-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Platelet-Rich Plasma in Patients With Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears or Tendinopathy Leads to Significantly Improved Short-Term Pain Relief and Function Compared With Corticosteroid Injection: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.
- Cory A Kwong, Jarret M Woodmass, Eva M Gusnowski, Aaron J Bois, Justin Leblanc, Kristie D More, and LoIan K YIKYDepartment of Surgery, Section of Orthopedic Surgery, McCaig Institute for Bone and Joint Health, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada..
- Department of Surgery, Section of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Electronic address: cakwong87@gmail.com.
- Arthroscopy. 2021 Feb 1; 37 (2): 510-517.
PurposeTo perform a randomized controlled trial comparing platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with standard corticosteroid (CS) injection in providing pain relief and improved function in patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy and partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCTs).MethodsThis double-blind randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with ultrasound-proven or magnetic resonance imaging-proven PTRCTs who received either an ultrasound-guided PRP or CS injection. Patients completed patient-reported outcome assessments at baseline and at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 12 months after injection. The primary outcome was improvement in the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain. Secondary outcomes included changes in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) scores. Treatment failure was defined as subsequent injection, consent to undergo surgery, or operative intervention.ResultsWe followed up 99 patients (47 in the PRP group and 52 in the CS group) until 12 months after injection. There were no differences in baseline patient demographic characteristics including age, sex, or duration of symptoms. Despite randomization, patients in the PRP group had worse baseline VAS (46.0 vs 34.7, P = .01), ASES (53.9 vs 61.8, P = .02), and WORC (42.2 vs 49.5, P = .03) scores. At 3 months after injection, the PRP group had superior improvement in VAS (-13.6 vs 0.4, P = .03), ASES (13.0 vs 2.9, P = .02), and WORC (16.8 vs 5.8, P = .03) scores. There were no differences in patient-reported outcomes at 6 weeks or 12 months. There was no difference in the rate of failure (P = .31) or conversion to surgery (P = .83) between groups.ConclusionsPatients with PTRCTs or tendinopathy experienced clinical improvement in pain and patient-reported outcome scores after both ultrasound-guided CS and PRP injections. Patients who received PRP obtained superior improvement in pain and function at short-term follow-up (3 months). There was no sustained benefit of PRP over CS at longer-term follow-up (12 months).Level Of EvidenceLevel I, randomized controlled trial.Copyright © 2020 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.