Treatment of lateral epicondylitis with platelet-rich plasma, glucocorticoid, or saline: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Comparison of Interventions for Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis for Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Pain Outcome

PURPOSE

There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment for lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET), and not all available treatment options have been compared directly with placebo/control. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effectiveness of different LET treatments directly and indirectly against control/placebo based on a validated outcome, the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) pain score.

METHODS

Randomized, controlled trials comparing different treatment methods for LET were included, provided they reported outcome data using the PRTEE pain score. A network meta-analysis with random effect was used to combine direct and indirect evidence between treatments compared with placebo in the short term (up to six weeks) and midterm (more than six weeks and up to six months) after intervention.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 12 comparators including control/placebo were eligible. The results indicated no significant improvement in PRTEE pain score in the short term across all treatments compared with control/placebo. In the midterm, physiotherapy/exercise showed benefit against placebo (mean difference: -4.32, 95% confidence interval: -7.58 and -1.07). Although steroid injections, dry needling, and autologous blood also exhibited potential treatment effects, it is crucial for the clinician to consider certain pitfalls when considering these treatments. The limited number of small studies and paucity of data call for caution in interpreting the results and need for further evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients should be informed that there is currently no strong evidence that any treatment produces more rapid improvement in pain symptoms when compared with control/placebo in the short and medium terms.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic I.

The concentration of platelets in PRP does not affect pain outcomes in lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: To investigate the analyze the relationship between concentration platelet-dose in platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections and improvements in pain when treating lateral epicondylitis. Methods: A systematic review was conducted into five medical databases, exploring the difference in pain outcomes based on concentration of PRP. Results: Initial querying of the databases yielded 1408 articles with 20 articles ultimately included. There was no statistical significance between effect sizes of the two treatment groups (high and low platelet concentration; p = 0.976). Conclusion: Both large and small concentrations of platelets depict significant reduction in pain, however, between subgroups there was no significance. It can thus be concluded that concentration of platelets in PRP does not impact overall pain relief.

Assessing the treatment response of lateral elbow tendinopathy using time-dependent ultrasonography, Doppler imaging, and elastography

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the structural alterations, neovascularity, and elasticity of tendons and the relationship between elasticity and the Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation score after undergoing US-guided fenestration or surgery in patients with chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy.

METHODS

Participants from the per-protocol population of a randomized trial conducted between October 2016 and June 2020 were included. The surgery and fenestration groups included 24 (mean age, 50 ± 7 years [standard deviation], 10 men) and 29 (47 ± 8 years, 18 men) participants, respectively. Ultrasound exams were performed at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Statistical analyses included linear mixed effects and generalized equation estimation models.

RESULTS

Fenestration had no significant impact on tendon thickness (p = 0.46). Conversely, surgery significantly increased tendon thickness at 6 months (p < 0.0001) and remained elevated at 12 months (p = 0.04). Tendon echostructure exhibited a group effect (p = 0.03), indicating a higher proportion of pathological scores in the surgery group post-intervention compared to the fenestration group. Both groups showed a similar reduction in neovascularity from 6 to 12 months postintervention (p = 0.006). Shear-wave velocity increased in the fenestration group at 6 months (p = 0.04), while the surgery group experienced a nonsignificant decrease at 6 months, with some improvement at 12 months (p = 0.08). Changes in shear-wave velocity did not correlate with clinical outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Fenestration and surgery reduced tendon neovascularity over time. Unlike surgery, fenestration did not impact tendon size while improving tendon echostructure and elasticity.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Fenestration and surgery equally alleviated symptoms and decreased tendon neovascularity in lateral elbow tendinopathy; however, fenestration did not alter tendon thickness and improved echostructure and shear-wave velocity, suggesting shear-wave velocity's potential for quantitatively monitoring tendon elasticity during healing.

KEY POINTS

Reliable markers for monitoring healing response and informing treatment protocols in elbow tendinopathy are lacking. Fenestration and surgery reduced tendon neovascularity, while fenestration improved tendon echostructure and shear-wave velocity. Shear-wave velocity may provide quantitative measures to monitor tendon elasticity in response to treatment.

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.

Trends in utilization, demographics, and costs of platelet-rich plasma injections: a ten-year nationwide investigation

INTRODUCTION

Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) has become one of the most popular biologic treatments in orthopedic surgery. Despite this, its utilization over the last decade has not been investigated.

METHODS

We conducted a search using Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify patients who received PRP injections between 2010 and 2019 using the PearlDiver database. The purpose was to 1) determine annual trends of PRP injections of the ankle, hip, knee, shoulder, and elbow for cartilaginous, tendinous, ligamentous, meniscal/labral, and miscellaneous pathologies; 2) compare baseline demographics of patients receiving these injections; and 3) analyze costs.

RESULTS

A total of 23,716 patients who received PRP injections were identified; 54.4% were female. The incidence of PRP injections was between 1.6 and 4.3 per 100,000 orthopedic patients. The most common anatomic locations targeted for PRP therapy was the knee (36.7%), followed by the shoulder/elbow (30.5%), then the ankle (19.6%) and hip (13.6%). Subgroup analysis revealed that most common use of PRP was for knee cartilaginous pathologies, followed by shoulder/elbow tendinous pathologies. The number of injections used in the knee significantly increased between 2010 and 2019 (p< 0.001), and trended toward significantly increasing in the shoulder/elbow (p = 0.055). Average annual costs for PRP injections ranged from $711.65 for ankles and $1,711.63 for hips; costs significantly changed for 3 of the 4 anatomic locations. By 2019, average PRP injection costs for each area clustered around $1000.

CONCLUSION

Between 2010 and 2019, there was an increase in usage of PRP injections in the knee (cartilaginous pathologies) and the shoulder/elbow (tendinous pathologies). PRP costs demonstrated early variability but clustered around $1000 by 2019. Further studies into drivers of prices and cost-effectiveness of PRP are needed to provide clarity into the true costs to patients and healthcare providers.

An Update on Orthobiologics: Cautious Optimism

Orthobiologics are rapidly growing in use given their potential to augment healing for multiple musculoskeletal conditions. Orthobiologics consist of a variety of treatments including platelet-rich plasma and stem cells that provide conceptual appeal in providing local delivery of growth factors and inflammation modulation. The lack of standardization in nomenclature and applications within the literature has led to a paucity of high-quality evidence to support their frequent use. The purpose of this review was to describe the current landscape of orthobiologics and the most recent evidence regarding their use.

Is there structural change on MRI in gluteal tendinopathy after treatment? Single outcome measure extension of an RCT

BACKGROUND

The etiology of tendinopathy remains controversial and it is unknown whether degenerative structural changes in tendinopathies are reversible.

HYPOTHESIS

There will be no structural change on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) taken > 2-years after treatment for gluteal tendinopathy.

STUDY DESIGN

Extension of a single site, double-blind, prospective randomized-controlled trial to analyze the additional outcome measure; MRI changes.

METHODS

University of Melbourne ethics approval number: 1852900, trial registration: ACTRN12613000677707. Participants with gluteal tendinopathy who had previously received a leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma injection (LR-PRP) or a corticosteroid injection (CSI) had a post treatment MRI between at least 2-years and up to 7 years following trial completion. A blinded, senior musculoskeletal radiologist graded all de-identified MRI scans using the Melbourne Hip Score (MHIP). The primary outcome measure was the change in overall pre- and post-treatment score.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 20) underwent MRI at mean time of 4.15 (SD 1.11; range 2-7) years after their initial treatment. There was no change in the overall mean MHIP score for the CSI group (Pre 4.3 (SD 2.3) Post 4.3 (SD 1.1), p = 1.00). Although there was an improvement in the LR-PRP group mean MHIP score (Pre 5.3 (SD 3.0) Post 4.77 (SD 2.5), p = 0.56) it was not statistically significant. However, in the LR-PRP intervention group, five out of nine of participants' MHIP score improved, with four of these improving by 2-4 points.

CONCLUSION

The hypothesis that there would be no improvement in MHIP scores following treatment of gluteal tendinopathy was supported. Findings of improvement in the LR-PRP group at 4 years would support further studies powered to look for structural improvement. These findings suggest that structural change following treatment for tendinopathy may be possible supporting the inclusion of MRI as a core outcome for future studies.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The study suggests that degenerative structural changes in tendons may be reversible.

Enthesitis in Spondyloarthritis Including Psoriatic Arthritis-To Inject or Not To Inject?: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

Enthesitis is a key manifestation of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and spondyloarthritis (SpA) and is considered to be the tissue where the disease initiates. Enthesitis leads to pain and substantial limitations in patients with PsA. Treatment is key in achieving remission or minimal disease activity. Whether it is safe to apply injections to entheseal tissue is unknown. This narrative review aimed to summarize the literature on the efficacy and tolerability of entheseal corticosteroid (CS) injections.

METHODS

The published literature was searched through PubMed as well as identifying relevant articles from their citations,  for articles on the anatomic location of the injection, tissue characteristics (eg, whether there is a tendon sheath), blind versus imaging-guided and entheseal versus perientheseal injections, and related studies in animals. Given that articles on SpA are limited, those on mechanical enthesopathies were also included.

FINDINGS

The literature on the efficacy and tolerability of entheseal CS injection in SpA and PsA are limited. In most articles on entheseal injection, the entheseal tissue has not actually been targeted. The decision of entheseal injection should be made on an individual basis, with consideration of the use of CS injection as the last treatment option following more conservative measures such as NSAIDs, physiotherapy, rest, and lifestyle modifications. Entheseal injection should be avoided in high-risk patients, such as those who have rupture at the enthesis. Diagnostic ultrasound is advised to ensure the presence of inflammation that can potentially benefit from corticosteroid injection, as well as the absence of rupture. In the authors' perspective, perientheseal injections should be tried before intraentheseal injections. Finally, ultrasound guidance for needle placement is strongly encouraged.

IMPLICATIONS

The literature on the efficacy and tolerability of entheseal CS injection in SpA and PsA is limited. With the lack of quality data, recommendations on entheseal corticosteroid injection remain expert opinion.

Efficacy of Ultrasonic Tenotomy and Debridement and Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy

Purpose

To determine the efficacy of treatment of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection and ultrasonic tenotomy and debridement (USTD) as well as risk factors for treatment failure.

Methods

This was a retrospective study including patients treated for LET with PRP or USTD between January 2018 and December 2021. The efficacy of both procedures was assessed using pain-related patient-reported outcome measures at the 12-week follow-up. Baseline subject characteristics and diagnostic ultrasound findings were analyzed as risk factors for failure of treatment. Failure was classified as a surgical indication for LET within a year of the PRP or USTD.

Results

Ultrasonic tenotomy and debridement and PRP both led to significant improvement in patient pain within the 12-week follow-up period. There was no significant difference in efficacy between the two procedures. Common extensor tendon tearing on ultrasound and Worker's Compensation cases were found to be risk factors for failure of USTD. Lateral collateral ligament complex involvement and injection were found to be risk factors for failure of PRP.

Conclusions

Platelet-rich plasma and USTD are both effective interventions for LET. They have separate risk factors for failure that should be taken in consideration while deciding the treatment approach. These procedures are minimally invasive alternatives to some of the more invasive surgical options to treat LET.

Type of study/level of evidence

Therapeutic III.

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.

Corticosteroid injections for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis are superior to platelet-rich plasma at 1 month but platelet-rich plasma is more effective at 6 months: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of level 1 and 2 studies

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing local injections of either platelet-rich plasma (PRP) or corticosteroid for the treatment of lateral elbow epicondylitis.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar was performed, and all level 1 and 2 randomized studies from 2000 to 2022 were included. Clinical symptoms, patient perceived outcomes, and pain were assessed by the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand questionnaire) and pain by the visual analog scale (VAS). Publication bias and risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tools. The modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) and the GRADE system were used to assess the quality of the body of evidence. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ2 and I2 statistics.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the analysis. Five studies had a high risk of bias, and the risk of bias across studies was assessed as unclear. There was no publication bias identified. Two of the four GRADE domains (inconsistency of results, imprecision of results) were downgraded to low quality, and the final GRADE assessment was downgraded to a low quality of evidence. The mean CMS score was 62.8, indicating fair quality. The pooled estimate for VAS at 1 month favored corticosteroids (P = .75) but favored PRP at three (P = .003) and six months (P = .0001). The pooled estimate for the DASH score favored corticosteroids at 1 month (P = .028) but favored PRP at three (P = .01) and six months (P = .107) CONCLUSION: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that PRP has no advantage over steroid injections within the first month of treatment, but that it is superior to steroids at both 3 and 6 months. These results also suggest that corticosteroids have a short-term beneficial effect during the early treatment period, although the quality of the available evidence is not very robust in support of this finding. However, these findings must all be viewed with caution as the high risk of bias and moderate to low quality of the included studies may not justify a recommendation of one treatment over another.

BESS patient care pathway: Tennis elbow

This article provides a guidance summary for the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system of the rating quality of the literature and grading the strength of available evidence. The process began by assembling a guideline development group of volunteers including orthopaedic surgeons, trainees, physiotherapists, rheumatologists, radiologists and patients. Virtual meetings were organised to set out explicit PICO questions, including specification of all important outcomes (including patient reported tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) as an important primary outcome) to determine the clinical effectiveness of common treatment options for LET compared with no treatment or placebo. Clinical librarian searched (date 31 April 2022) for available systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials reviewing the management of the LET January 2011 onwards and evidence was collected and summarized using explicit GRADE criteria for rating the quality of evidence that include study design, risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, and magnitude of effect. Recommendations were characterized as strong or weak (alternative terms conditional or discretionary) according to the quality of the supporting evidence and the balance between desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative management options. This informative summary provides the quality of available evidence for the management of LET.

Angiogenesis and Tissue Repair Depend on Platelet Dosing and Bioformulation Strategies Following Orthobiological Platelet-Rich Plasma Procedures: A Narrative Review

Angiogenesis is the formation of new blood vessel from existing vessels and is a critical first step in tissue repair following chronic disturbances in healing and degenerative tissues. Chronic pathoanatomic tissues are characterized by a high number of inflammatory cells; an overexpression of inflammatory mediators; such as tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin-1 (IL-1); the presence of mast cells, T cells, reactive oxygen species, and matrix metalloproteinases; and a decreased angiogenic capacity. Multiple studies have demonstrated that autologous orthobiological cellular preparations (e.g., platelet-rich plasma (PRP)) improve tissue repair and regenerate tissues. There are many PRP devices on the market. Unfortunately, they differ greatly in platelet numbers, cellular composition, and bioformulation. PRP is a platelet concentrate consisting of a high concentration of platelets, with or without certain leukocytes, platelet-derived growth factors (PGFs), cytokines, molecules, and signaling cells. Several PRP products have immunomodulatory capacities that can influence resident cells in a diseased microenvironment, inducing tissue repair or regeneration. Generally, PRP is a blood-derived product, regardless of its platelet number and bioformulation, and the literature indicates both positive and negative patient treatment outcomes. Strangely, the literature does not designate specific PRP preparation qualifications that can potentially contribute to tissue repair. Moreover, the literature scarcely addresses the impact of platelets and leukocytes in PRP on (neo)angiogenesis, other than a general one-size-fits-all statement that "PRP has angiogenic capabilities". Here, we review the cellular composition of all PRP constituents, including leukocytes, and describe the importance of platelet dosing and bioformulation strategies in orthobiological applications to initiate angiogenic pathways that re-establish microvasculature networks, facilitating the supply of oxygen and nutrients to impaired tissues.

Extracorporeal Shock Wave Combined with Warm Acupuncture for External Humeral Epicondylitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave combined with warm acupuncture for external humeral epicondylitis.

Methods

Eighty-two patients with external humeral epicondylitis were randomly divided into an observation group and a control group. Patients in the control group were treated with extracorporeal shock waves while those in observation group with warm acupuncture on the basis of the control group. Patients in both groups were evaluated by Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) before and after treatment. The inflammatory factors such as IL-6, IL-10, TNF-ɑ and clinical outcomes were contrasted before and after treatment.

Results

There were statistically significant differences in VAS score, MEPS score and DASH score between the two groups before and after treatment (P<0.05), and the improvement of each score in the observation group was more obvious than that in the control group. After treatment, the inflammatory factors of the two groups were lower than those before treatment, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The decrease of inflammatory factors in the observation group was more obvious than that in the control group. The total effective rate of the observation group was higher than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Extracorporeal shock wave combined with warm acupuncture could effectively improve the pain symptoms and dysfunction of external humeral epicondylitis and reduce the expression of inflammatory factors, and its effect may be better than that of extracorporeal shock wave treatment alone.

Clinical Trial Registration

ChiCTR2200066075.

[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.

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.

Global research trends on platelet-rich plasma for tendon and ligament injuries from the past two decades: A bibliometric and visualized study

Background

In sports medicine, tendon and ligament injuries are the most prevalent conditions, and with the booming of sports competition, the incidence of sports injuries is gradually increasing, investigating more potent therapeutic options is therefore becoming increasingly crucial. Platelet-rich plasma therapy has gained popularity as an effective and secure treatment in recent years. Currently, a faceted systematic and clear visual analysis is lacking in this research area.

Methods

The literature related to using platelet-rich plasma to treat ligament and tendon injuries from 2003 to 2022 in the core dataset of the Web of Science database was collected and analyzed visually using Citespace 6.1 software. Research hotspots and development trends were analyzed in terms of high-impact countries or regions, authors, research institutions, keywords, and cited literature.

Results

The literature comprised a total of 1,827 articles. The annual publication volume of relevant literature has demonstrated a significant development tendency as the field of platelet-rich plasma research for tendon and ligament injuries has heated up in recent years. With 678 papers, the United States came in top place, followed by China with 187 papers. Hosp Special Surg ranked first with 56 papers. The hot research topics analyzed by keywords were tennis elbow, anterior cruciate ligament, rotator cuff repair, achilles tendon, mesenchymal stem cells, guided tissue regeneration, network meta analysis, chronic patellar tendinopathy, and follow up.

Conclusion

Analysis of the research literature over the past 20 years shows that the United States and China will continue to dominate in terms of volume of publications based on annual volume and trends, with some collaboration among high-impact authors and further collaboration still needed in different countries and institutions. Platelet-rich plasma is widely used in the treatment of tendon ligament injuries. Its clinical efficacy is influenced by a number of factors, the main ones being the inconsistency in the preparation and composition of platelet-rich plasma and its related preparations, and the differences in efficacy due to different activation methods of platelet-rich plasma, as well as factors such as injection time, injection site, administration method, number of administrations, acidity and evaluation methods, In addition, the applicability to different injury diseases remains controversial. In recent years, the molecular biology of platelet-rich plasma for tendon ligament therapy has received increasing attention.

Lateral Epicondylitis: Critical Analysis Review of Current Nonoperative Treatments

»

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) or tennis elbow is a common cause of elbow pain in the general population, especially women in the fourth and fifth decades of life who participate in repetitive forceful movements involving the wrist and forearm.

»

The pathogenesis of this overuse injury is believed to start from an overload event leading to a microtear in or near the origin of the extensor carpi radialis brevis that is subsequently prone to additional injury and structural weakness over time.

»

Treatment of LE often begins with a wide variety of nonoperative modalities including rest, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, bracing, and physical therapy. For recalcitrant symptoms, additional nonoperative therapies are implemented; however, there remains a lack of comparative efficacy between these adjunct treatments.

»

In this article, we examine the available literature regarding nonoperative management of LE and provide supplementary insight into the effectiveness of current modalities.

Advances in the Clinical Application of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Foot and Ankle: A Review

Autologous and recombinant biologic substances have been generated as a result of the research into the cellular features of the healing process. Orthobiologics are increasingly being used in sports medicine and musculoskeletal surgery. Nevertheless, clinical data are limited; consequently, further studies are required, particularly in foot and ankle pathologies. This review aims to provide evidence of the most recent literature results and ignite the interest of orthopedic specialists eager for an update about the most current discussion on platelet-rich plasma (PRP) clinical applications in the foot and ankle fields. Previous studies have shown that platelet-rich plasma can be beneficial in treating various conditions, such as chronic foot ulcers, osteoarthritis, Achilles tendinopathy, etc. Despite the positive effects of PRP on various musculoskeletal conditions, more prospective studies are needed to confirm its effectiveness at treating ankle and foot pathologies. In addition to clinical trials, other factors, such as the quality of the research and the procedures involved, must be considered before they can be used in patients. More long-term evaluations are needed to support or oppose its application in treating foot and ankle disorders. We present the most extensive review of PRP's clinical applications in the foot and ankle field.

Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Tendinopathy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections versus placebo in the treatment of tendinopathy.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov through November 2020 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the clinical efficacy of PRP versus placebo for the treatment of tendinopathy. Outcomes were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis with random-effects models.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 13 RCTs were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed no significant difference in pain relief at 4 to 6 weeks (standard mean difference [SMD]: -0.18, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: -0.62 to 0.26), 12 weeks (SMD: -0.14, 95% CI: -0.55 to 0.26), and ≥24 weeks (SMD: -0.56, 95% CI: -1.16 to 0.05) or function improvement at 4 to 6 weeks (SMD: 0.11, 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.35), 12 weeks (SMD: 0.18, 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.49), and ≥24 weeks (SMD: 0.26, 95% CI: -0.14 to 0.66) for PRP compared with placebo in the treatment of tendinopathy. The sensitivity analysis indicated no significant difference in pain relief or function improvement at 12 weeks between PRP and placebo for different types of tendinopathies, treatment regimens, leukocyte concentrations, or cointerventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Platelet-rich plasma injection was not found to be superior to placebo in the treatment of tendinopathy, as measured by pain relief and functional improvement at 4 to 6, 12, and ≥24 weeks.

Ultrasound-Guided Injection of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma for Refractory Lateral Epicondylitis of Humerus: Case Series

Refractory lateral epicondylitis (RLE) is a tendinopathy of the elbow with less effective conservation treatment. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a new treatment option for RLE because of its repair-promoting effect on tissues. Although evidence demonstrates the efficacy of PRP in treating tendinopathies, the therapeutic utility of ultrasound-guided PRP injection for RLE is unknown. Here, we report two cases of RLE treated with PRP. The first patient was a 78-year-old man who received an unknown dose of local glucocorticoid injection at the local community clinic in June 2016. His pain recurred after exertion. The second patient was a 54-year-old woman who received a glucocorticoid injection (0.5 mL of compound betamethasone and 1.5 mL of 0.9% normal saline) in October 2020. Her pain could not be relieved. A physician diagnosed patients with RLE based on their medical history, symptoms, and clinical signs. The doctor injected PRP (the first patient in November 2020, the second in March 2021) under ultrasound guidance into the patient's attachment point of the extensor tendon at the lateral humeral epicondyle. The doctor evaluated the effectiveness of the treatment by ultrasonography, visual analogue scale, and the patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation. After four weeks of treatment, the pain was relieved, and functions continued to improve in the following three months. Moreover, the ultrasonography showed that the damaged tendons were repaired. Together, we demonstrate that ultrasound-guided PRP injection could considerably relieve pain, improve elbow joint functions in patients with RLE, and provide visible evidence that PRP repairs tendon damage.

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.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopic Debridement of Tennis Elbow Nonresponsive to Nonoperative Measures Is a Good Option and Clinical Outcomes Are Associated With Radiographic Outcomes

Chronic lateral epicondylitis, or "tennis elbow," is rare and affects 1% to 3% of adults annually. The initial treatment should be nonoperative and include physical therapy, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medication, rest, bracing, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, and injection therapy with various agents such as autologous blood, dextrose, corticosteroids, or platelet-rich plasma. The condition is self-limited, and approximately 80% of cases resolve. In refractory cases, arthroscopic release with debridement is a good surgical option but is not superior to open or percutaneous techniques. Recent research shows that a reduction in magnetic resonance imaging signal intensity in patients who respond to arthroscopic treatment correlates with pain reduction and functional outcome improvement.

Comparison between acupotomy and corticosteroid injection for patients diagnosed with different classifications of tennis elbow: a randomized control trial

BACKGROUND

Tennis elbow has long been one of the most controversial subjects in orthopaedics. Many scholars thought the use of open or arthroscopic surgery was reserved for patients with refractory symptoms. Therapy with percutaneous acupotomy performed under local anaesthesia also removes degenerated tissue, releases strain, and therefore provides an alternative treatment option to surgical excision.

METHODS

The aim of this single-blinded randomized control trial was to examine the long-term clinical effectiveness of a nonsurgical percutaneous release technique (acupotomy) and the current recommended treatment (steroid injection) in people diagnosed with a refractory tennis elbow. Ninety patients with refractory symptoms were included. The intervention period was 6 weeks. According to the classification, 38 patients had extra-articular tennis elbow, 36 patients had intraarticular tennis elbow, and 16 patients had mixed type tennis elbow. Forty-five patients were randomly assigned to treatment with percutaneous release by acupotomy according to their classified condition, and 45 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with steroid injection alone. The visual analogue scale (VAS), a tenderness assessment, a grip assessment, and the Nirschl staging system were used for outcome evaluation at pretreatment and the posttreatment timepoints from 12 to 48 weeks.

RESULTS

During the first weeks, there were no differences observed between the groups. By 6, 24 and 48 weeks, significant differences were observed between the two groups. The acupotomy group scored significantly better in visual analogue scale score (VAS) of pain, tenderness during palpation, pain-free grip strength (PFGS) and Nirschl staging than the corticosteroid group.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with lateral epicondylitis, acupotomy is just as effective as corticosteroid injections in the short term (< 6 weeks). In the long term, acupotomy has greater efficacy and is associated with a lower rate of recurrence than corticosteroid injections in the management of lateral epicondylitis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The National Health Commission announced the "ethical review measures for biomedical research involving people" in 2019, which was not mandatory in previous studies.

Position statement: nonoperative management of lateral epicondylitis in adults

We sought to compare methods of nonsurgical treatment of lateral epicondylitis in men and women older than 18 years to develop a guideline intended for orthopedic surgeons and other health care providers who assess, counsel and care for these patients. We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane through to Mar. 9, 2021, and included all English-language studies comparing nonsurgical approaches. We compared physiotherapy versus no active treatment, corticosteroids versus placebo, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) versus placebo, and autologous blood injection versus placebo. Outcomes of interest were pain outcomes (visual analogue scale scores) and functional outcomes. We rated the quality of the evidence and strength of recommendations using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. This guideline will benefit patients seeking nonsurgical intervention for lateral epicondylitis by improving counselling on nonsurgical treatment options and possible outcomes. It will also benefit surgical providers by improving their knowledge of various nonsurgical approaches. Data presented could be used to develop frameworks and tools for shared decision-making.

Exploring the clinical efficacy of different nonsurgical rehabilitation interventions for humeral lateral epicondylitis: A protocol for network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Lateral epicondylitis is a common musculoskeletal disorder characterized by the decreased grip and upper limb strength and pain in the lateral aspect of the elbow joint. At present, shock wave, corticosteroid injection, platelet-rich plasma injection, and Dextrose prolotherapy therapy nonsurgical rehabilitation treatment methods are commonly used in clinical. However, the conclusions of studies comparing treatment efficacy between them are controversial, with most studies focusing on limited comparisons and a lack of direct and indirect comparisons between them, making it difficult to have a clearer and more comprehensive understanding of the efficacy between them.

PURPOSE

To comprehensively compare the effectiveness of shockwave, corticosteroid injection, platelet-rich plasma injection, and Dextrose prolotherapy therapy for the treatment of external humeral lateral epicondylitis using a reticulo-meta-analysis.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of shock wave, corticosteroid injection, platelet-rich plasma injection, and Dextrose prolotherapy therapy for the treatment of external humeral lateral epicondylitis were searched in PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wan-Fang databases for the period January 1, 2016 to January 1, 2021 for each database. Two investigators independently screened the literature, extracted data according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and evaluated the quality of the literature in parallel. Statistical analyses were performed using Stata 14.0 software to compare differences in efficacy between treatment measures using ratio and 95% confidence interval as effect indicators and to rank efficacy.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials with a total of 289 patients with external humeral lateral epicondylitis were included, involving 4 nonsurgical rehabilitation measures and 6 intervention options. Quadrilateral ring to test the inconsistency of each closed-loop study finding, and the results show that the inconsistency factor was bounded at 1.65, with lower 95% confidence interval of 0.47 and 2.84 for both, which in summary indicates that the formation between the treatment measures in this study indicates that each closed-loop inconsistency was good. The SUCRA curve showed that platelet-rich plasma injection + shockwave was the first treatment with an area under the curve of 86.9%. Six treatment measures were ranked as follows: platelet-rich plasma injection + shockwave > platelet-rich plasma injection > shockwave > corticosteroid > corticosteroid + shockwave > prolotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

It is believed that in the course of clinical practice, platelet-rich plasma injection combined with shockwave therapy can be preferred for patients with humeral epicondylitis.

The Effects of Intra-Articular Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Narrative Review

Platelet-rich plasma injections have been a therapeutic option with exponential growth in several pathologies in the last decades, particularly musculoskeletal for their effect on improving pain and functionality. Rheumatoid arthritis is a chronic joint disease, which involves inflammation of the synovial membrane with cartilage and juxta-articular bone destruction. Conventional and biological disease-modifying anti-rheumatoid drugs are the cornerstone of the treatment of this disease. However, the use of intra-articular glucocorticoids is often necessary and the role of platelet-rich plasma injections in these patients remains uncertain.

A literature review was carried out through the PubMed database, Cochrane and Google Scholar for the search terms “rheumatoid arthritis” and “platelet-rich plasma”. Eleven studies have been included in this review: two of these are in vitro studies, five are animal studies, one case report, two case series and one randomized controlled trial. Most of the studies demonstrated a decrease in pain and inflammatory mediators and improvement of functional outcomes, with no severe adverse effects reported.

However, the quantity and quality of literature about the effects and safety of plasma-rich plasma injections in rheumatoid arthritis patients are still scarce. It is essential that well-designed randomized controlled trials are made on this topic to understand if platelet-rich plasma may be useful as a coadjuvant therapy in rheumatoid arthritis.

Effects of Heavy Slow Resistance Training Combined With Corticosteroid Injections or Tendon Needling in Patients With Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A 3-Arm Randomized Double-Blinded Placebo-Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Lateral elbow tendinopathy is a disabling tendon overuse injury. It remains unknown if a corticosteroid injection (CSI) or tendon needling (TN) combined with heavy slow resistance (HSR) training is superior to HSR alone in treating lateral elbow tendinopathy.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose was to investigate the effects of HSR combined with either (1) a CSI, (2) TN, or (3) placebo needling (PN) as treatment for lateral elbow tendinopathy. We hypothesized that 12 weeks of HSR in combination with a CSI or TN would have superior effects compared with PN at 12, 26, and 52 (primary endpoint) weeks' follow-up on primary (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] score) and secondary outcomes in patients with chronic unilateral lateral elbow tendinopathy.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A total of 60 patients with chronic unilateral lateral elbow tendinopathy were randomized to perform 12 weeks of home-based HSR with elastic band exercises combined with either (1) a CSI, (2) TN, or (3) PN, and at 12, 26, and 52 weeks, we assessed the primary outcome, the DASH score, and secondary outcomes: shortened version of the DASH (QuickDASH) score, pain (numerical rating scale [NRS] score), pain-free grip strength, and hypervascularization (power Doppler area).

RESULTS

A CSI, TN, and PN improved patient outcomes equally based on the DASH (Δ20 points), QuickDASH (Δ21 points), and NRS (Δ2.5 points) scores after 12 weeks. Further, after 12 weeks, a CSI also resulted in decreased hypervascularization (power Doppler area) compared with PN (Δ-2251 pixels, P = .0418). Except for the QuickDASH score (CSI increased score by Δ15 points compared with PN; P = .0427), there were no differences between the groups after 52 weeks.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that 12 weeks of HSR improved symptoms in both the short and the long term and that a CSI or TN did not amplify this effect. In addition, a CSI seemed to impair patient-reported outcomes compared with HSR alone at long-term follow-up.

REGISTRATION

NCT02521298 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

The use of platelet-rich plasma therapy in treating tennis elbow: A critical review of randomised control trials

Tennis elbow (TE) is a painful and debilitating condition of the elbow. Recently, the use of orthobiologics, such as platelet-rich-plasma (PRP), has been proposed to promote tendon regeneration. Despite their popularity, there is a paucity of updated reviews on the use of PRP compared with other treatment modalities for treating TE. The aim of this review is to summarise high quality studies that compare the use of PRP therapy with other therapies for TE and to identify areas where further research is warranted. This systematic review was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases was undertaken in May 2021. Articles were screened for the following criteria: randomised control trials (RCTs) involving PRP in at least one of the treatment arms for tennis elbow. The quality of the RCTs included were analysed for their risk of bias using the modified Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for randomised trials. A total of 20 RCTs of which 1520 TE patients were analysed. The RCTs included in this review compared PRP with various treatment modalities routinely used in clinical practice such as physiotherapy, steroid injections, Autologous Whole Blood (AWB) and surgical interventions. With regards to the quality of RCTs, collectively, selection bias was found to be low risk however, performance bias in terms of blinding of participants and personnel performed poorly. Of the 20 RCTs, only 5 studies were classified as low risk of bias. In these 5 studies, 2 RCTs compared PRP with steroids and reported contrasting results, 1 RCT compared PRP with AWB injections which reported both to be similarly efficacious, 3 RCTs included a placebo group and only 1 reported superior effects with PRP. There are 2 main types of PRP classified according to the number of pro-inflammatory leukocyte i.e. leukocyte-rich and leukocyte-poor PRP. However, only 8 studies documented the formulation of PRP used. While the heterogeneity of PRP formulations could in-part explain the reported differences in outcomes, overall there is limited robust evidence to recommend PRP therapy for TE. Further research is required to establish the optimal formulation and administration of PRP injections. Proper documentation of TE patients need to be standardised before concrete recommendations on the use of PRP therapy may be offered.

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.

Effectiveness of Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy Treatment Depends on the Content of Biologically Active Compounds in Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma

Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection is an alternative treatment option for patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy. The treatment is supposed to accelerate tissue regeneration by providing high concentrations of growth factors derived from platelets. The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between the content of biologically active compounds in PRP and the clinical effect of the treatment. Thirty patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy treated with a single PRP injection, were evaluated. The pain intensity (measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS)), the pressure pain threshold (PPT), the grip strength and strength of the main arm and forearm muscle groups, and the functional outcome (measured by the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaires), were assessed before PRP injection and at one- and three-months follow-up. Flow cytometry measurements of the growth factors and inflammatory cytokines in PRP were performed, and the results were used to establish the relationship between those molecules and the clinical outcome. After three months from the intervention, the minimal clinically important difference in pain reduction and functional improvement was observed in 67% and 83% of patients, respectively. Positive correlations were found between the extent of pain reduction after three months and concentrations in the PRP of platelets, epidermal growth factor (EGF), vascular endothelial growth factor, and platelet-derived growth factors. The concentration of EGF in the PRP significantly correlated with an improvement in grip strength, strength of wrist extensors, and the size of functional improvement measured by the PRTEE. The local injection of PRP is a safe and effective treatment option for lateral elbow tendinopathy, and the clinical outcome is correlated with concentrations of its biologically active compounds.

Assessment of Characteristics and Methodological Quality of the Top 50 Most Cited Articles on Platelet-Rich Plasma in Musculoskeletal Medicine

Background:

The wide range of clinical applications and controversial scientific evidence associated with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy in musculoskeletal medicine requires an examination of the most commonly cited studies within this field.

Purpose:

To identify the 50 most cited articles on PRP, assess their study design, and determine any correlations between the number of citations and level of evidence (LoE) or methodological quality.

Study Design:

Cross-sectional study.

Methods:

The Web of Science database was queried to identify the top 50 most cited articles on PRP in orthopaedic surgery. Bibliometric characteristics, number of citations, and LoE were recorded. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS), Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS), and Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics (MIBO). The Pearson correlation coefficient and Spearman correlation coefficient (r_S) were used to determine the degree of correlation between the number of citations or citation density and LoE, MCMS, MINORS score, and MIBO score. Student t tests were performed for 2-group comparisons.

Results:

The top 50 articles were published between 2005 and 2016 in 21 journals. The mean number of citations and citation density were 241 ± 94 (range, 151-625) and 23 ± 8, respectively, and the mean LoE was 2.44 ± 1.67, with 15 studies classified as LoE 1. The mean MCMS, MINORS score, and MIBO score were 66.9 ± 12.6, 16 ± 4.7, and 12.4 ± 3.7, respectively. No correlation was observed between the number of citations or citation density and LoE, MCMS, MINORS score, and MIBO score. A significant difference (P = .02) was noted in LoE in articles from the United States (3.56 ± 1.7) versus outside the United States (2 ± 1.5). Seven of the 8 in vivo studies were published between 2005 and 2010, whereas 19 of the 25 clinical outcome investigations were published between 2011 and 2016. Studies that were published more recently were found to significantly correlate with number of citations (r_S = –0.38; P = .01), citation density (r_S = 0.36; P = .01), and higher LoE (r_S = 0.47; P = .01).

Conclusion:

The top 50 most cited articles on PRP consisted of high LoE and fair methodological quality. There was a temporal shift in research from in vivo animal studies toward investigations focused on clinical outcomes.

Bibliometric analysis of the top 50 highly cited articles on platelet-rich plasma in osteoarthritis and tendinopathy

The primary goal of this study was to compile the top 50 most cited articles on the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP). A search of relevant studies was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines in Web of Science. The top 25 most cited articles in osteoarthritis and tendinopathy were then compiled and evaluated. Level 1 evidence articles constituted the majority of the studies (64%) and were more likely to have a higher citation density. Altmetric data was highest for level 1 systematic reviews. Of the articles that report a positive outcome for PRP, 13% (2/16) had low risk of bias. This study defines the most cited and influential publications regarding PRP to further research in this area.

Platelet-Rich Plasma as an Orthobiologic: Clinically Relevant Considerations

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous blood-derived product processed to concentrate platelets and the associated growth factors. PRP has been shown to be relatively well-tolerated and safe to use for a number of conditions in humans, equines, and canines. There are multiple commercial systems that have been validated for canine use. These systems use a variety of methodologies to produce a PRP product. However, PRP products have been shown to differ greatly between systems. Further study is needed to fully elucidate optimal component concentrations for various indications.

Platelet-rich plasma vs. corticosteroid injections for the treatment of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis: a cost-effectiveness Markov decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Both platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroid injections may be used to treat lateral epicondylitis. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PRP injections vs. corticosteroid injections for the treatment of recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis.

METHODS

Markov modeling was used to analyze the base-case 45-year-old patient with recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis, unresponsive to conservative measures, treated with a single injection of PRP or triamcinolone 40 mg/mL. Transition probabilities were derived from randomized controlled trials, quality-of-life (QOL) values from the Tufts University Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry reported using Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores, and costs from institution financial records. Analyses were performed from health care and societal perspectives. Outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), reported as US dollars / quality-adjusted life-year (USDs/QALY) and net monetary benefit (NMB) to represent the values of an intervention in monetary terms. Willingness-to-pay thresholds were set at $50,000 and $100,000. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed over 10,000 iterations.

RESULTS

Both PRP and triamcinolone 40-mg/mL injections were considered cost-effective interventions from a health care and societal perspective below the WTP threshold of $50,000. From a health care perspective, PRP injections were dominant compared with triamcinolone 40-mg/mL injections, with an ICER of -$5846.97/QALY. PRP injections provided an NMB of $217,863.98, whereas triamcinolone 40 mg/mL provided an NMB of $197,534.18. From a societal perspective, PRP injections were dominant compared to triamcinolone 40-mg/mL injections, with an ICER of -$9392.33/QALY. PRP injections provided an NMB of $214,820.16, whereas triamcinolone 40 mg/mL provided an NMB of $193,199.75.

CONCLUSIONS

Both PRP and triamcinolone 40-mg/mL injections provided cost-effective treatments from health care and societal perspectives. Overall, PRP injections were the dominant treatment, with the greatest NMB for recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis over the time horizon of 5 years.

Cell-based therapy of the elbow: evidence for lateral tendinopathy-a review on current treatments

PURPOSE

Cell-based therapies are on the rise in treating intra and extraarticular pathologies, trying to avoid surgical intervention and support local repair processes. Therefore, the aim was to summarize current evidence-based treatment options for a cell-based therapy around the elbow.

METHODS

Through a literature review up-to date treatment algorithms and therapies have been identified and have been rated according to their evidence level for clinical recommendation.

RESULTS

Regarding the four extraarticular anatomical regions of the elbow (anterior, medial, posterior and lateral) and the joint itself, the lateral elbow and its´ tendinopathies as well as the use of cell-based treatment options have been extensively studied and, therefore, allow for clear and evidence-based recommendations. The remaining three regions as wells as the intraarticular application do not show enough evidence for a clinical recommendation.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion the cell-based approach for treating elbow pathologies can only be recommended for the lateral elbow, as there has been shown sufficient evidence for the extraarticular application. It has to be mentioned, that the results from the lateral elbow maybe transferred to other extra-articular tendinopathies, as the lack of evidence may be due to the rare appearance of posterior, medial and anterior tendon affection. No recommendation can be given for intra-articular use.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

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.

The effect of leucocyte concentration of platelet-rich plasma on outcomes in patients with lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

HYPOTHESIS

The concentration of leukocytes influences the quality of platelet-rich plasma (PRP). However, there is no consensus on which type of PRP based on the concentration of leukocytes is the best for lateral epicondylitis (LE).

METHODS

We systematically searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until March 1, 2020. Studies involving randomized controlled trials, patients with LE, and treatment with PRP injections were included. PRP was classified into leukocyte-poor (LP) PRP and leukocyte-rich (LR) PRP. LR-PRP was defined as PRP with a white blood cell concentration exceeding that of whole blood (4.0-10.0 per μL³), whereas LP-PRP was defined as PRP with a lower white blood cell concentration than that of whole blood. The efficacy of PRP was assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and success rates.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials (six involving LP-PRP and five involving LR-PRP) were eligible for inclusion in this review. Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis to evaluate the VAS score. Regarding short-term follow-up, there was no difference in the VAS scores between the LP-PRP and control groups (standard mean difference [SMD], 0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.29 to 0.30; P = 0.97), with no heterogeneity (I² = 0%). There was also no difference in the VAS scores between the LR-PRP and control groups (SMD, -0.19; 95% CI, -0.57 to 0.20; P = 0.34), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 56.7%). Regarding long-term follow-up, there was no difference in the VAS scores between the LP-PRP and control groups (SMD, -0.73; 95% CI, -1.69 to 0.23; P = 0.134) with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 88.4%). The LR-PRP group had lower VAS scores than the control group (SMD, -1.06; 95% CI, -2.02 to -0.09; P = 0.032) with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 92%). In the LP-PRP group, there was no significant difference in the success rate (odds ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.07-16.47; P = 0.956) with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 87.7%). In the LR-PRP group, however, the patients who received PRP had a higher success rate than those in the control group (odds ratio, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.67-4.85; P < 0.01) with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 82.9%).

CONCLUSION

LR-PRP may provide pain relief and successful outcomes for patients with LE compared with alternative local injections. Better results were observed with the use of LR-PRP than with the use of LP-PRP.

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.

Orthobiologics: Diagnosis and Treatment of Common Tendinopathies

Orthobiologics, including platelet-rich plasma, prolotherapy, and mesenchymal stem cells, are seeing increasing use in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA), muscle injury, and tendinopathy. This article reviews the biology and applications of orthobiologics in tendons, muscles, and joints, and focuses on platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Clinical evidence-based literature related to the use of PRP in the treatment of rotator cuff injury, lateral epicondylosis, Achilles tendinopathy, plantar fasciitis, knee OA, and acute muscle injury are discussed.

Comparison of the effectiveness of extensor muscle strengthening exercise by itself, exercise with polydeoxyribonucleotide injection, and exercise with extracorporeal shockwave therapy in lateral epicondylitis: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Extensor muscle strengthening exercises with counterforce braces (EX) is a conventional conservative treatment for lateral epicondylitis (LE) of the elbow. In addition, polydeoxyribonucleotide (PDRN) or extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) has been recently used for LE.

Methods

Sixty-three patients with chronic LE participated in this study and randomly allocated in three groups (G1: EX, G2: EX+PDRN injection, and G3: EX+ESWT). All of the three groups were taught to perform EX at the first out-patient department (OPD) visit. Group 2 was injected with 3 mL PDRN (5.625 mg/3 mL), while group 3 received ESWT at the first OPD visit. Visual analog scale pain score, Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), and ultrasonographic examination were checked before, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks after the treatments.

Results

Overall functional scores and ultrasonographic findings in all three groups improved after treatment. The mean MEPS in group 2 improved more than groups 1 and 3 at 6 weeks (G1, 56.9>62.4; G2, 54.3>65.0; G3, 55.7>62.6), and more than group 1 at 12 weeks (G1, 56.9>67.9; G2, 54.3>73.6). The mean common extensor tendon depth (CETD) on ultrasonography in group 2 increased more than groups 1 and 3 at 6 and 12 weeks (6 weeks: G1, 0.385>0.386; G2, 0.332>0.392; G3, 0.334>0.357; 12 weeks: G1, 0.385>0.409; G2, 0.332>0.438; G3, 0.334>0.405 [cm]).

Conclusions

PDRN injections combined with EX exhibited a greater improvement in mean MEPS and mean CETD compared to EX only or EX combined with ESWT for LE within the 12 weeks follow-up.

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.

Lateral epicondylosis: A literature review to link pathology and tendon function to tissue-level treatment and ergonomic interventions

BACKGROUND

Common treatments for lateral epicondylosis (LE) focus on tissue healing. Ergonomic advice is suggested broadly, but recommendations based on biomechanical motion parameters associated with functional activities are rarely made. This review analyzes the role of body functions and activities in LE and integrates the findings to suggest motion parameters applicable to education and interventions relevant to activities and life roles for patients.

PURPOSE

This study examines LE pathology, tendon and muscle biomechanics, and population exposure outlining potentially hazardous activities and integrates those to provide motion parameters for ergonomic interventions to treat or prevent LE. A disease model is discussed to align treatment approaches to the stage of LE tendinopathy.

STUDY DESIGN

Integrative review METHODS: We conducted in-depth searches using PubMed, Medline, and government websites. All levels of evidence were included, and the framework for behavioral research from the National Institutes of Health was used to synthesize ergonomic research.

RESULTS

The review broadened the diagnosis of LE from a tendon ailment to one affecting the enthesis of the capitellum. It reinforced the continuum of severity to encompass degeneration as well as regeneration. Systematic reviews confirmed the availability of evidence for tissue-based treatments, but evidence of well-defined harm reducing occupational interventions was scattered amongst evidence levels. Integration of biomechanical studies and population information gave insight into types of potentially hazardous activities and provided a theoretical basis for limiting hazardous exposures to wrist extensor tendons by reducing force, compression, and shearing during functional activities.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may broaden the first treatment approach from a passive, watchful waiting into an active exploration and reduction of at-risk activities and motions. Including the findings into education modules may provide patients with the knowledge to lastingly reduce potentially hazardous motions during their daily activities, and researchers to define parameters of ergonomic interventions.

Autologous blood and platelet-rich plasma injection therapy for lateral elbow pain

BACKGROUND

Autologous whole blood or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are commonly used to treat lateral elbow pain (also known as tennis elbow or lateral epicondylitis or epicondylalgia). Based on animal models and observational studies, these injections may modulate tendon injury healing, but randomised controlled trials have reported inconsistent results regarding benefit for people with lateral elbow pain.

OBJECTIVES

To review current evidence on the benefit and safety of autologous whole blood or platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection for treatment of people with lateral elbow pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase for published trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal for ongoing trials, on 18 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing autologous whole blood or PRP injection therapy to another therapy (placebo or active treatment, including non-pharmacological therapies, and comparison between PRP and autologous blood) for lateral elbow pain. The primary comparison was PRP versus placebo. Major outcomes were pain relief (≥ 30% or ≥ 50%), mean pain, mean function, treatment success, quality of life, withdrawal due to adverse events, and adverse events; the primary time point was three months.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies with 2337 participants; 56% of participants were female, mean age varied between 36 and 53 years, and mean duration of symptoms ranged from 1 to 22 months. Seven trials had three intervention arms. Ten trials compared autologous blood or PRP injection to placebo injection (primary comparison). Fifteen trials compared autologous blood or PRP injection to glucocorticoid injection. Four studies compared autologous blood to PRP. Two trials compared autologous blood or PRP injection plus tennis elbow strap and exercise versus tennis elbow strap and exercise alone. Two trials compared PRP injection to surgery, and one trial compared PRP injection and dry needling to dry needling alone. Other comparisons include autologous blood versus extracorporeal shock wave therapy; PRP versus arthroscopic surgery; PRP versus laser; and autologous blood versus polidocanol. Most studies were at risk of selection, performance, and detection biases, mainly due to inadequate allocation concealment and lack of participant blinding. We found moderate-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias) to show that autologous blood or PRP injection probably does not provide clinically significant improvement in pain or function compared with placebo injection at three months. Further, low-certainty evidence (downgraded for bias and imprecision) suggests that PRP may not increase risk for adverse events. We are uncertain whether autologous blood or PRP injection improves treatment success (downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness) or withdrawals due to adverse events (downgraded for bias and twice for imprecision). No studies measured health-related quality of life, and no studies reported pain relief (> 30% or 50%) at three months. At three months, mean pain was 3.7 points (0 to 10; 0 is best) with placebo and 0.16 points better (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 better to 0.29 worse; 8 studies, 523 participants) with autologous blood or PRP injection, for absolute improvement of 1.6% better (6% better to 3% worse). At three months, mean function was 27.5 points (0 to 100; 0 is best) with placebo and 1.86 points better (95% CI 4.9 better to 1.25 worse; 8 studies, 502 participants) with autologous blood or PRP injection, for absolute benefit of 1.9% (5% better to 1% worse), and treatment success was 121 out of 185 (65%) with placebo versus 125 out of 187 (67%) with autologous blood or PRP injection (risk ratio (RR) 1.00; 95% CI 0.83 to 1.19; 4 studies, 372 participants), for absolute improvement of 0% (11.1% lower to 12.4% higher). Regarding harm, we found very low-certainty evidence to suggest that we are uncertain whether withdrawal rates due to adverse events differed. Low-certainty evidence suggests that autologous blood or PRP injection may not increase adverse events compared with placebo injection. Withdrawal due to adverse events occurred in 3 out of 39 (8%) participants treated with placebo versus 1 out of 41 (2%) treated with autologous blood or PRP injection (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.92; 1 study), for an absolute difference of 5.2% fewer (7.5% fewer to 14.8% more). Adverse event rates were 35 out of 208 (17%) with placebo versus 41 out of 217 (19%) with autologous blood or PRP injection (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.72; 5 studies; 425 participants), for an absolute difference of 2.4% more (4% fewer to 12% more). At six and twelve months, no clinically important benefit for mean pain or function was observed with autologous blood or PRP injection compared with placebo injection.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Data in this review do not support the use of autologous blood or PRP injection for treatment of lateral elbow pain. These injections probably provide little or no clinically important benefit for pain or function (moderate-certainty evidence), and it is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence) whether they improve treatment success and pain relief > 50%, or increase withdrawal due to adverse events. Although risk for harm may not be increased compared with placebo injection (low-certainty evidence), injection therapies cause pain and carry a small risk of infection. With no evidence of benefit, the costs and risks are not justified.

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.

Comparative analysis of leucocyte poor vs leucocyte rich platelet-rich plasma in the management of lateral epicondylitis: Systematic review & meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review & Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to comparatively analyse the efficacy and safety of using leucocyte-poor platelet rich plasma (LP-PRP) against leucocyte-rich platelet rich plasma (LR-PRP) in the management of lateral epicondylitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted independent and duplicate electronic database searches including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library till September 2020 for randomised controlled trials analyzing the efficacy and safety of LP-PRP and LR-PRP in the management of lateral epicondylitis. Visual Analog Score(VAS) for pain, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score, Patient Reported Tennis-Elbow Evaluation (PRETEE) Score, Mayo Elbow Performance Score(MEPS) and adverse events were the outcomes analyzed. Analysis was performed in R-platform using OpenMeta[Analyst] software.

RESULTS

We performed a single arm meta-analysis of 26 studies involving 2034 patients. On analysis it was noted that significant improvement was noted in the VAS for pain (p < 0.001), DASH score (p < 0.001), PRETEE score (p < 0.001) and MEPS (p < 0.027) compared to their pre-operative state. No significant increase in adverse events were noted compared to the control group (p = 0.170). While stratifying the results based on the type of PRP used, no significant difference was noted between the use of LP-PRP or LR-PRP in any of the above-mentioned outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

PRP is a safe and effective treatment option for lateral epicondylitis with clinical improvements in pain and functional scores and both types of PRP (LR-PRP & LP-PRP) offer similar results.