Corticosteroids or platelet-rich plasma injections for rotator cuff tendinopathy: a randomized clinical trial study

Inordinate attention to minor pathophysiology variations in musculoskeletal research: example of rotator cuff tendinopathy

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests variation in pathophysiology is less relevant to musculoskeletal illness than variation in mental health factors. For diseases such as rotator cuff tendinopathy, attention may be placed on aspects of tendon thinning and suture techniques when studies show that variations in muscle quality and defect size have limited association with comfort and capability compared with variations in thoughts and feelings regarding symptoms. Using rotator cuff tendinopathy as an example, we studied the degree to which research addresses relatively minor degrees of variation in pathophysiology and relatively minor differences in treatments to better understand the relative emphasis on pathophysiology. We asked the following questions: What factors are associated with relative pathophysiology severity in comparative therapeutic studies of musculoskeletal conditions? What factors are associated with relative differences in interventions in comparative therapeutic studies of musculoskeletal conditions?

METHODS

We systematically reviewed clinical trials of patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy for the relative severity of pathophysiology (low, moderate, or high) and variation in interventions (minimal, moderate, or large). An example of a relatively minor variation in rotator cuff tendon pathophysiology is bursal- vs. articular-sided thinning of the tendon. An example of a relatively minor variation in treatment is single- vs. double-row defect closure.

RESULTS

Most studies of rotator cuff tendinopathy treatment addressed low (39%) or medium (50%) levels of pathophysiology. Greater relative pathology severity was independently associated with operative treatment (odds ratio, 12 [95% confidence interval, 3.2-45]; P < .001). Of 127 studies, 113 (89%) were rated as comparing treatments with minimal difference.

CONCLUSION

Despite the evidence of limited variation in comfort and capability due to pathophysiological variations, a large percentage of research on rotator cuff tendinopathy addresses relatively limited severity of pathophysiology and relatively minor variations in treatment. This may be typical of musculoskeletal research and suggests a possibility of focusing, on the one hand, on more impactful interventions such as treatments that can delay or avoid rotator cuff arthropathy and, on the other hand, on management strategies that optimize accommodation of common age-related changes in the rotator cuff tendons.

Platelet-rich plasma in the management of rotator cuff tendinopathy

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous blood-derived product that has gained significant attention in the treatment of tendinopathies as one of many treatment modalities in the field of regenerative medicine. Rotator cuff pathologies are the leading cause of shoulder pain. Despite the high success rate with conservative treatment and arthroscopic surgical repair, the search for a nonsurgical treatment has made PRP a trending topic recently. The purpose of this article is to review the recent literature data on the possible role of PRP in different rotator cuff pathologies. The limited data in the literature about isolated tendinopathies without a tear (tendonitis and tendinosis) suggests potential benefit from conservative treatment with PRP. Many studies exist for the treatment of rotator cuff tears solely using PRP or as an augmentation to arthroscopic repair. Despite the large number of randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses about the topic, there is no consensus in favor of routine application of PRP in this patient population. The existing reliable evidence of benefit seems to be restricted to its use in only inflammatory tendinopathies with preserved tendon integrity.

Most Orthopaedic Platelet-Rich Plasma Investigations Don't Report Protocols and Composition: An Updated Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to assess the heterogeneity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) preparation and composition reporting for the treatment of musculoskeletal/orthopaedic pathologies.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify Level I and Level II studies from 2016 to 2022 that evaluated the use of PRP therapy for musculoskeletal pathologies. The search phrase used was "platelet-rich plasma clinical studies." Studies were assessed based on their reporting of the PRP preparation methods and reporting of PRP composition.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-four studies (in 120 articles) met inclusion criteria for analysis. Of these studies, 15 (12.1%) provided comprehensive reporting, including a clear, well-described, and reproducible preparation protocol that future investigators can follow. Thirty-three studies (26.6%) quantitatively reported the final PRP product composition.

CONCLUSIONS

Among the studies using PRP for the treatment of musculoskeletal/orthopaedic pathologies, less than 20% provided a clear, well-described, and reproducible PRP preparation protocol, and only one-fourth of studies reported on the final PRP product composition.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A diverse current reporting of PRP composition between studies provides a high heterogeneity of the term "PRP," which becomes a limitation for a comparison of studies using PRP.

A scoping review and best evidence synthesis for treatment of partial-thickness rotator cuff tears

BACKGROUND

Rotator cuff disorders include a broad spectrum of pathological conditions including partial-thickness and full-thickness tears. Studies have shown partial-thickness rotator cuff tear (PTRCT) prevalence to be twice that of full-thickness tears. In the working population, PTRCTs are one of the most common causes of shoulder pain and often result in occupational disability due to pain, stiffness, and loss of shoulder function. Treatment of PTRCTs remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to consolidate the existing high-quality evidence on best management approaches in treating PTRCTs using both nonoperative and operative approaches.

METHODS

A scoping review with best evidence synthesis was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Library (Wiley), SCOPUS, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost), PubMed Central, and Science Direct were searched from 2000 to March 3, 2023. Level 1 studies, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses that included level 1 and 2 studies, were included.

RESULTS

The search yielded 8276 articles. A total of 3930 articles were screened after removing 4346 duplicates. Application of inclusion criteria resulted in 662 articles that were selected for full-text review. Twenty-eight level 1 studies, 1 systematic review, 4 meta-analyses, and 1 network meta-analyses were included in the best evidence synthesis. Nonoperative strategies included injections (ie, platelet-rich plasma, corticosteroid, prolotherapy, sodium hyaluronate, anesthetic, and atelocollagen), exercise therapy, and physical agents. Operative interventions consisted of débridement, shaving of the tendon and footprint, transtendon repair, and traditional suture anchor repair techniques with and without tear completion. Both nonoperative and operative strategies demonstrated effectiveness at managing pain and functional outcome for PTRCTs. The evidence supports the effectiveness of surgical intervention in treating PTRCTs regardless of arthroscopic technique.

CONCLUSION

The results of this scoping review do not support superiority of operative over nonoperative management and suggest that both strategies can be effective at managing pain and functional outcome for PTRCTs. Surgery, however, is the most invasive and costly approach, with the highest risk of complications such as infection. Other variables such as patient expectation, treating practitioner bias, or preference may change which modalities are offered and in what sequence.

Clinical effects of sodium hyaluronate combined with platelet-rich plasma injection on rotator cuff injury in arthroscopic repair

Objective

Rotator cuff injury is one prevalent shoulder condition that often leads to pain and dysfunction. The study explored the clinical effects of sodium hyaluronate combined with platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection on rotator cuff injury in arthroscopic repair.

Methods

A total of 92 cases with rotator cuff injury were randomly divided into the control group (n = 46, treated with shoulder arthroscopy repair combined with subacromial space injection of sodium hyaluronate) and the experimental group (n = 46, treated with subacromial space injection of autologous PRP on the basis of the treatment in the control group). Visual analogue scale (VAS), Constant-Murley scale (CMS), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES), and quality of life (QOL) scores, as well as complications were compared in the two groups before surgery and at 3 and 6 months after surgery. Shoulder range of motion (ROM) was measured before and after surgery.

Results

VAS scores of patients in the two groups at 3 and 6 months after surgery were lower than those before surgery, and the VAS scores of patients in the experimental group at 3 and 6 months after surgery were much lower than those in the control group (all P < 0.05). The scores of CMS, UCLA, ASES, and QOL, and shoulder ROM in both groups at 3 and 6 months after surgery were higher than those before surgery, and these shoulder joint function scores, QOL and shoulder ROM in the experimental group at 3 and 6 months after surgery were higher than those in the control group (all P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference presented in the incidence of complications between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and sodium hyaluronate combined with PRP injection can effectively reduce pain symptoms, improve shoulder joint function and shoulder ROM, and improve QOL in patients with rotator cuff injury.

Role of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of rotator cuff tendinopathy

Shoulder pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint, and rotator cuff (RC) pathologies are one of the main causes. The RC undergoes various tendinopathic and avascular changes during the aging process. Other degenerative changes affecting its healing potential make it an appealing target for biological agents. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has demonstrated the potential to deliver a high concentration of several growth factors and anti-inflammatory mediators, and its clinical use is mainly supported by experiments that demonstrated its positive effect on muscle, ligaments, and tendinous cells. This review aimed to specify the role of PRP and its future applications in RC tendinopathies based on the current clinical evidence. Due to the different characteristics and conflicting outcomes, clinicians should use PRP with moderate expectations until more consistent evidence is available. However, it is reasonable to consider PRP in patients with contraindications to corticosteroid injections or those with risk factors for inadequate healing. Its autologous origin makes it a safe treatment, and its characteristics make it a promising option for treating RC tendinopathy, but the efficacy has yet to be established.

Comparison of three common shoulder injections for rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the clinical effectiveness of three common shoulder injections mentioned in the guidelines [corticosteroid, sodium hyaluronate (SH) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP)] on rotator cuff tears.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched up to June 1, 2022, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies on the three injection therapies for rotator cuff tears. The main results were pain relief and functional improvement at 1-5 months and over 6 months, pooled using a network meta-analysis and ranked by SUCRA score. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs and 4 prospective studies comprising a total of 1115 patients were included in the review. Three prospective studies were judged to be at high risk of selection bias and performance bias, and one was considered as having a high risk of detection bias. SH injection ranked first in the short term in pain relief (MD: - 2.80; 95%CI - 3.91, - 1.68) and functional improvement (MD:19.17; 95%CI 12.29, 26.05), while PRP injection obtained better results in the long term in both pain relief (MD: - 4.50; 95%CI - 4.97, - 4.03) and functional improvement (MD:11.11; 95%CI 0.53,21.68).

CONCLUSIONS

PRP injection has the potential to successfully treat rotator cuff tears as an alternative to corticosteroids in the long term, in terms of either therapeutic efficiency or adverse effects, followed by SH injection. More research is needed to make high-quality recommendations on treatment options for injection treatments of rotator cuff tears.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection Can Be a Viable Alternative to Corticosteroid Injection for Conservative Treatment of Rotator Cuff Disease: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

To explore whether platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection can be a viable alternative to corticosteroid (CS) injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease.

METHODS

This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched from January 1, 1990, to March 20, 2022, for English-language randomized controlled trials that compared PRP and CS injections for patients with rotator cuff disease. Two evaluators independently screened the literature, extracted data, and assessed the level of evidence and methodologic quality of the enrolled studies. The meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan software (version 5.3.3).

RESULTS

Thirteen nonsurgical randomized controlled trials with 725 patients were included. Compared with CS, PRP provided statistically worse short-term (<2 months) changes in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) assessment scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire scores but provided better medium-term (2-6 months) changes in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores, as well as long-term (≥6 months) changes in Constant-Murley scores, ASES scores, and Simple Shoulder Test scores. No statistically significant differences regarding pain reduction were found between the 2 groups. PRP injections led to worse short-term changes in forward flexion and internal rotation but better medium-term changes in forward flexion and external rotation. PRP showed significantly lower rates of post-injection failure (requests for subsequent injections or surgical intervention prior to 12 months) than CS. No outcome reached the minimal clinically important difference. After sensitivity analyses excluding studies with substantial clinical and/or methodologic heterogeneity, PRP showed better medium-term changes in ASES scores and visual analog scale scores and long-term changes in visual analog scale scores that reached the minimal clinically important difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Without the drawbacks of CS injection, PRP injection is not worse than CS injection in terms of pain relief and function recovery at any time point during follow-up. PRP injection may reduce rates of subsequent injection or surgery, and it might provide better improvements in pain and function in the medium to long term. PRP injection can be a viable alternative to CS injection for conservative treatment of rotator cuff disease.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Meta-analysis of Level I and II studies.

Platelet-rich plasma versus corticosteroid injections in the management of patients with rotator cuff disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an alternative to corticosteroid (CS) injections in managing rotator cuff disease. This meta-analysis investigated differences between PRP and CS for function and pain scores in significance and minimal clinical important difference (MCID). A literature search of Ovid Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, Epub, and Scopus was conducted from inception to October 28, 2021. Eligible studies reported patients older than 18 years with a diagnosis of rotator cuff disease. This review was registered in PROSPERO (ID: CRD42021278740). Twelve studies met eligibility criteria (n = 639) of patients receiving either PRP or CS. At short-term follow-up, a difference favored CS compared to PRP in baseline change for disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score (MD = -5.08, 95% CI: -8.00, -2.15; p = 0.0007; I²  = 0%) and simple shoulder test (SST) (MD = 1.25, 95% CI: 0.33, 2.18; p = 0.008; I²  = 0%). At intermediate follow-up, a difference favored PRP to CS baseline change of the DASH score (MD = 3.41, 95% CI: 0.67, 6.15; p = 0.01; I²  = 0%). At medium-term, a difference favored PRP to CS baseline change of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder (ASES) score (MD = -4.42, 95% CI: -8.16, -0.67; p = 0.02; I²  = 0%). Both treatments achieved individual MCID for each score. Despite favoring CS at short-term follow-up and PRP at intermediate- and medium-term follow-up, functional and pain scores did not demonstrate any clinical difference between the two treatment modalities in management of rotator cuff disease at all follow-up periods.

Platelet-rich plasma does not improve clinical results in patients with rotator cuff disorders but reduces the retear rate. A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess whether the use of Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) produces a clinical benefit in patients with rotator cuff disorders, treated either conservatively or surgically.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science) to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the use of PRP in patients with rotator cuff disorders, treated either conservatively or surgically. A meta-analysis was performed on articles reporting results for Constant, UCLA, VAS, SST scores and retear rate. The RoB 2.0 and the modified Coleman Methodology Score were used to assess methodological quality.

RESULTS

A total of 36 RCTs (20 surgical, 16 conservative) were included, for a total of 2,443 patients. Conservative treatment showed high heterogeneity and no clear consensus in favour of PRP. The meta-analysis of the studies with surgical treatment showed no benefit in using PRP in any of the clinical outcomes, either at the short or medium/long-term follow-up. However, the retear rate was lower with PRP augmentation (p < 0.001). The overall quality of the studies was moderate to high, with the surgical studies presenting a lower risk of bias than the conservative studies.

CONCLUSION

The use of PRP as augmentation in rotator cuff surgical repair significantly reduces the retear rate. However, no benefits were documented in terms of clinical outcomes. PRP application through injection in patients treated conservatively also failed to present any clear advantage. While there are many studies in the literature with several RCTs of moderate to high quality, the high heterogeneity of products and studies remains a significant limitation to fully understanding PRP potential in this field.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Clinical efficacy of different shoulder joint drug injections for rotator cuff injuries: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rotator cuff injury is a common clinical disorder of the musculoskeletal system. It is one of the most common causes of shoulder pain and shoulder joint dysfunction. Intra-articular injection therapy is one of the common conservative treatments for rotator cuff injury in clinical practice, but scholars have been controversial about the different drugs used for injection therapy and their clinical effectiveness, and there is no complete agreement on the choice of different injectables, and the existing original studies are mostly direct comparisons in 1 arm, lacking indirect comparisons, making it difficult to have a clear and comprehensive understanding.

OBJECTIVE

A network Meta-analysis was used to comprehensively compare the effectiveness of drug injection therapies for rotator cuff injuries.

METHODS

The PubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase, Chinese national knowledge infrastructure, Chinese BioMedical Literature on disc, China Science and Technology Journal Database, and Wan-Fang databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of steroid injections for the comparative treatment of rotator cuff injury for the period April 19, 2013 to April 19, 2022 (the last decade). Two investigators independently screened the literature, extracted data according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and evaluated the quality of the literature in parallel. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata 16.0 software to compare the differences in efficacy of each treatment measure and rank the efficacy using the ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) as the effect indicator.

RESULTS

10 RCTs with a total of 861 patients with rotator cuff injury were included, involving 4 therapeutic measures: corticosteroid injection therapy (COR), platelet-rich plasma injection therapy (PRP), Hyaluronic acid injection therapy (HA), and prolotherapy therapy (PRO).Meta-analysis results showed that the ranking results of the 4 therapeutic measures were: corticosteroid injection + hyaluronic acid injection > platelet-rich plasma injection + corticosteroid injection > corticosteroid injection > platelet-rich plasma injection > PRO > platelet-rich plasma injection + hyaluronic acid injection > hyaluronic acid injection.

CONCLUSION

we recommend that corticosteroid injections combined with hyaluronic acid injections can be used for the non-surgical conservative clinical management of rotator cuff injuries.

The use of platelet-rich plasma in management of musculoskeletal pain: a narrative review

Musculoskeletal pain is the most common pain reported by patients. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is widely used to treat musculoskeletal pain. However, the efficacy of PRP to treat this pain remains controversial. This review highlights the application of PRP in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain. PRP treatment appears to reduce pain and improve function in patients with musculoskeletal pain. However, there are limitations to the currently published studies. These limitations include the PRP preparation methods, type of activators, types of pathology to be treated, methods and times of administration, and association of PRP with other treatments.