Whiplash injury successfully treated with prolotherapy: a case report with long-term follow up

Background: Chronic whiplash-associated disorder (WAD) can develop after flexion/extension injuries and may be refractory to standard-of-care therapies. Aim: To present successful treatment of severe, longstanding, treatment resistant WAD with prolotherapy. Materials & methods: Four, monthly sessions of fluoroscopically guided prolotherapy with phenol-glycerin-glucose. Electronic data on pain (visual analog score), disability (Oswestry Disability Index), pain interference, depression, anxiety, sleep and quality of life were collected with University of Washington's (WA, USA) online tool for a total of 21 months. This study conforms to the Case Report Guidelines (CARE). Results: Significant improvement was achieved and maintained through 18 months after treatment in all assessed pain and functional measures. Conclusion: Regenerative medicine, including prolotherapy may be an appropriate treatment option for carefully selected patients with WAD.

Regenerative Medicine for Axial and Radicular Spine-Related Pain: A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Regenerative injection-based therapy has established itself as a therapeutic option for the management of a variety of painful musculoskeletal conditions. The aim of this work was to review the current literature regarding regenerative injection therapy for axial/radicular spine pain.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted on the use of regenerative medicine for axial/radicular spine pain. Eligible articles analyzed the therapeutic injection effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP), prolotherapy, or mesenchymal signaling cells (MSCs) via intradiscal, facet joint, epidural, or sacroiliac joint delivery.

RESULTS

Regarding intradiscal PRP, there are level I/IV studies supporting its use. Regarding intradiscal prolotherapy, there are level III to IV studies supporting its use. Regarding intradiscal MSCs, there are level I/IV studies supporting its use with the exception of one level IV study that found no significant improvement at 12 months. Regarding facet joint injections with PRP, there are level I/IV studies supporting its use. Regarding facet joint injections with prolotherapy, there are level IV studies supporting its use, though the one level I study did not demonstrate any statistical significance supporting its use. Regarding epidural injections with PRP, there are level I/IV studies supporting its use. Regarding epidural injections with prolotherapy, there are level IV studies supporting its use, though the one level I study did not demonstrate statistical significance beyond 48 hours. Regarding sacroiliac joint injections with PRP, there are level I/IV studies supporting its use. Regarding sacroiliac joint injections with prolotherapy, there are level I/III studies supporting its use.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, there are level I studies to support the use of PRP and MSC injections for discogenic pain; facet joint injections with PRP; epidural injections of autologous conditioned serum and epidural prolotherapy; and PRP and prolotherapy for sacroiliac joint pain. One level I study showed that facet joint prolotherapy has no significant benefit. Notably, no intervention has multiple published level I studies.

Regenerative Sports Medicine: Past, Present, and Future (Adapted From the PASSOR Legacy Award Presentation; AAPMR; October 2016)

Regenerative medicine has shown dramatic expanse and evolution in the past decade. Within that milieu, physiatrists are taking an active role in research, clinical care delivery, and education. The purpose of this review is to provide a balance among evidence, theory, experience, clinical trends, and the foreseeable future. We focus on the literature that reports the research with the best methodology in each practice area, recognizing that the level of evidence varies substantially among different treatment modalities and conditions. The following elements are included: an overview of the evolution of currently available regenerative techniques, evidence base for each available modality (prolotherapy, platelet rich plasma, bone marrow aspirate concentrate and stem cells, adipose-derived stem cells, and amniotic tissue products), general principles in the application of these treatments, and discussion and a vision of what lies ahead. We expect that practitioners will use this review to facilitate clinical decision making and to provide a core knowledge base to assist when counseling patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

A Systematic Review of Dextrose Prolotherapy for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to systematically review dextrose (d-glucose) prolotherapy efficacy in the treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases PubMed, Healthline, OmniMedicalSearch, Medscape, and EMBASE were searched from 1990 to January 2016.

STUDY SELECTION

Prospectively designed studies that used dextrose as the sole active prolotherapy constituent were selected.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers rated studies for quality of evidence using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database assessment scale for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the Downs and Black evaluation tool for non-RCTs, for level of evidence using a modified Sackett scale, and for clinically relevant pain score difference using minimal clinically important change criteria. Study population, methods, and results data were extracted and tabulated.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Fourteen RCTs, 1 case–control study, and 18 case series studies met the inclusion criteria and were evaluated. Pain conditions were clustered into tendinopathies, osteoarthritis (OA), spinal/pelvic, and myofascial pain. The RCTs were high-quality Level 1 evidence (Physiotherapy Evidence Database ≥8) and found dextrose injection superior to controls in Osgood–Schlatter disease, lateral epicondylitis of the elbow, traumatic rotator cuff injury, knee OA, finger OA, and myofascial pain; in biomechanical but not subjective measures in temporal mandibular joint; and comparable in a short-term RCT but superior in a long-term RCT in low back pain. Many observational studies were of high quality and reported consistent positive evidence in multiple studies of tendinopathies, knee OA, sacroiliac pain, and iliac crest pain that received RCT confirmation in separate studies. Eighteen studies combined patient self-rating (subjective) with psychometric, imaging, and/or biomechanical (objective) outcome measurement and found both positive subjective and objective outcomes in 16 studies and positive objective but not subjective outcomes in two studies. All 15 studies solely using subjective or psychometric measures reported positive findings.

CONCLUSION

Use of dextrose prolotherapy is supported for treatment of tendinopathies, knee and finger joint OA, and spinal/pelvic pain due to ligament dysfunction. Efficacy in acute pain, as first-line therapy, and in myofascial pain cannot be determined from the literature.

Chronic neck pain: making the connection between capsular ligament laxity and cervical instability

The use of conventional modalities for chronic neck pain remains debatable, primarily because most treatments have had limited success. We conducted a review of the literature published up to December 2013 on the diagnostic and treatment modalities of disorders related to chronic neck pain and concluded that, despite providing temporary relief of symptoms, these treatments do not address the specific problems of healing and are not likely to offer long-term cures. The objectives of this narrative review are to provide an overview of chronic neck pain as it relates to cervical instability, to describe the anatomical features of the cervical spine and the impact of capsular ligament laxity, to discuss the disorders causing chronic neck pain and their current treatments, and lastly, to present prolotherapy as a viable treatment option that heals injured ligaments, restores stability to the spine, and resolves chronic neck pain. The capsular ligaments are the main stabilizing structures of the facet joints in the cervical spine and have been implicated as a major source of chronic neck pain. Chronic neck pain often reflects a state of instability in the cervical spine and is a symptom common to a number of conditions described herein, including disc herniation, cervical spondylosis, whiplash injury and whiplash associated disorder, postconcussion syndrome, vertebrobasilar insufficiency, and Barré-Liéou syndrome. When the capsular ligaments are injured, they become elongated and exhibit laxity, which causes excessive movement of the cervical vertebrae. In the upper cervical spine (C0-C2), this can cause a number of other symptoms including, but not limited to, nerve irritation and vertebrobasilar insufficiency with associated vertigo, tinnitus, dizziness, facial pain, arm pain, and migraine headaches. In the lower cervical spine (C3-C7), this can cause muscle spasms, crepitation, and/or paresthesia in addition to chronic neck pain. In either case, the presence of excessive motion between two adjacent cervical vertebrae and these associated symptoms is described as cervical instability. Therefore, we propose that in many cases of chronic neck pain, the cause may be underlying joint instability due to capsular ligament laxity. Currently, curative treatment options for this type of cervical instability are inconclusive and inadequate. Based on clinical studies and experience with patients who have visited our chronic pain clinic with complaints of chronic neck pain, we contend that prolotherapy offers a potentially curative treatment option for chronic neck pain related to capsular ligament laxity and underlying cervical instability.