Platelet-rich Plasma For Pain Research Articles

Comparison between single spin and double spin platelet rich plasma in pain and functional outcome of Osteoarthritis knee: A randomized controlled trial

Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is condition characterised by progressive degeneration of joint cartilage, eventually leading to deformity of the joint. OA causes pain and disability and impacts on quality-of-life. Intra-articular platelet rich plasma gives favourable outcomes in OA knee; however, efficacy may be affected by method of preparation. Hence, this study comparing single spin and double spin platelet-rich plasma (PRP).Methods: A randomised controlled trial done among patients of OA who visited Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal during August 2019-July 2021. Patients with OA knee having radiological findings of Kellgren Lawrence (KL) grade 2 and 3 (n=62) randomized into single spin PRP, (n=31) and double spin PRP, (n=31) groups and intra-articular PRP injection was given.Results: Baseline characteristics were not statistically significant. At the end of 1 week, improvement in mean difference of VAS was observe however not statistically significant (p=0.71). At end of 12 weeks and 24 weeks, there were statistically significant improvement in both mean difference of VAS (p=0.00) and WOMAC (p=0.002). Post intervention, out of the single spin PRP group, (64.51%, n=20) had complaints of adverse effects swelling, pain, redness whereas (6.45%, n=2) patients who received double spin PRP had adverse effects.Conclusions: Platelet rich plasma obtained by double spin method has long term improvement in both pain and function in patients with KL grade 2 and 3 OA knee than PRP from single spin method. Patient who received single spin PRP has more frequent post injection flare ups.

Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Pain and Self-Report Function in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Best-Evidence Synthesis.

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in pain and self-report function of patients with knee osteoarthritis on the basis of comparisons with hyaluronic acid or placebo. Best-evidence synthesis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. Literature retrieval was limited to RCTs assessing the efficacy of PRP in knee osteoarthritis. Methodology evaluation and data extraction were based on Cochrane Collaboration guidelines. Meta-analyses were performed using mean difference or standardized mean difference as effect size. Ten RCTs were included and analyzed. Meta-analysis showed significant superiority of PRP in outcome scores when compared with hyaluronic acid (standardized mean difference = -0.85, P = 0.004, I = 93%), but no statistical difference was found in well-designed double-blind trials (standardized mean difference = -0.09, P = 0.38, I = 0%). Pooled standardized mean difference of trials comparing PRP with placebo directly was -2.13 (95% confidence interval = -3.29 to -0.98), and that of indirect comparison was -0.22 (95% confidence interval = -0.45 to -0.01). In relieving pain and improving self-report function, PRP showed no superiority over hyaluronic acid in well-designed double-blind trials, and beneficial effects of PRP in most trials probably resulted from insufficient blinding methods. However, PRP is still considered more effective than placebo on the basis of present evidence.

Treatment of Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: Platelet-Rich Plasma or Exercise Therapy? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background:Subacromial impingement syndrome (SAIS) is the most common disorder of the shoulder. The evidence for the effectiveness of treatment options is inconclusive and limited. Therefore, there is a need for more evidence in this regard, particularly for long-term outcomes.Hypothesis:Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) would be an effective method in treating subacromial impingement.Study Design:Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.Methods:This was a single-blinded randomized clinical trial with 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-up. Sixty-two patients were randomly placed into 2 groups, receiving either PRP or exercise therapy. The outcome parameters were pain, shoulder range of motion (ROM), muscle force, functionality, and magnetic resonance imaging findings.Results:Both treatment options significantly reduced pain and increased shoulder ROM compared with baseline measurements. Both treatments also significantly improved functionality. However, the treatment choices were not significantly effective in improving muscle force. Trend analysis revealed that in the first and third months, exercise therapy was superior to PRP in pain, shoulder flexion and abduction, and functionality. However, in the sixth month, only shoulder abduction and total Western Ontario Rotator Cuff score were significantly different between the 2 groups.Conclusion:Both PRP injection and exercise therapy were effective in reducing pain and disability in patients with SAIS, with exercise therapy proving more effective.