASH scores were reported in eight of the 19 articles, and SPADI scores were reported in seven of the 19 articles. VAS, DASH, and SPADI scores were all superior in the PRP group compared to the control. Two studies reported the same final VAS score, but the PRP groups had a larger overall improvement. Of the studies that reported objective ROM outcomes, the PRP group had greater ROM at the longest follow-up compared to control in the vast majority of comparisons. For the studies that reported subjective outcomes, all patients that received PRP had a decrease in VAS pain scores and an improvement in DASH and SPADI questionnaires.

Current Status and Advancements in Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as a treatment modality has been around for the last four decades, but only truly gained popularity over the last 10 to 15 years in medicine, in a variety of fields ranging from regenerative medicine to infertility treatment. It has gained popularity, especially in treating musculoskeletal conditions where the bulk of research has been performed and published. There is level I evidence available supporting its efficacy in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), epicondylitis, bursitis, compressive neuropathy, plantar fasciitis, muscular injuries and osteochondral lesions. Most published research with regards to PRP has been focused on knee OA (limited research in shoulder, elbow, and foot and ankle OA), lateral epicondylitis and carpal tunnel syndrome, whereas spinal and hand conditions have limited research available. Tendinopathies and partial tendon tears have conflicting evidence available, with level I evidence supporting PRP's use in rotator cuff tendinopathies and tears, with contradictory level I evidence discouraging its use in patella and Achilles tendinopathies and tears. The available evidence regarding the use of PRP continues to produce conflicting results, but despite this, there is an ongoing increase in the popularity and use of PRP in patients with musculoskeletal conditions.

Comparing the Efficacy of Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma and Corticosteroid Injections in the Management of Frozen Shoulder: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction Periarthritis of the shoulder, or frozen shoulder (FS), is a common, painful, and disabling condition with varied treatment strategies. Intra-articular (IA) corticosteroid (CS) injections are a popular treatment option, but their efficacy is often temporary. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as an alternative therapy for adhesive capsulitis, but the literature on its effectiveness is limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of IA PRP and CS injections in managing FS. Methods In this prospective, randomized study, 68 patients who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled and randomized using a computer-generated table into two groups: Group 1 (IA PRP) received 4 ml PRP, and Group 2 (IA CS) received 2 ml (80 mg) of methylprednisolone acetate mixed with 2 ml normal saline (for a total of 4 ml) as a CS injection in the IA area of the shoulder. Outcome measures included pain; shoulder range of motion (ROM); the condensed version of the disabling conditions of the arm, shoulder, and hand (QuickDASH) score; and the shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) score. Participants were monitored via follow-up for 24 weeks, with pain and function assessed at each evaluation using the visual analog scale (VAS) score, the SPADI score, and the QuickDASH score. Results The IA PRP injections demonstrated better long-term outcomes than the IA CS injections, significantly improving pain, shoulder ROM, and daily activity performance. After 24 weeks, the mean VAS score in the PRP and methylprednisolone acetate groups was 1.00 (1.0 to 1.0) and 2.00 (2.0 to 2.0), respectively (P≤0.001). The mean QuickDASH score was 41.83 ± 6.33 in the PRP group and 48.76 ± 5.08 in the methylprednisolone acetate group (P≤0.001). The mean SPADI score was 53.32 ± 7.49 in the PRP group and 59.24 ± 5.80 in the methylprednisolone acetate group (P≤0.001), indicating a significant improvement in the PRP group's pain and disability scores after 24 weeks. The rate of complications was similar between the two groups. Conclusions Our findings suggest that IA PRP injections provide better long-term results than IA CS injections for managing FS. Platelet-rich plasma can be used as a treatment modality for better outcomes, particularly when the patient is contraindicated or refuses CS treatment. Further research is needed to evaluate the efficacy of these treatment modalities at different stages of FS and explore the potential benefits of ultrasound-guided injections.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections Are at Least Equivalent to Corticosteroid Injections for Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies

PURPOSE

To evaluate the role of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for adhesive capsulitis (AC) as compared with other injectables.

METHODS

A literature search of the PubMed and Embase online databases was performed to identify articles evaluating injection therapy for the treatment of AC. The inclusion criteria included prospective studies comparing PRP against alternative injectables with a minimum of 15 patients in each treatment arm and a minimum 12-week follow-up period. Pain scores, range of motion, and function scores were the primary outcomes assessed.

RESULTS

Five articles comparing PRP with corticosteroid or saline solution injections met the inclusion criteria. A total of 157 patients were treated with PRP, with a follow-up duration ranging from 3 to 6 months. All 5 studies showed statistically significant improvements in pain scores, motion, and function scores in patients receiving PRP, corticosteroid, and saline solution injections. However, PRP was consistently superior on intergroup analyses in all but 1 study. In 4 studies, pain and function scores favored PRP over control at final follow-up (range in mean difference, -2.2 to 0.69 for visual analog scale pain score [n = 5] and -50.5 to -4.0 for Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score [n = 3]), whereas 3 studies found greater improvement in shoulder motion after PRP (range in mean difference, 0.7° to 34.3° for forward flexion and -2.3° to 20.4° for external rotation [n = 4]). One study found no significant difference between PRP and corticosteroid injections but noted that the results were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

According to a limited number of prospective studies, PRP injections for AC are at least equivalent to corticosteroid or saline solution injections and often lead to improved pain, motion, and functional outcomes at 3- to 6-month follow-up. Given the small number of studies, with design heterogeneity, there is insufficient evidence to routinely recommend PRP for AC. However, the results are promising and do support considering PRP as an adjunct treatment option for AC, especially for patients refractory and/or averse to corticosteroids or alternative treatment modalities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.

Current Role of Intra-Articular Injections of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder: A Systematic Review

Adhesive capsulitis shoulder is a common problem of patients presenting with shoulder pain and disability. The approach to such patients includes a variety of modalities. This systematic review evaluates the efficacy of intra-articular injections of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment. A literature search was performed between January 2010 and 30 May 2022. MeSH terms used were 'Platelet-rich plasma' OR 'PRP' AND 'Frozen shoulder' OR 'Adhesive capsulitis shoulder' OR 'Periarthritis shoulder'. The search included published articles in the English language involving human subjects. Studies evaluating other types of shoulder disorders, in vitro studies, review articles, animal-model studies, and pre-clinical trials were excluded. The data regarding study characteristics, efficacy, and safety outcomes were analyzed. A total of 11 studies with 347 patients over 10 years were finally included in this review. Most publications were in 2019 and 2020, mostly from India. This review included seven comparative studies, three case series, and one case report. In seven studies, a single intra-articular PRP injection was administered, whereas in the rest of the studies two or multiple injections were given. Only one study demonstrated an equivocal efficacy of PRP and steroid intra-articular injection. The rest all depicted better clinical and functional outcomes with the PRP injection. Only one study compared the outcomes of hydro-dissection treatment in adhesive capsulitis with the intra-articular PRP injection. The rest all either examined PRP alone or compared it with the steroid intra-articular injection. None of the studies showed any major side effects. The intra-articular injections of PRP in the management of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder provide a new treatment approach. Further studies are required to ascertain the efficacy and safety of the PRP intraarticular injection as a management alternative in adhesive capsulitis.

Adhesive capsulitis: A review for clinicians

ABSTRACT

Adhesive capsulitis, a common primary care and orthopedic diagnosis often referred to as frozen shoulder, is a painful inflammatory process that leads to a mechanical block in active and passive range of shoulder motion. Risk factors include diabetes and thyroid dysfunction. Diagnosis is made based on physical examination, but can be augmented by diagnostic imaging. Nonsurgical management is the mainstay of treatment because the disease is self-limiting. However, some patients may need surgical intervention.

Surgical versus Nonsurgical Multimodality Treatment in an Idiopathic Frozen Shoulder: A Retrospective Study of Clinical and Functional Outcomes

This retrospective study compared the clinical and functional outcomes of patients diagnosed with an idiopathic frozen shoulder with symptom onset of a maximum of six months, treated by arthroscopic capsular release followed by corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy to patients who received only corticosteroid injection followed by physiotherapy. The patients who underwent arthroscopic capsular release, intraoperative corticosteroid injection, and physiotherapy (Group I, n = 30) or received only corticosteroids injection and physiotherapy (Group II, n = 29) were examined in terms of shoulder range of motion (ROM), pain intensity, and function before a given treatment and three, six, and twelve months later. The groups were comparable pre-treatment in terms of ROM, pain, and functional outcome. Group I had statistically and clinically significantly better ROM and function at three and six months post-treatment than Group II. Despite being statistically significant, the between-group differences at twelve-month follow-up in ROM and function were too small to be considered clinically notable. The between-group comparison of pain revealed no significant differences at any post-treatment point of time. The early arthroscopic capsular release preceding corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy seemed more effective at three- and six-month follow-up; however, it brought a comparable result to corticosteroid injection and subsequent physiotherapy at twelve months follow-up.

Nonoperative and Operative Soft-Tissue, Cartilage, and Bony Regeneration and Orthopaedic Biologics of the Shoulder: An Orthoregeneration Network (ON) 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 electro-magnetic 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 shoulder including the rotator cuff tendons, glenohumeral articular cartilage, glenoid labrum, the joint capsule, and bone. Promising and established treatment modalities include hyaluronic acid (HA); platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet rich concentrates (PRC); bone marrow aspirate (BMA) comprising mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs alternatively termed medicinal signaling cells and frequently, misleadingly labelled "mesenchymal stem cells"); MSC harvested from adipose, umbilical, or placental sources; factors including vascular endothelial growth factors (VEGF), basic fibroblast growth factor (FGF), platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF), transforming growth factor-beta (TGFβ), bone morphogenic protein (BMP), and matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs); prolotherapy; pulsed electromagnetic field therapy; microfracture and other marrow-stimulation techniques; biologic resurfacing using acellular dermal allografts, allograft Achilles tendons, allograft lateral menisci, fascia lata autografts, and porcine xenografts; osteochondral autograft or allograft); and autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). Studies involving hyaluronic acid, platelet rich plasma, and medicinal signaling cells of various origin tissues have shown mixed results to-date as isolated treatments and as surgical adjuncts. Despite varied results thus far, there is great potential for improved efficacy with refinement of current techniques and translation of burgeoning preclinical work. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.