Effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of Achilles tendon disease.

IF 2 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Dan Huang, Djandan Tadum Arthur Vithran, Hao-Li Gong, Ming Zeng, Zhong-Wen Tang, Zhou-Zhou Rao, Jie Wen, Sheng Xiao
{"title":"Effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of Achilles tendon disease.","authors":"Dan Huang,&nbsp;Djandan Tadum Arthur Vithran,&nbsp;Hao-Li Gong,&nbsp;Ming Zeng,&nbsp;Zhong-Wen Tang,&nbsp;Zhou-Zhou Rao,&nbsp;Jie Wen,&nbsp;Sheng Xiao","doi":"10.5312/wjo.v14.i6.485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the treatment of patients with Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) and Achilles tendinopathy (AT) has been controversial.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To assess PRP injections' effectiveness in treating ATR and AT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive review of relevant literature was conducted utilizing multiple databases such as Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese Science and Technology Journal, EMBASE, and China Biomedical CD-ROM. The present investigation integrated randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma injections in managing individuals with Achilles tendon rupture and tendinopathy. The eligibility criteria for the trials encompassed publications that were published within the timeframe of January 1, 1966 to December 2022. The statistical analysis was performed utilizing the Review Manager 5.4.1, the visual analogue scale (VAS), Victorian Institute Ankle Function Scale (VISA-A), and Achilles Tendon Thickness were used to assess outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This meta-analysis included 13 randomized controlled trials, 8 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for AT and 5 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for ATR. PRP for AT at 6 wk [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.92, 95%CI: -0.54 to 4.38, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 34%], at 3 mo [WMD = 0.20, 95%CI: -2.65 to 3.05, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 60%], and 6 mo [WMD = 2.75, 95%CI: -2.76 to 8.26, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 87%) after which there was no significant difference in VISA-A scores between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in VAS scores between the PRP group and the control group after 6 wk [WMD = 6.75, 95%CI: -6.12 to 19.62, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 69%] and 6 mo [WMD = 10.46, 95%CI: -2.44 to 23.37, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 69%] of treatment, and at mid-treatment at 3 mo [WMD = 11.30, 95%CI: 7.33 to 15.27, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] after mid-treatment, the PRP group demonstrated better outcomes than the control group. Post-treatment patient satisfaction [WMD = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.35, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%], Achilles tendon thickness [WMD = 0.34, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.71, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 61%] and return to sport [WMD = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.87 to 1.42, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] were not significantly different between the PRP and control groups. The study did not find any statistically significant distinction between the groups that received PRP treatment and those that did not, regarding the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment - Achilles scores at 3 mo [WMD = -1.49, 95%CI: -5.24 to 2.25, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%], 6 mo [WMD = -0.24, 95%CI: -3.80 to 3.32, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%], and 12 mo [WMD = -2.02, 95%CI: -5.34 to 1.29, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 87%] for ATR patients. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the PRP and the control groups in improving Heel lift height respectively at 6 mo [WMD = -3.96, 95%CI: -8.61 to 0.69, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] and 12 mo [WMD = -1.66, 95%CI: -11.15 to 7.83, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] for ATR patients. There was no significant difference in calf circumference between the PRP group and the control group after 6 mo [WMD = 1.01, 95%CI: -0.78 to 2.80, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 54%] and 12 mo [WMD = -0.55, 95%CI: -2.2 to 1.09, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] of treatment. There was no significant difference in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups at 6 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.38, 95%CI: -2.34 to 1.58, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 82%] and after 12 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.98, 95%CI: -1.41 to -0.56, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 10%] there was a significant improvement in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in the rate of return to exercise after treatment [WMD = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.77 to 1.87, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] and the rate of adverse events [WMD = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.50 to 1.45, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 0%] between the PRP group and the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The use of PRP for AT improved the patient's immediate VAS scores but not VISA-A scores, changes in Achilles tendon thickness, patient satisfaction, or return to sport. Treatment of ATR with PRP injections alone improved long-term ankle mobility but had no significant effect on VISA-A scores, single heel lift height, calf circumference or return to sport. Additional research employing more extensive sampling sizes, more strict experimental methods, and standard methodologies may be necessary to yield more dependable and precise findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":47843,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Orthopedics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/dd/1a/WJO-14-485.PMC10292057.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v14.i6.485","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the treatment of patients with Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) and Achilles tendinopathy (AT) has been controversial.

Aim: To assess PRP injections' effectiveness in treating ATR and AT.

Methods: A comprehensive review of relevant literature was conducted utilizing multiple databases such as Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese Science and Technology Journal, EMBASE, and China Biomedical CD-ROM. The present investigation integrated randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma injections in managing individuals with Achilles tendon rupture and tendinopathy. The eligibility criteria for the trials encompassed publications that were published within the timeframe of January 1, 1966 to December 2022. The statistical analysis was performed utilizing the Review Manager 5.4.1, the visual analogue scale (VAS), Victorian Institute Ankle Function Scale (VISA-A), and Achilles Tendon Thickness were used to assess outcomes.

Results: This meta-analysis included 13 randomized controlled trials, 8 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for AT and 5 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for ATR. PRP for AT at 6 wk [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.92, 95%CI: -0.54 to 4.38, I2 = 34%], at 3 mo [WMD = 0.20, 95%CI: -2.65 to 3.05, I2 = 60%], and 6 mo [WMD = 2.75, 95%CI: -2.76 to 8.26, I2 = 87%) after which there was no significant difference in VISA-A scores between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in VAS scores between the PRP group and the control group after 6 wk [WMD = 6.75, 95%CI: -6.12 to 19.62, I2 = 69%] and 6 mo [WMD = 10.46, 95%CI: -2.44 to 23.37, I2 = 69%] of treatment, and at mid-treatment at 3 mo [WMD = 11.30, 95%CI: 7.33 to 15.27, I2 = 0%] after mid-treatment, the PRP group demonstrated better outcomes than the control group. Post-treatment patient satisfaction [WMD = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.35, I2 = 0%], Achilles tendon thickness [WMD = 0.34, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.71, I2 = 61%] and return to sport [WMD = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.87 to 1.42, I2 = 0%] were not significantly different between the PRP and control groups. The study did not find any statistically significant distinction between the groups that received PRP treatment and those that did not, regarding the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment - Achilles scores at 3 mo [WMD = -1.49, 95%CI: -5.24 to 2.25, I2 = 0%], 6 mo [WMD = -0.24, 95%CI: -3.80 to 3.32, I2 = 0%], and 12 mo [WMD = -2.02, 95%CI: -5.34 to 1.29, I2 = 87%] for ATR patients. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the PRP and the control groups in improving Heel lift height respectively at 6 mo [WMD = -3.96, 95%CI: -8.61 to 0.69, I2 = 0%] and 12 mo [WMD = -1.66, 95%CI: -11.15 to 7.83, I2 = 0%] for ATR patients. There was no significant difference in calf circumference between the PRP group and the control group after 6 mo [WMD = 1.01, 95%CI: -0.78 to 2.80, I2 = 54%] and 12 mo [WMD = -0.55, 95%CI: -2.2 to 1.09, I2 = 0%] of treatment. There was no significant difference in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups at 6 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.38, 95%CI: -2.34 to 1.58, I2 = 82%] and after 12 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.98, 95%CI: -1.41 to -0.56, I2 = 10%] there was a significant improvement in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in the rate of return to exercise after treatment [WMD = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.77 to 1.87, I2 = 0%] and the rate of adverse events [WMD = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.50 to 1.45, I2 = 0%] between the PRP group and the control group.

Conclusion: The use of PRP for AT improved the patient's immediate VAS scores but not VISA-A scores, changes in Achilles tendon thickness, patient satisfaction, or return to sport. Treatment of ATR with PRP injections alone improved long-term ankle mobility but had no significant effect on VISA-A scores, single heel lift height, calf circumference or return to sport. Additional research employing more extensive sampling sizes, more strict experimental methods, and standard methodologies may be necessary to yield more dependable and precise findings.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

富血小板血浆治疗跟腱疾病的疗效观察。
背景:富血小板血浆(PRP)治疗跟腱断裂(ATR)和跟腱病变(AT)的有效性一直存在争议。目的:评价PRP注射液治疗ATR和AT的疗效。方法:利用Cochrane Library、PubMed、Web of Science、Chinese Science and Technology Journal、EMBASE、China Biomedical CD-ROM等数据库,对相关文献进行综合检索。本研究整合了随机对照试验,评估富血小板血浆注射治疗跟腱断裂和肌腱病变的有效性。试验的资格标准包括在1966年1月1日至2022年12月期间发表的出版物。采用Review Manager 5.4.1进行统计分析,采用视觉模拟量表(VAS)、victoria Institute踝关节功能量表(VISA-A)和跟腱厚度评估结果。结果:本meta分析纳入13项随机对照试验,其中8项为PRP治疗AT的随机对照试验,5项为PRP治疗ATR的随机对照试验。6周时AT的PRP[加权平均差(WMD) = 1.92, 95%CI: -0.54至4.38,I2 = 34%], 3个月时[WMD = 0.20, 95%CI: -2.65至3.05,I2 = 60%], 6个月时[WMD = 2.75, 95%CI: -2.76至8.26,I2 = 87%],之后PRP组与对照组的VISA-A评分无显著差异。治疗6周[WMD = 6.75, 95%CI: -6.12 ~ 19.62, I2 = 69%]、6个月[WMD = 10.46, 95%CI: -2.44 ~ 23.37, I2 = 69%]、治疗中期[WMD = 11.30, 95%CI: 7.33 ~ 15.27, I2 = 0%], PRP组与对照组的VAS评分差异无统计学意义;治疗中期3个月[WMD = 11.30, 95%CI: 7.33 ~ 15.27], PRP组疗效优于对照组。治疗后患者满意度[WMD = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.84 ~ 1.35, I2 = 0%]、跟腱厚度[WMD = 0.34, 95%CI: -0.04 ~ 0.71, I2 = 61%]和运动恢复[WMD = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.87 ~ 1.42, I2 = 0%]在PRP组和对照组之间无显著差异。该研究未发现接受PRP治疗的组和未接受PRP治疗的组之间有统计学上的显著差异,关于维多利亚运动评估研究所- ATR患者3个月[WMD = -1.49, 95%CI: -5.24至2.25,I2 = 0%]、6个月[WMD = -0.24, 95%CI: -3.80至3.32,I2 = 0%]和12个月[WMD = -2.02, 95%CI: -5.34至1.29,I2 = 87%]的跟腱评分。此外,在ATR患者6个月[WMD = -3.96, 95%CI: -8.61至0.69,I2 = 0%]和12个月[WMD = -1.66, 95%CI: -11.15至7.83,I2 = 0%]时,PRP组与对照组在改善跟举高度方面无显著差异。在治疗6个月[WMD = 1.01, 95%CI: -0.78 ~ 2.80, I2 = 54%]和12个月[WMD = -0.55, 95%CI: -2.2 ~ 1.09, I2 = 0%]后,PRP组与对照组的小腿围无显著差异。治疗6个月时,PRP组与对照组的踝关节活动度无显著差异[WMD = -0.38, 95%CI: -2.34 ~ 1.58, I2 = 82%],治疗12个月后[WMD = -0.98, 95%CI: -1.41 ~ -0.56, I2 = 10%], PRP组与对照组的踝关节活动度有显著改善。PRP组与对照组治疗后运动恢复率[WMD = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.77 ~ 1.87, I2 = 0%]和不良事件发生率[WMD = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.50 ~ 1.45, I2 = 0%]差异均无统计学意义。结论:使用PRP治疗AT可改善患者的即时VAS评分,但不能改善VISA-A评分、跟腱厚度变化、患者满意度或恢复运动。单独用PRP注射治疗ATR可改善长期踝关节活动,但对VISA-A评分、单跟抬高、小腿围或恢复运动无显著影响。为了得到更可靠和精确的结果,可能需要采用更广泛的抽样规模、更严格的实验方法和标准方法进行进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
814
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信