Intra-articular corticosteroid injections versus platelet-rich plasma as a treatment for cervical facetogenic pain: a randomized clinical trial.

IF 5.1 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
David J Allison, Sanam Ebrahimzadeh, Stephanie Muise, Steven Joseph, Alexandria Roa Agudelo, Arden Lawson, Nicole Billias, John Tran, Ashley Smith, Eldon Loh
{"title":"Intra-articular corticosteroid injections versus platelet-rich plasma as a treatment for cervical facetogenic pain: a randomized clinical trial.","authors":"David J Allison, Sanam Ebrahimzadeh, Stephanie Muise, Steven Joseph, Alexandria Roa Agudelo, Arden Lawson, Nicole Billias, John Tran, Ashley Smith, Eldon Loh","doi":"10.1136/rapm-2024-105889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The study's primary objective was to compare the effectiveness of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injections versus corticosteroid injections for the treatment of cervical facetogenic pain. Secondary aims were to compare self-rated disability, pain self-efficacy, and the safety of the procedure between groups.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-site randomized double-blind controlled trial with 40 participants assigned to receive either leucocyte-poor, low-concentrate platelet-rich plasma injections or corticosteroid injection without local anesthetic into the cervical facet joint under fluoroscopy. Outcomes were collected via telephone at 1, 3, and 6 months to determine treatment effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Low-concentrate platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroid injections had similar effects on cervical facetogenic pain intensity over a 6-month period post injection as demonstrated by a non-significant group-by-time interaction for Numeric Rating Scale scores (p>0.05). However, both groups showed a statistically significant decrease in cervical facetogenic pain intensity 1 month post treatment compared with baseline (p=0.02), while the platelet-rich plasma group also demonstrated a clinically significant decrease in pain intensity at the same time point. There was a significant interaction at 1 month post intervention for pain self-efficacy (p=0.04), with the platelet-rich plasma injection group showing a larger increase in pain self-efficacy compared with the corticosteroid injection group. No significant interaction was observed for self-rated disability; however, significant reductions were shown at 3 and 6 months post treatment compared with baseline in both groups (p<0.01). No significant differences between groups were reported for adverse events; however, those receiving platelet-rich plasma injection reported significantly less procedural pain (p=0.02).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroid injections induced similar improvements in cervical facetogenic pain intensity (1 month post) and self-rated disability (3 and 6 months post). Pain self-efficacy demonstrated a significant interaction with platelet-rich plasma injection showing greater improvement 1 month post. Additionally, both treatments exhibited a similar low prevalence of adverse events; however, those receiving platelet-rich plasma injection reported less procedural pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":54503,"journal":{"name":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/rapm-2024-105889","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The study's primary objective was to compare the effectiveness of intra-articular platelet-rich plasma injections versus corticosteroid injections for the treatment of cervical facetogenic pain. Secondary aims were to compare self-rated disability, pain self-efficacy, and the safety of the procedure between groups.

Methods: A single-site randomized double-blind controlled trial with 40 participants assigned to receive either leucocyte-poor, low-concentrate platelet-rich plasma injections or corticosteroid injection without local anesthetic into the cervical facet joint under fluoroscopy. Outcomes were collected via telephone at 1, 3, and 6 months to determine treatment effectiveness.

Results: Low-concentrate platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroid injections had similar effects on cervical facetogenic pain intensity over a 6-month period post injection as demonstrated by a non-significant group-by-time interaction for Numeric Rating Scale scores (p>0.05). However, both groups showed a statistically significant decrease in cervical facetogenic pain intensity 1 month post treatment compared with baseline (p=0.02), while the platelet-rich plasma group also demonstrated a clinically significant decrease in pain intensity at the same time point. There was a significant interaction at 1 month post intervention for pain self-efficacy (p=0.04), with the platelet-rich plasma injection group showing a larger increase in pain self-efficacy compared with the corticosteroid injection group. No significant interaction was observed for self-rated disability; however, significant reductions were shown at 3 and 6 months post treatment compared with baseline in both groups (p<0.01). No significant differences between groups were reported for adverse events; however, those receiving platelet-rich plasma injection reported significantly less procedural pain (p=0.02).

Conclusion: Both platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroid injections induced similar improvements in cervical facetogenic pain intensity (1 month post) and self-rated disability (3 and 6 months post). Pain self-efficacy demonstrated a significant interaction with platelet-rich plasma injection showing greater improvement 1 month post. Additionally, both treatments exhibited a similar low prevalence of adverse events; however, those receiving platelet-rich plasma injection reported less procedural pain.

关节内皮质类固醇注射与富血小板血浆治疗颈椎面源性疼痛:随机临床试验。
研究目的研究的主要目的是比较关节内注射富血小板血浆与注射皮质类固醇治疗颈椎面源性疼痛的效果。次要目标是比较两组患者的自评残疾程度、疼痛自我效能感和手术安全性:方法:这是一项单点随机双盲对照试验,40 名参与者被分配接受贫白细胞、低浓度富血小板血浆注射,或在透视下在颈椎面关节注射皮质类固醇(不含局麻药)。通过电话收集1、3和6个月的疗效,以确定治疗效果:结果:低浓度富血小板血浆注射和皮质类固醇注射对注射后 6 个月内颈椎面源性疼痛强度的影响相似,数值评定量表评分的组间时间交互作用不显著(P>0.05)。不过,与基线相比,两组治疗后 1 个月的颈椎面源性疼痛强度都有显著的统计学下降(p=0.02),而富血小板血浆组在同一时间点的疼痛强度也有显著的临床下降。干预后 1 个月,疼痛自我效能存在明显的交互作用(p=0.04),与皮质类固醇注射组相比,富血小板血浆注射组的疼痛自我效能提高幅度更大。在自评残疾方面,没有观察到明显的交互作用;不过,与基线相比,两组患者在治疗后3个月和6个月的自评残疾都有明显下降(p结论:富血小板血浆和皮质类固醇注射对颈椎面源性疼痛强度(治疗后 1 个月)和自评残疾程度(治疗后 3 个月和 6 个月)的改善效果相似。疼痛自我效能表现出显著的交互作用,注射富血小板血浆后 1 个月的改善程度更大。此外,两种治疗方法的不良反应发生率都很低;但接受富血小板血浆注射的患者在治疗过程中的疼痛感较轻。
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
8.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
175
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine, the official publication of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA), is a monthly journal that publishes peer-reviewed scientific and clinical studies to advance the understanding and clinical application of regional techniques for surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. Coverage includes intraoperative regional techniques, perioperative pain, chronic pain, obstetric anesthesia, pediatric anesthesia, outcome studies, and complications. Published for over thirty years, this respected journal also serves as the official publication of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA), the Asian and Oceanic Society of Regional Anesthesia (AOSRA), the Latin American Society of Regional Anesthesia (LASRA), the African Society for Regional Anesthesia (AFSRA), and the Academy of Regional Anaesthesia of India (AORA).
×
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