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.

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