Platelet rich plasma versus corticosteroids for lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

IF 1.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-10 DOI:10.5397/cise.2024.00801
Ralph Maroun, Mohammad Daher, Peter Boufadel, Ryan Lopez, Adam Z Khan, Joseph A Abboud
{"title":"Platelet rich plasma versus corticosteroids for lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.","authors":"Ralph Maroun, Mohammad Daher, Peter Boufadel, Ryan Lopez, Adam Z Khan, Joseph A Abboud","doi":"10.5397/cise.2024.00801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lateral epicondylitis, colloquially known as tennis elbow, is a common cause of elbow pain and daily task disability. Caused by repetitive movement, it is typically a degenerative rather than inflammatory event and affects mostly middle-aged patients. Despite its good prognostic nature, its economic burden on the healthcare system encourages research on the efficacity of non-operative injection treatments. This article aims to compare the clinical effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroid (CS) injections in managing lateral epicondylitis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20) were searched up to March 2024. Only randomized controlled trials were included. The clinical outcomes evaluated were the visual analog scale (VAS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six randomized controlled trials with 1.877 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of VAS scores, short-term results (<2 months) favored CS over PRP (P=0.03; mean difference [MD], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.05 to 1.28), whereas long-term results (>6 months) favored PRP (P<0.001; MD, -1.60; 95% CI, -2.01 to -1.20]). Intermediate-term results (2-6 months) showed no significant difference between injection treatments. In terms of DASH scores, short- and intermediate-term results showed no significant difference, whereas long-term results favored PRP (P<0.001; MD, -4.87; 95% CI, -7.69 to -2.06).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CS provides significantly better short-term pain relief, while PRP provides better long-term functional improvement and clinical long-term pain relief. However, future studies should focus on other injection protocols or addition of other non-invasive modalities. Level of evidence: I.</p>","PeriodicalId":33981,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","volume":"28 1","pages":"40-48"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11938920/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2024.00801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Lateral epicondylitis, colloquially known as tennis elbow, is a common cause of elbow pain and daily task disability. Caused by repetitive movement, it is typically a degenerative rather than inflammatory event and affects mostly middle-aged patients. Despite its good prognostic nature, its economic burden on the healthcare system encourages research on the efficacity of non-operative injection treatments. This article aims to compare the clinical effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroid (CS) injections in managing lateral epicondylitis.

Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20) were searched up to March 2024. Only randomized controlled trials were included. The clinical outcomes evaluated were the visual analog scale (VAS) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score.

Results: Twenty-six randomized controlled trials with 1.877 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In terms of VAS scores, short-term results (<2 months) favored CS over PRP (P=0.03; mean difference [MD], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.05 to 1.28), whereas long-term results (>6 months) favored PRP (P<0.001; MD, -1.60; 95% CI, -2.01 to -1.20]). Intermediate-term results (2-6 months) showed no significant difference between injection treatments. In terms of DASH scores, short- and intermediate-term results showed no significant difference, whereas long-term results favored PRP (P<0.001; MD, -4.87; 95% CI, -7.69 to -2.06).

Conclusions: CS provides significantly better short-term pain relief, while PRP provides better long-term functional improvement and clinical long-term pain relief. However, future studies should focus on other injection protocols or addition of other non-invasive modalities. Level of evidence: I.

富血小板血浆与皮质类固醇治疗外侧上髁炎:随机临床试验的荟萃分析。
背景:外侧上髁炎,俗称网球肘,是肘部疼痛和日常工作障碍的常见原因。由重复运动引起,它通常是一种退行性而不是炎症性事件,主要影响中年患者。尽管它具有良好的预后性质,但它对医疗保健系统的经济负担鼓励了对非手术注射治疗有效性的研究。本文旨在比较富血小板血浆(PRP)和皮质类固醇(CS)注射治疗外侧上髁炎的临床疗效。方法:检索截至2024年3月的PubMed、Cochrane和谷歌Scholar(第1-20页)。仅纳入随机对照试验。临床结果评估为视觉模拟量表(VAS)和臂、肩、手残疾(DASH)评分。结果:26项随机对照试验纳入了1877例患者。在VAS评分方面,短期结果(6个月)偏向于PRP(结论:CS能明显改善短期疼痛,而PRP能更好地改善长期功能和临床长期疼痛。然而,未来的研究应侧重于其他注射方案或增加其他非侵入性方式。证据等级:1。
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
55
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信