富血小板血浆注射治疗跟腱病的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-27 eCollection Date: 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1177/23259671241296508
Samuel Ka-Kin Ling, Clarence Tsz-Kit Mak, Jasmine Pui-Yin Lo, Patrick Shu-Hang Yung
{"title":"富血小板血浆注射治疗跟腱病的疗效:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Samuel Ka-Kin Ling, Clarence Tsz-Kit Mak, Jasmine Pui-Yin Lo, Patrick Shu-Hang Yung","doi":"10.1177/23259671241296508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Achilles tendinopathy is a common condition without a reproducible and timely treatment modality. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection has been proposed as an enticing treatment option, but there is no consensus regarding its effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To pool the available data and evaluate the evidence of the effect of PRP injections on Achilles tendinopathy.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing PRP injection with nonoperative treatment, with the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) questionnaire score or maximal Achilles tendon (AT) thickness on ultrasound as outcome measures. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed of the included studies, and meta-analyses compared differences in outcome measures between PRP injection and control at the short-term (3-month), intermediate-term (6-month), and long-term (12-month) follow-ups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 409 publications, 6 publications (N = 422 patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy) were identified from the literature search. Risk-of-bias assessment revealed 2 studies were low risk, 1 was of some concern, and 3 were high risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between PRP injection and control at any time point for both VISA-A score (short term: <i>P</i> = .29; intermediate term: <i>P</i> = .42; long term: <i>P</i> = .57) and maximal AT thickness (short term: <i>P</i> = .60; intermediate term: <i>P</i> = .20; long term: <i>P</i> = .55).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our review demonstrated that although recent trends have shown an increasing popularity of PRP injection, no solid evidence has been established. The heterogenicity of the tendinopathy pathology and the PRP injection content and methodology should be controlled by better-designed clinical trials. Further research is needed before it should be recommended as a standard treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":19646,"journal":{"name":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","volume":"12 11","pages":"23259671241296508"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603511/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection on the Treatment of Achilles Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Samuel Ka-Kin Ling, Clarence Tsz-Kit Mak, Jasmine Pui-Yin Lo, Patrick Shu-Hang Yung\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23259671241296508\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Achilles tendinopathy is a common condition without a reproducible and timely treatment modality. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection has been proposed as an enticing treatment option, but there is no consensus regarding its effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To pool the available data and evaluate the evidence of the effect of PRP injections on Achilles tendinopathy.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing PRP injection with nonoperative treatment, with the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) questionnaire score or maximal Achilles tendon (AT) thickness on ultrasound as outcome measures. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed of the included studies, and meta-analyses compared differences in outcome measures between PRP injection and control at the short-term (3-month), intermediate-term (6-month), and long-term (12-month) follow-ups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 409 publications, 6 publications (N = 422 patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy) were identified from the literature search. Risk-of-bias assessment revealed 2 studies were low risk, 1 was of some concern, and 3 were high risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between PRP injection and control at any time point for both VISA-A score (short term: <i>P</i> = .29; intermediate term: <i>P</i> = .42; long term: <i>P</i> = .57) and maximal AT thickness (short term: <i>P</i> = .60; intermediate term: <i>P</i> = .20; long term: <i>P</i> = .55).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our review demonstrated that although recent trends have shown an increasing popularity of PRP injection, no solid evidence has been established. The heterogenicity of the tendinopathy pathology and the PRP injection content and methodology should be controlled by better-designed clinical trials. Further research is needed before it should be recommended as a standard treatment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine\",\"volume\":\"12 11\",\"pages\":\"23259671241296508\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603511/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241296508\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671241296508","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:跟腱病是一种常见的疾病,没有可重复和及时的治疗方式。富血小板血浆(PRP)注射被认为是一种诱人的治疗选择,但其有效性尚未达成共识。目的:收集现有资料,评价PRP注射治疗跟腱病变的疗效。研究设计:系统评价;证据等级:1。方法:本综述按照PRISMA(系统评价和荟萃分析首选报告项目)指南进行。CINAHL通过EBSCOhost、Cochrane Library和PubMed数据库检索了比较PRP注射与非手术治疗的随机对照试验,以维多利亚运动评估研究所-跟腱(VISA-A)问卷评分或超声最大跟腱(AT)厚度作为结局指标。对纳入的研究进行了偏倚风险评估,并进行了荟萃分析,比较了短期(3个月)、中期(6个月)和长期(12个月)随访中PRP注射和对照组之间结果测量的差异。结果:在409篇出版物中,从文献检索中发现6篇出版物(N = 422例慢性跟腱中段病变患者)。偏倚风险评估显示,2项研究为低风险,1项研究值得关注,3项研究为高偏倚风险。meta分析显示PRP注射组与对照组在任何时间点VISA-A评分均无显著差异(短期:P = 0.29;中期:P = .42;长期:P = 0.57)和最大AT厚度(短期:P = 0.60;中期:P = .20;长期:P = 0.55)。结论:我们的综述表明,尽管最近的趋势显示PRP注射越来越受欢迎,但没有确凿的证据。肌腱病变病理的异质性和PRP注射的含量和方法应通过设计更好的临床试验来控制。在将其推荐为标准治疗方法之前,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection on the Treatment of Achilles Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Background: Achilles tendinopathy is a common condition without a reproducible and timely treatment modality. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection has been proposed as an enticing treatment option, but there is no consensus regarding its effectiveness.

Purpose: To pool the available data and evaluate the evidence of the effect of PRP injections on Achilles tendinopathy.

Study design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods: This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Cochrane Library, and PubMed databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing PRP injection with nonoperative treatment, with the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) questionnaire score or maximal Achilles tendon (AT) thickness on ultrasound as outcome measures. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed of the included studies, and meta-analyses compared differences in outcome measures between PRP injection and control at the short-term (3-month), intermediate-term (6-month), and long-term (12-month) follow-ups.

Results: Of 409 publications, 6 publications (N = 422 patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy) were identified from the literature search. Risk-of-bias assessment revealed 2 studies were low risk, 1 was of some concern, and 3 were high risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between PRP injection and control at any time point for both VISA-A score (short term: P = .29; intermediate term: P = .42; long term: P = .57) and maximal AT thickness (short term: P = .60; intermediate term: P = .20; long term: P = .55).

Conclusion: Our review demonstrated that although recent trends have shown an increasing popularity of PRP injection, no solid evidence has been established. The heterogenicity of the tendinopathy pathology and the PRP injection content and methodology should be controlled by better-designed clinical trials. Further research is needed before it should be recommended as a standard treatment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
876
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine (OJSM), developed by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM), is a global, peer-reviewed, open access journal that combines the interests of researchers and clinical practitioners across orthopaedic sports medicine, arthroscopy, and knee arthroplasty. Topics include original research in the areas of: -Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, including surgical and nonsurgical treatment of orthopaedic sports injuries -Arthroscopic Surgery (Shoulder/Elbow/Wrist/Hip/Knee/Ankle/Foot) -Relevant translational research -Sports traumatology/epidemiology -Knee and shoulder arthroplasty The OJSM also publishes relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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