The Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in Gluteal Tendinopathy: A Randomized, Double-Blind Controlled Trial Comparing a Single Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection With a Single Corticosteroid Injection

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 933-939 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Fitzpatrick ◽  
Max K. Bulsara ◽  
John O’Donnell ◽  
Paul Robert McCrory ◽  
Ming Hao Zheng
Keyword(s):  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Duration Of Symptoms ◽  
Gluteal Tendinopathy ◽  
The Mean

Background: Gluteus medius/minimus tendinopathy is a common cause of lateral hip pain or greater trochanteric pain syndrome. Hypothesis: There would be no difference in the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) between a single platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection compared with a corticosteroid injection in the treatment of gluteal tendinopathy. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: There were 228 consecutive patients referred with gluteal tendinopathy who were screened to enroll 80 participants; 148 were excluded (refusal: n = 42; previous surgery or sciatica: n = 50; osteoarthritis, n = 17; full-thickness tendon tear, n = 17; other: n = 22). Participants were randomized (1:1) to receive either a blinded glucocorticoid or PRP injection intratendinously under ultrasound guidance. A pain and functional assessment was performed using the mHHS questionnaire at 0, 2, 6, and 12 weeks and the patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 12 weeks. Results: Participants had a mean age of 60 years, a ratio of female to male of 9:1, and mean duration of symptoms of >14 months. Pain and function measured by the mean mHHS showed no difference at 2 weeks (corticosteroid: 66.95 ± 15.14 vs PRP: 65.23 ± 11.60) or 6 weeks (corticosteroid: 69.51 ± 14.78 vs PRP: 68.79 ± 13.33). The mean mHHS was significantly improved at 12 weeks in the PRP group (74.05 ± 13.92) compared with the corticosteroid group (67.13 ± 16.04) ( P = .048). The proportion of participants who achieved an outcome score of ≥74 at 12 weeks was 17 of 37 (45.9%) in the corticosteroid group and 25 of 39 (64.1%) in the PRP group. The proportion of participants who achieved the MCID of more than 8 points at 12 weeks was 21 of 37 (56.7%) in the corticosteroid group and 32 of 39 (82%) in the PRP group ( P = .016). Conclusion: Patients with chronic gluteal tendinopathy >4 months, diagnosed with both clinical and radiological examinations, achieved greater clinical improvement at 12 weeks when treated with a single PRP injection than those treated with a single corticosteroid injection. Registration: ACTRN12613000677707 (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry).

Leucocyte-Rich Platelet-Rich Plasma Treatment of Gluteus Medius and Minimus Tendinopathy: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial With 2-Year Follow-up

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1130-1137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Fitzpatrick ◽  
Max K. Bulsara ◽  
John O’Donnell ◽  
Ming Hao Zheng
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Ultrasound Guidance ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Gluteal Tendinopathy ◽  
To Receive

Background: A previously published trial showed that patients with chronic gluteal tendinopathy achieved greater clinical improvement at 12 weeks when treated with a single platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection than those treated with a single corticosteroid injection (CSI). Purpose: This follow-up study was conducted to determine whether there would be a sustained long-term difference in the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) at 2 years for a leucocyte-rich PRP (LR-PRP) injection in the treatment of chronic gluteal tendinopathy. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: This trial included 80 patients randomized 1:1 to receive LR-PRP or CSI intratendinously under ultrasound guidance. Patients had a mean age of 60 years, a 9:1 ratio of women to men, a mean body mass index of 27, and a mean length of symptoms >15 months. No patients had full-thickness tears of the gluteal tendons. An open-labeled extension allowed patients to receive crossover treatment after 3 months. The main outcome measure was the mHHS. Results: The mean mHHS improved significantly at 12 weeks in the PRP group (74.05; SD, 13.92) as compared with the CSI group (67.13; SD, 16.04) ( P = .048). At 24 weeks, the LR-PRP group (77.60; SD, 11.88) improved further than the CSI group (65.72; SD, 15.28; P = .0003). Twenty-seven patients were deemed to have failed the CSI treatment at 16 to 24 weeks, with an exit score of 59.22 (SD, 11.54), and then had treatment with LR-PRP. The crossover group improved with the LR-PRP: from 59.22 (SD, 11.22) at baseline to 75.55 (SD, 16.05) at 12 weeks, 77.69 (SD, 15.30) at 24 weeks, and 77.53 (SD, 14.54) at 104 weeks. The LR-PRP group retained 38 of 39 patients to 52 weeks and continued to improve. Their baseline scores of 53.77 (SD, 12.08) improved to 82.59 (SD, 9.71) at 104 weeks ( P < .0001). Conclusion: Among patients with chronic gluteal tendinopathy and a length of symptoms >15 months, a single intratendinous LR-PRP injection performed under ultrasound guidance results in greater improvement in pain and function than a single CSI. The improvement after LR-PRP injection is sustained at 2 years, whereas the improvement from a CSI is maximal at 6 weeks and not maintained beyond 24 weeks. Registration: ACTRN12613000677707 (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials identifier).

scholarly journals Treatment of Early Hip Osteoarthritis: Ultrasound-Guided Platelet Rich Plasma versus Hyaluronic Acid Injections in a Randomized Clinical Trial

Joints ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 05 (03) ◽  
pp. 152-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Doria ◽  
Giulia Mosele ◽  
Gianfilippo Caggiari ◽  
Leonardo Puddu ◽  
Emanuele Ciurlia
Keyword(s):  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Hip Osteoarthritis ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Double Blinded

Purpose The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of ultrasound-guided intra-articular injections of autologous platelet rich plasma (PRP) versus hyaluronic acid (HA) for symptomatic early osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip. Methods A prospective controlled double-blinded randomized trial on 80 patients with hip OA was conducted. The patients were divided in two groups of 40 patients each: group 1 underwent three PRP intra-articular ultrasound-guided injections, whereas group 2 underwent three HA injections. WOMAC, VAS, and Harris Hip Score were evaluated for both groups before and at 6 and 12 months after treatment. Results The two groups were comparable in age, sex, body mass index, and severity of hip OA. Both groups showed a significant improvement from baseline at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups for all the outcome measures. No major complications were observed during the treatment and at follow-ups in both the groups. Conclusion PRP did not offer significantly better results compared with HA in patients with moderate signs of OA, and thus it should not be considered as first-line treatment. Level of Evidence Level II, randomized controlled trial.

scholarly journals Comparison of a Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection and a Conventional Steroid Injection for Pain Relief and Functional Improvement of Partial Supraspinatus Tears

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 232596712110249
Author(s):  
Marvin Thepsoparn ◽  
Phark Thanphraisan ◽  
Thanathep Tanpowpong ◽  
Thun Itthipanichpong
Keyword(s):  
Pain Relief ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Corticosteroid Injection ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Functional Improvement ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Supraspinatus Tear ◽  
Subacromial Corticosteroid Injection

Background: Partial supraspinatus tendon tears have frequently been treated using a subacromial corticosteroid injection or surgery. The clinical use of a platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection is an alternative treatment method for the condition, despite the paucity of evidence of its efficacy. Purpose: To compare pain relief, functional improvement, and complications after an intratendinous PRP injection versus a subacromial corticosteroid injection for partial supraspinatus tears. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 32 patients with partial supraspinatus tears were randomly assigned to receive a leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) injection or a corticosteroid injection. One patient withdrew from the PRP group, leaving 15 patients in the PRP group and 16 patients in the corticosteroid group. The ultrasound-guided procedures were performed by a single experienced pain physician. Pain relief and functional improvement were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), respectively. Treatment efficacy and complications were documented, and the 2 groups were compared at 1- and 6-month follow-up. Results: There were no differences in VAS and OSS scores between the PRP and corticosteroid groups at 1-month follow-up. However, the PRP group had better scores than the corticosteroid group had on both the VAS and OSS at 6-month follow-up (VAS: 14.5 ± 15.4 vs 37.5 ± 24.9, respectively; OSS: 16.2 ± 3.9 vs 25.0 ± 10.2, respectively; P < .01 for both). Both groups showed significant improvement in VAS and OSS scores from before treatment to 1-month follow-up (mean difference, 35.67 and 11.47 points, respectively, for the PRP group; mean difference, 29.69 and 11.13 points, respectively, for the corticosteroid group; P < .01 for all). The VAS and OSS scores did not change significantly at 6-month follow-up in the corticosteroid group; however, the PRP group showed continued improvement in both VAS and OSS scores between 1- and 6-month follow-up (mean difference, 15.87 and 7.40 points, respectively; P < .01 for both). There were no complications in either group. Conclusion: An injection using either a corticosteroid or LP-PRP resulted in a similar reduction in pain and improvement in function at 1 month in patients with a partial supraspinatus tear. However, PRP showed superior benefits over the corticosteroid at 6-month follow-up.

scholarly journals Treatment of Gluteal Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Stage-Adjusted Treatment Recommendation

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 232596712110168
Author(s):  
Andreas Ladurner ◽  
Jane Fitzpatrick ◽  
John M. O’Donnell
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Surgical Repair ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Treatment Recommendation ◽  
Iliotibial Band ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Shockwave Therapy ◽  
Partial Thickness ◽  
Gluteal Tendinopathy ◽  
The Mean

Background: Gluteal tendinopathy is the most common lower limb tendinopathy. It presents with varying severity but may cause debilitating lateral hip pain. Purpose: To review the therapeutic options for different stages of gluteal tendinopathy, to highlight gaps within the existing evidence, and to provide guidelines for a stage-adjusted therapy for gluteal tendinopathy. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: We screened Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, PubMed Central, Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, UpToDate, and Google Scholar databases and databases for grey literature. Patient selection, diagnostic criteria, type and effect of a therapeutic intervention, details regarding aftercare, outcome assessments, complications of the treatment, follow-up, and conclusion of the authors were recorded. An assessment of study methodological quality (type of study, level of evidence) was also performed. Statistical analysis was descriptive. Data from multiple studies were combined if they were obtained from a single patient population. Weighted mean and range calculations were performed. Results: A total of 27 studies (6 randomized controlled trials) with 1103 patients (1106 hips) were included. The mean age was 53.7 years (range, 17-88 years), and the mean body mass index was 28.3. The ratio of female to male patients was 7:1. Radiological confirmation of the diagnosis was most commonly obtained using magnetic resonance imaging. Reported treatment methods were physical therapy/exercise; injections (corticosteroids, platelet-rich plasma, autologous tenocytes) with or without needle tenotomy/tendon fenestration; shockwave therapy; therapeutic ultrasound; and surgical procedures such as bursectomy, iliotibial band release, and endoscopic or open tendon repair (with or without tendon augmentation). Conclusion: There was good evidence for using platelet-rich plasma in grades 1 and 2 tendinopathy. Shockwave therapy, exercise, and corticosteroids showed good outcomes, but the effect of corticosteroids was short term. Bursectomy with or without iliotibial band release was a valuable treatment option in grades 1 and 2 tendinopathy. Insufficient evidence was available to provide guidelines for the treatment of partial-thickness tears. There was low-level evidence to support surgical repair for grades 3 (partial-thickness tears) and 4 (full-thickness tears) tendinopathy. Fatty degeneration, atrophy, and retraction can impair surgical repair, while their effect on patient outcomes remains controversial.

scholarly journals Comparing Intra-articular Injections of Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Low–Molecular Weight Hyaluronic Acid for the Treatment of Symptomatic Osteoarthritis of the Hip: A Double-Blind, Randomized Pilot Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 232596712096921
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Kraeutler ◽  
Darby A. Houck ◽  
Tigran Garabekyan ◽  
Shannon L. Miller ◽  
Jason L. Dragoo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molecular Weight ◽  
Hyaluronic Acid ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Hip Osteoarthritis ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Low Molecular Weight ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Double Blind

Background: Hyaluronic acid (HA) and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) are 2 nonoperative treatment options that have been studied in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). Purpose: To compare the efficacy of intra-articular injections of low–molecular weight (LMW) HA and LP-PRP in patients with hip OA. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A total of 34 patients (36 hips) presenting with signs of hip OA were randomized to receive 3 blinded, weekly intra-articular injections of either LP-PRP or LMW-HA. Patients were prospectively evaluated before injections and at 6 weeks and then at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. The primary outcome, conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) or a hip resurfacing procedure, was analyzed along with secondary outcomes including the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score and hip range of motion. Results: The final analysis included 33 hips (mean Kellgren-Lawrence grade, 2.73) (LMW-HA: n = 14; LP-PRP: n = 19) in 31 patients (18 male; mean age, 53.8 years). Significantly more patients converted to THA or a hip resurfacing procedure in the LMW-HA group (7/14; 50.0%) (mean, 1.3 years after first injection) than the LP-PRP group (3/19; 15.8%) (mean, 0.73 years after first injection) ( P = .035). There was no significant improvement or decline in any outcome scores within the LMW-HA group from before injections to 6 weeks or 3, 6, and 12 months. For the LP-PRP group, WOMAC overall ( P = .032), joint ( P = .030), and function scores ( P = .025) significantly improved from before injections to 6 weeks, and WOMAC joint scores significantly improved from before injections to 6 months ( P = .036). When comparing the difference between groups in internal rotation at 90° of hip flexion from before injections to 6 months, the LP-PRP group demonstrated a mean 5.0° improvement, while the LMW-HA group showed a mean 1.5° decrease ( P = .028). Conclusion: Intra-articular hip injections of LP-PRP in patients with hip OA resulted in an improvement in WOMAC scores and hip internal rotation at 6 months and delayed the need for THA or a hip resurfacing procedure compared with treatment with LMW-HA. A longer follow-up is necessary to further compare the effects of LP-PRP and LMW-HA injections in patients with hip OA. Registration: NCT01920152 ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document