Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections as a second-line treatment in patients with tendinopathy-related chronic pain and failure of conservative treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Pain Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-12 DOI:10.1093/pm/pnaf022
Mathieu Nadeau-Vallée, Sami Ellassraoui, Véronique Brulotte
{"title":"Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections as a second-line treatment in patients with tendinopathy-related chronic pain and failure of conservative treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Mathieu Nadeau-Vallée, Sami Ellassraoui, Véronique Brulotte","doi":"10.1093/pm/pnaf022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Design: </strong>Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a popular treatment option in managing chronic tendinopathies, although the literature is inconsistent, mainly because of significant heterogeneity in patient populations. Patients who failed conservative management may respond differently than those who have not undergone first-line treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of PRP injections in reducing pain and improving function in patients with chronic tendinopathy who failed conservative treatment. A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cinahl Complete and Dissertations & Theses Global was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of PRP versus non-surgical treatments on pain and functional outcomes in adult non-responders to conservative management.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 9 RCTs involving 488 patients were included in the review. Of those, 6 studies at low risk of bias were included in the meta-analysis. PRP significantly reduced pain at both 6 and 12 months compared to control treatments (mean difference: -0.83 [95% CI: -1.61 to -0.04] at 6 months; and -1.11 [95% CI: -2.10 to -0.12] at 12 months). This effect was also seen at 24 months, although based on limited data. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in pain reduction between upper and lower limb tendinopathies. Functional improvement was observed in some studies, though the heterogeneity in outcome measures precluded a pooled analysis. Heterogeneity was substantial across studies, likely due to differences in PRP preparation, site of tendinopathy, and study methodologies.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite these limitations, the findings suggest that PRP reduces pain in patients suffering from chronic tendinopathy who have not responded to first-line therapies. Further high-quality research with standardized protocols and longer follow-up is necessary to confirm PRP's long-term efficacy and safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":19744,"journal":{"name":"Pain Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnaf022","RegionNum":3,"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

Design: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a popular treatment option in managing chronic tendinopathies, although the literature is inconsistent, mainly because of significant heterogeneity in patient populations. Patients who failed conservative management may respond differently than those who have not undergone first-line treatment. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of PRP injections in reducing pain and improving function in patients with chronic tendinopathy who failed conservative treatment. A comprehensive search of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Cinahl Complete and Dissertations & Theses Global was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of PRP versus non-surgical treatments on pain and functional outcomes in adult non-responders to conservative management.

Results: A total of 9 RCTs involving 488 patients were included in the review. Of those, 6 studies at low risk of bias were included in the meta-analysis. PRP significantly reduced pain at both 6 and 12 months compared to control treatments (mean difference: -0.83 [95% CI: -1.61 to -0.04] at 6 months; and -1.11 [95% CI: -2.10 to -0.12] at 12 months). This effect was also seen at 24 months, although based on limited data. Subgroup analysis revealed no significant differences in pain reduction between upper and lower limb tendinopathies. Functional improvement was observed in some studies, though the heterogeneity in outcome measures precluded a pooled analysis. Heterogeneity was substantial across studies, likely due to differences in PRP preparation, site of tendinopathy, and study methodologies.

Conclusion: Despite these limitations, the findings suggest that PRP reduces pain in patients suffering from chronic tendinopathy who have not responded to first-line therapies. Further high-quality research with standardized protocols and longer follow-up is necessary to confirm PRP's long-term efficacy and safety.

富血小板血浆(PRP)注射作为肌腱病相关慢性疼痛和保守治疗失败患者的二线治疗:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析
设计:富血小板血浆(PRP)是治疗慢性肌腱病变的一种流行治疗选择,尽管文献不一致,主要是因为患者群体的显著异质性。保守治疗失败的患者可能与未接受一线治疗的患者反应不同。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估PRP注射对保守治疗失败的慢性肌腱病变患者减轻疼痛和改善功能的疗效。我们对Medline、Embase、Cochrane Library、Cinahl Complete和dissert&theses Global进行了全面的检索,以确定随机对照试验,比较PRP与非手术治疗对保守治疗无反应的成人疼痛和功能结局的影响。结果:共纳入9项rct,共纳入488例患者。其中,6项低偏倚风险的研究被纳入meta分析。与对照治疗相比,PRP在6个月和12个月时均显著减轻了疼痛(6个月时平均差异:-0.83 [95% CI: -1.61至-0.04];12个月时为-1.11 [95% CI: -2.10至-0.12])。尽管基于有限的数据,但在24个月时也可以看到这种效果。亚组分析显示,上肢和下肢肌腱病变患者在减轻疼痛方面无显著差异。在一些研究中观察到功能改善,尽管结果测量的异质性排除了合并分析。研究的异质性很大,可能是由于PRP制备、肌腱病变部位和研究方法的差异。结论:尽管存在这些局限性,但研究结果表明,PRP可以减轻对一线治疗无效的慢性肌腱病变患者的疼痛。为了确认PRP的长期疗效和安全性,需要进一步的高质量研究,采用标准化的方案和更长时间的随访。
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
Pain Medicine
Pain Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.20%
发文量
187
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Pain Medicine is a multi-disciplinary journal dedicated to pain clinicians, educators and researchers with an interest in pain from various medical specialties such as pain medicine, anaesthesiology, family practice, internal medicine, neurology, neurological surgery, orthopaedic spine surgery, psychiatry, and rehabilitation medicine as well as related health disciplines such as psychology, neuroscience, nursing, nurse practitioner, physical therapy, and integrative health.
×
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