A retrospective comparison of the management of recalcitrant lateral elbow tendinosis: platelet-rich plasma injections versus surgery

The Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma on the Healing of Nasal Mucosa After Surgery of the Nose: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Purpose

To investigate the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) on the healing of nasal mucosa after surgery of the nose.

Methods

This prospective, randomized, Comparative Analytic study was conducted on 40 patients. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups: Group A, subjected to PRP, and Group B, who were not subjected to PRP after nasal surgery. The outcome of both Techniques was analyzed and compared.

Results

Significant differences were found in dryness, encrustations, and postoperative healing days in the PRP group. However, no significant differences between the two groups were observed in primary bleeding, secondary bleeding, nasal synechiae, pain, healing time, return to physical activity, and patient satisfaction.

Conclusion

Our study detects the potential hopeful effect of PRP on postoperative wound healing of nasal mucosa, dryness, and nasal crustations. According to these results, the application of PRP post-nasal surgery can be considered an effective method for maintaining post-nasal surgery Mucosa.

[Treatment of lateral and medial epicondylopathy : Are platelet-rich plasma, shock wave therapy, etc. effective for both?]

Lateral and medial epicondylopathy (epicondylitis), which are common and in most cases self-limiting, frequently result in relevant reduction of quality of life and may also affect the ability to work. Recently, the use of orthobiologics, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), has been proposed to promote tendon regeneration and is supposed to be a valuable treatment option. However, scientific data are conflicting and the short- and long-time results are controversial. The use of stem cells is new approach and preliminary clinical data are promising. Shock wave therapy is widely used and part of the daily routine in treating lateral epicondylopoathy, although it is questionable for medial epicondylopathy.

Validation of a novel magnetic resonance imaging classification and recommended treatment for lateral elbow tendinopathy

BACKGROUND

Lateral epicondylitis is one of the most common upper extremity problems presented to orthopedic surgeons. Despite a rapid and accurate arrival at a diagnosis by clinical examination, there exists no consensus classification for this condition, which hampers clinical approaches for treatment of the disease based on its severity. Thus, the aim of this study was to propose and valiadate a new magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) classification of lateral epicondylitis, staging by tendinosis, the degree of thickness tears of the common extensor tendon (CET) and bone bruise lesion.

METHOD

MRI assessment of the elbow of 75 patients (57 women and 18 men; mean age:51.4 years (range,34-73) from Jan 2014 to Jan 2021 who were diagnosed with lateral epicondylitis were included in the study. MR images were reviewed retrospectively by two independent upper extremities orthopedists and one musculoskeletal radiologist. Inter- and intra-observer reliabilities for the classification were calculated using kappa statistics for the analysis of interrater agreement. Correlation between the stage of the disease and the duration of symptom before MRI was calculated using Kruskal-wallis test.

RESULTS

Various degrees of CET lesions were demonstrated in this population (Stage I-17, IIA-7, IIB-22 and III-29). Intra-observer agreements of MRI staging were substantial to satisfactory. Inter-observer agreements were moderate to substantial. There was no significant correlation between the disease stage and the patient age or the duration of symptom before MRI.

CONCLUSION

Our MRI classification has emerged as one of the most reliable methods to define stages of chronic lateral epicondylitis. At the end, we have suggeted a clearer direction for understanding the disease pathology as well as an appropriate management protocol for each stage of the disease in line with the recent body of literature.

A systematic review on the efficacy of different types of platelet-rich plasma in the management of lateral epicondylitis

BACKGROUND

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is reported as an effective treatment for lateral epicondylitis (LE). Theoretically, different types of PRP have different therapeutic effects. However, there is controversy on the effects of different types of PRP in the treatment of LE. The purpose of this study was to systematically compare pain relief, functional improvement, and the success rate of treatment using 2 different types of PRP by reviewing and summarizing the data available in the current literature on LE after PRP injection.

METHODS

The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were reviewed. A computerized literature search was performed for related studies published from database inception to August 2021 using the following terms: lateral epicondylitis, tennis elbow, tendinopathy, lateral elbow pain, PRP, and platelet-rich plasma. The PRP patients included in our study were divided into those receiving leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) and those receiving leukocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) according to the different preparation methods. Outcomes of interest included patient characteristics, types and preparations of PRP, clinical outcomes, success rates, and the safety of treatment at short- and long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies were evaluated in our analysis, including 2420 LE patients. LP-PRP was used in 19 of these studies, LR-PRP was used in 13, and both LP-PRP and LR-PRP were used in 1. Patients in both PRP groups showed significantly improved clinical outcomes after treatment compared with before treatment. The mean visual analog scale scores ranged from 6.1 to 8.0 before treatment, ranged from 1.5 to 4.0 at short-term follow-up, and ranged from 0.6 to 3.3 at long-term follow-up in the LR-PRP group. The mean visual analog scale scores ranged from 4.2 to 8.4 before treatment, 1.6 to 5.9 at short-term follow-up, and 0.7 to 2.7 at long-term follow-up in the LP-PRP group. The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores in the LR-PRP and LP-PRP groups ranged from 47.0 to 54.3 and 30.0 to 67.7, respectively, before treatment and ranged from 20.0 to 22.0 and 5.5 to 19.0, respectively, at long-term follow-up. The success rates in the LR-PRP and LP-PRP groups ranged from 70% to 100% and 36% to 100%, respectively. The complication rate was lower in the LP-PRP group (3.9%) than in the LR-PRP group (6.4%, P = .029), with the main complication being temporary pain after PRP treatment.

CONCLUSION

PRP treatment demonstrated significant improvements in terms of pain relief and functional improvement in LE patients regardless of the type of PRP. There were no significant differences in pain relief and functional improvement between LR-PRP and LP-PRP. The main complication was temporary pain after PRP injection, and the complication rate in the LP-PRP group was lower than that in the LR-PRP group.

Platelet-rich plasma injection vs. operative treatment for lateral elbow tendinosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although surgical treatment is considered reliable for lateral elbow tendinosis, local injection therapy may be preferable, as it avoids surgery. Among a number of local injections, platelet-rich plasma has been used successfully to treat lateral elbow tendinosis. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes in patients treated with either platelet-rich plasma injections or surgery for lateral elbow tendinosis using a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for studies published before March 1, 2021, that compared platelet-rich plasma with operative treatment for lateral elbow tendinosis. The pooled analysis was designed to compare the visual analog scale scores and the Patient-Related Tennis Elbow Evaluation scores between the platelet-rich plasma and surgical treatment groups at serial time points.

RESULTS

We included 5 studies involving 340 patients with lateral elbow tendinosis, comprising of 154 patients treated with platelet-rich plasma and 186 patients who underwent surgical treatment. The pooled analysis showed no statistically significant differences in the visual analog scale scores at any of the follow-up time points, namely, 2 months (mean difference [MD] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.51 to 4.74, P = .55, I² = 94%), 6 months (MD 0.80, 95% CI -2.83 to 4.42, P = .67, I² = 92%), and 12 months (MD -0.92, 95% CI -4.63 to 2.80, P = .63, I² = 93%) postintervention and in the Patient-Related Tennis Elbow Evaluation scores at 12 weeks (MD -1.86, 95% CI -22.30 to 18.58, P = .86, I² = 81%), 24 weeks (MD -3.33, 95% CI -21.82 to 15.17, P = .72, I² = 74%), and 52 weeks (MD -3.64, 95% CI -19.65 to 12.37, P = .66, I² = 69%) postintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Local platelet-rich plasma injections and surgical treatment produced equivalent pain scores and functional outcomes in patients with lateral elbow tendinosis. Thus, platelet-rich plasma injections may represent a reasonable alternative treatment for patients who are apprehensive to proceed with surgery or for poor surgical candidates.

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.

To Improve Pain and Function, Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections May Be an Alternative to Surgery for Treating Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To determine whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection for lateral epicondylitis offers patients comparable outcomes to lateral epicondylar surgery.

METHODS

Embase, Cochrane Library, and MEDLINE databases were searched using the terms lateral epicondylitis, lateral elbow pain, tennis elbow, lateral epicondylalgia, and elbow tendinopathy individually and combined with the terms platelet-rich plasma injections and lateral epicondylar surgery. We compared pain relief, function between the 2 treatment options, and identified whether PRP injection reduced the incidence of lateral epicondylar surgery. Studies must have compared PRP injections with lateral epicondylar surgery for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis; be of Level I, II, or III evidence; and be written in the English language.

RESULTS

Three studies (1 Level II and 2 Level III) met inclusion criteria. Two of the studies suggested that PRP injections offer similar relief as surgery in the short and mid-term, one study reported that PRP injections and surgery had similar outcomes in pain improvement and return to work, whereas 1 study reported that surgery may be a better long-term solution.

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with lateral epicondylar surgery, PRP injections offer similar improvements in pain and function for patients suffering from lateral epicondylitis, especially in the short- and mid-term in 2 of the 3 included investigations. Therefore, PRP injections are an appropriate alternative for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review of Level III or greater evidence.

Biologics

Biologics are a growing field that has shown immense promise for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions both in orthopedic sports medicine and interventional pain management. These procedures utilize injection of supraphysiologic levels of platelets and growth factors to invoke the body's own inflammatory cascade to augment the healing of many bony and soft tissue conditions. While many patients improve with conservative care, there is a need to address the gap between those that improve with rehabilitation alone and those who ultimately require operative management. Orthobiologic procedures have the potential to fill this void. The purpose of this review is to summarize the basic science, evidence for use, and post-injection rehabilitation concepts of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) as they pertain to joints, tendons, ligaments, and the spine.

Management of Lateral Epicondylitis: A Narrative Literature Review

Lateral epicondylitis, also termed as "tennis elbow," is the most common cause of elbow pain and dysfunction, mainly resulting from repetitive gripping or wrist extension during various activities. The exact pathogenesis remains largely elusive with putative tendinosis, a symptomatic degenerative process of the local tendon. It is usually diagnosed by clinical examinations. Sometimes, additional imaging is required for a specific differential diagnosis. Although most cases can be self-healing, the optimal treatment strategy for chronic lateral epicondylitis remains controversial. This article presents a landscape of emerging evidence on lateral epicondylitis and focuses on the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management, shedding light on the understandings and treatment for healthcare professionals.

Management of lateral epicondylitis

Lateral epicondylitis is the most common cause of lateral elbow pain. Although also known as tennis elbow, lateral epicondylitis often develops as a work-related condition and therefore constitutes a major public health issue. This article reviews the pathophysiological factors involved in lateral epicondylitis, as well as the tools available for establishing the diagnosis and ruling out other causes of lateral elbow pain. Finally, the non-operative and surgical treatment options are discussed in detail.

Platelet-Rich Plasma for Elbow Pathologies: a Descriptive Review of Current Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Platelet-rich plasma is used in many orthopedic pathologies such as tendinopathies and ligament injuries. The clinical results reported in the scientific literature are, however, confusing. The aim of this manuscript is to provide a narrative literature review regarding the role of PRP in the most common elbow soft tissue pathologies.

RECENT FINDINGS

The response to PRP seems to be favorable when compared to steroid injection for pain management and for patient-reported outcomes in lateral epicondylitis. PRP injection does not seem to have the potential complications associated with a steroid injection such as skin atrophy, discoloration, and secondary tendon tears. Only a few manuscripts comparing the results of PRP treatment with either extracorporeal shockwave (ESW), dry needling, or even surgical treatments in lateral epicondylitis exist. The use of PRP in other elbow pathologies such as golfer's elbow, ulnar collateral ligament injury, and distal biceps and triceps pathology is examined in few studies, with unclear recommendations. Regarding elbow pathologies, PRP injections in tennis elbow seems to be the best-studied intervention. A major limitation in these studies is the significant heterogeneity in the methods used for preparing PRP, for example employing leukocyte-rich, leukocyte-poor preparations, PRP with or without activation, which makes the results of the studies difficult to compare. Results of this review show that more studies on larger cohorts, with comparable formulations, and with longer follow-up are required to give optimal suggestions concerning the use of PRP in elbow pathologies.

Platelet-rich plasma in tendon-related disorders: results and indications

PURPOSE

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is currently the most exploited strategy in the clinical practice to provide a regenerative stimulus for tendon healing. The aim of the present study was to systematically review the available evidence on the treatment of the main tendon disorders where PRP is currently applied.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed on the use of PRP as a treatment for tendinopathies focusing on the following sites: Achilles tendon, patellar tendon, rotator cuff tendons, and lateral elbow tendons. The following inclusion criteria for relevant articles were used: clinical trials written in English language up to 21 June 2016 on the use of PRP in the conservative or surgical treatment of the aforementioned tendinopathies.

RESULTS

The research identified the following clinical trials dealing with the application of PRP in the selected tendons: 19 papers on patellar tendon (6 being RCTs: 4 dealing with PRP conservative application and 2 surgical), 24 papers on Achilles tendon (4 RCTs: 3 conservative and 1 surgical), 29 on lateral elbow tendons (17 RCTs, all conservative), and 32 on rotator cuff (22 RCTs: 18 surgical and 3 conservative).

CONCLUSION

Patellar tendons seem to benefit from PRP injections, whereas in the Achilles tendon, PRP application is not indicated neither as a conservative approach nor as a surgical augmentation. Lateral elbow tendinopathy showed an improvement in most of the high-level studies, but the lack of proven superiority with respect to the more simple whole-blood injections still questions its use in the clinical practice. With regard to rotator cuff pathology, the vast majority of surgical RCTs documented a lack of beneficial effects, whereas there is still inconclusive evidence concerning its conservative application in rotator cuff disorders.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of level I-IV trials, Level IV.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection With Percutaneous Needling for Recalcitrant Lateral Epicondylitis: Comparison of Tenotomy and Fenestration Techniques

Background

Recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a common debilitating condition, with numerous treatment options of varying success. An injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been shown to improve LE, although it is unclear whether the method of needling used in conjunction with a PRP injection is of clinical importance.

Purpose

To determine whether percutaneous needle tenotomy is superior to percutaneous needle fenestration when each is combined with a PRP injection for the treatment of recalcitrant LE.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A total of 93 patients with recalcitrant LE were treated with a PRP injection and percutaneous needle fenestration (n = 45) or percutaneous needle tenotomy (n = 48) over a 5-year study interval. Preoperative patient data, including visual analog scale for pain (VAS-P), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) scores and grip strength, were obtained from a chart review and compared with postoperative values obtained prospectively. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of complications, need for additional interventions, return to work, and patient satisfaction.

Results

At a mean follow-up of 40 months, significant improvements in VAS-P (mean, -6.1; 95% CI, -6.8 to -5.5; P < .0001), QuickDASH (mean, -46; 95% CI, -52 to -40; P < .0001), and PRTEE (mean, -57; 95% CI, -64 to -50; P < .0001) scores and grip strength (mean, +6.1 kg; 95% CI, 4.9 to 7.3; P < .0001) were observed across the entire study cohort, with no significant differences noted between the fenestration and tenotomy groups. Nine of 45 patients (22%) underwent additional procedures to treat recurrent symptoms in the fenestration group compared with 5 of 48 patients (10%) in the tenotomy group (P = .05). No complications occurred in any patients, and no patients expressed dissatisfaction with their treatment course.

Conclusion

A PRP injection with concomitant percutaneous needling is an effective treatment for recalcitrant LE, with sustained improvements in pain, strength, and function demonstrated at a mean follow-up of longer than 3 years. Although the method of concomitant needling does not appear to have a significant effect on treatment outcomes, more aggressive needle tenotomy is less likely to require conversion to open tenotomy than needle fenestration in the short term to midterm.

Autologous Blood and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis

Lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow) is a frequent cause of elbow pain; most patients (80%-90%) are successfully treated with standard nonoperative methods (rest, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, bracing, and physical therapy). Autologous blood injections and platelet-rich plasma injections are the two most frequently used orthobiologic techniques in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis. Studies of the effectiveness of autologous blood injections and platelet-rich plasma report varying outcomes, some citing significant clinical relief and others reporting no beneficial effect. More research is needed to determine how to best use orthobiologics in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis.

Arthroscopic Debridement Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection: A Prospective, Randomized, Comparative Study of Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis With a Nearly 2-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the efficacy of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections and arthroscopic lateral release in treating chronic lateral epicondylitis (LE).

METHODS

Patients who had a clinical diagnosis of LE confirmed by ultrasound (US) were included in this study. A total of 101 patients received arthroscopic release (n = 50) or US-guided PRP injections (n = 51). Outcomes were assessed using a visual analog scale for pain, the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE), and a calibrated hand dynamometer for grip strength.

RESULTS

Both patient groups experienced significant improvement in all measures. Between-group comparisons showed a significantly higher value in the PRP group only for grip strength at week 8 (P = .0073); all other significant differences were in favor of arthroscopy: overall pain (P = .0021), night pain (P = .0013), and PRTEE score (P = .0013) at week 104 and grip strength at weeks 24, 52, and 104 (all P < .0001). Consumption of rescue pain medication was not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings suggest that (1) PRP injections and arthroscopic extensor carpi radialis brevis release are both effective in the short and medium term; (2) PRP patients experienced a significant worsening of pain at 2 years; (3) arthroscopic release ensured better long-term outcomes in terms of pain relief and grip strength recovery; and (4) both procedures were safe and well accepted by patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study.

Editorial Commentary: The Needle or the Knife? Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Surgery for Lateral Epicondylitis

The most efficacious treatment for patients with lateral epicondylitis who have not adequately improved despite being treated for extended periods with commonly used nonoperative measures is controversial. Are locally applied platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections more effective than a surgical procedure, such as arthroscopic lateral epicondylitis debridement, in reducing symptoms for such patients? Level II evidence shows that long-term clinical benefits are much less likely to occur in patients receiving PRP injections. Moreover, in patients treated with PRP injection, progressively worsening pain is more likely to develop during activity at 1 and 2 years of follow-up in contradistinction to arthroscopically managed patients.