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

Arthroscopic Medial Bi-portal Extra-articular Debridement for Recalcitrant Medial Epicondylitis

Medial epicondylitis, or golfer's elbow, is characterized by pain and tenderness at the tendon insertion points of the pronator teres and flexor carpi radialis. Conservative treatment is sufficient for most patients, whereas surgical treatment is the best choice for intractable medial epicondylitis. With open surgery or arthroscopic surgery, good clinical results have been reported. However, there is still no consensus on which surgical technique is more ideal. We describe our technique of arthroscopic medial bi-portal extra-articular debridement, which is a safe and effective technique that allows more accurate debridement and maximum protection of the ulnar nerve while reducing surgical scars, relieving postoperative pain, reducing the probability of elbow infection and ankylosis, and shortening the recovery time.

[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.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection Can Be a Viable Alternative to Corticosteroid Injection for Conservative Treatment of Rotator Cuff Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To explore whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection can be a viable alternative to corticosteroid (CS) injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease.

METHODS

This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from January 1, 1990, to March 20, 2022, for English-language randomized controlled trials that compared PRP and CS injections for patients with rotator cuff disease. Two evaluators independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the level of evidence and methodologic quality of the enrolled studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan software (version 5.3.3).

RESULTS

Thirteen nonsurgical randomized controlled trials with 725 patients were included. Compared with CS, PRP provided statistically worse short-term (<2 months) changes in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) assessment scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire scores but provided better medium-term (2-6 months) changes in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores, as well as long-term (≥6 months) changes in Constant-Murley scores, ASES scores, and Simple Shoulder Test scores. No statistically significant differences regarding pain reduction were found between the 2 groups. PRP injections led to worse short-term changes in forward flexion and internal rotation but better medium-term changes in forward flexion and external rotation. PRP showed significantly lower rates of post-injection failure (requests for subsequent injections or surgical intervention prior to 12 months) than CS. No outcome reached the minimal clinically important difference. After sensitivity analyses excluding studies with substantial clinical and/or methodologic heterogeneity, PRP showed better medium-term changes in ASES scores and visual analog scale scores and long-term changes in visual analog scale scores that reached the minimal clinically important difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Without the drawbacks of CS injection, PRP injection is not worse than CS injection in terms of pain relief and function recovery at any time point during follow-up. PRP injection may reduce rates of subsequent injection or surgery, and it might provide better improvements in pain and function in the medium to long term. PRP injection can be a viable alternative to CS injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Meta-analysis of Level I and II studies.

The levels of TGFβ1, VEGF, PDGF-BB, and PF4 in platelet-rich plasma of professional soccer players: a cross-sectional pilot study

Background

Regenerative therapy using platelet-rich plasma (PRP), a rich source of growth factors, has become popular in orthopedic sports medicine. Elite athletes prefer PRP therapy for their injured muscles and tendons primarily to avoid the possible risks of surgical treatment. However, the clinical effectiveness of PRP therapy in elite athletes compared to that in non-athletes remains unknown. Therefore, to investigate the effectiveness of PRP therapy in professional athletes (pro-athletes), we focused on the quality of PRP preparations and compared the levels of bioactive molecules between pro-athletes and non-athletes.

Methods

PRP was prepared from healthy, non-smoking male professional soccer players (pro-athletes) (n = 22) and non-athletes (VEGF: n = 34, others: n = 38). The levels of TGFβ1, PDGF-BB, VEGF, and PF4 were determined using ELISA kits. Polyphosphate was probed with 4’,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole and monitored using a fluorometer. The body composition of the donors was determined using a bathroom weighing scale.

Results

The levels of TGFβ1 and VEGF were significantly lower in pro-athletes than in non-athletes, whereas PF4 levels were significantly higher in pro-athletes. No significant difference was found in PDGF-BB levels between these groups. Biomolecule levels were not correlated with polyphosphate levels.

Conclusion

TGFβ1, VEGF, and PDGF-BB levels in pro-athletes were not higher than those in non-athletes. These findings suggest that growth factor levels in PRP may not be a predominant determinant of the clinical effectiveness of PRP therapy in pro-athletes. Increased PF4 levels in pro-athletes suggest an immunological function of PRP that may positively influence tissue regeneration.

The use of platelet-rich plasma in management of musculoskeletal pain: a narrative review

Musculoskeletal pain is the most common pain reported by patients. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is widely used to treat musculoskeletal pain. However, the efficacy of PRP to treat this pain remains controversial. This review highlights the application of PRP in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain. PRP treatment appears to reduce pain and improve function in patients with musculoskeletal pain. However, there are limitations to the currently published studies. These limitations include the PRP preparation methods, type of activators, types of pathology to be treated, methods and times of administration, and association of PRP with other treatments.

Platelet-rich plasma injection for tennis elbow: did it ever work?

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a commonly used treatment for tendinopathies such as tennis elbow despite the questionable evidence of its efficacy. A recent Cochrane review suggests that it likely does not provide clinically meaningful benefits in people with tennis elbow. In this viewpoint, we discuss how lack of regulation allowed aggressive marketing and clinical use without normal phases of drug development and approval process or rigorous evidence of benefits. Since several phases of development were bypassed, we still do not know the optimal preparation method and dosing of PRP for tendinopathies. Furthermore, several clinical trials compared PRP with other interventions although it was unclear if PRP was better than placebo and these comparisons created distraction rather than improved understanding of its effects.

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.