Platelet-Rich Plasma Has Better Results for Long-term Functional Improvement and Pain Relief for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
Background: Corticosteroids (CS) have shown good short-term performance in terms of pain relief and functional improvement. However, the safety and long-term efficacy of this treatment remains controversial. Several studies have reported good results of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of tendinopathies. However, whether its use in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) is superior to that of CS remains controversial. Purpose: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of original studies to determine whether the prognosis of LE patients treated with PRP is better than that of CS. Study Design: Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Two independent reviewers searched online databases from January 2000 to July 2022 according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to evaluate prospective studies of PRP versus CS injection for LE. A third author addressed any discrepancies. Evidence quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Risk ratios for dichotomous variables and mean differences (MDs) for continuous variables were used to compare clinical outcomes. P values <.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: Eleven randomized controlled trials with 730 patients were included in this review. PRP provided a significantly worse short-term (<2 months) improvement in the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score (MD, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.44]; I2 = 85%; P = .0003) and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score (MD, 10.23 [95% CI, 9.08 to 11.39]; I2 = 67%; P < .0001) but better long-term (≥6 months) improvement in the VAS score (MD, –2.18 [95% CI, –3.13 to −1.22]; I2 = 89%; P < .0001), DASH score (MD, –8.13 [95% CI, –9.87 to −6.39]; I2 = 25%; P < .0001), and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MD, 16.53 [95% CI, 1.52 to 31.53]; I2 = 98%; P = .03) than CS. The medium-term (2-6 months) reduction in the VAS score was not significantly different between the 2 groups. After sensitivity analysis, none of the results changed except for the short-term VAS scores (MD, 0.53 [95% CI, –0.13 to 1.19]; I2 = 78%; P = .12). Conclusion: Both PRP and CS injections are effective treatments for patients with LE. CS provides better short-term (<2 months) functional improvement and may be more advantageous in terms of short-term pain relief, while PRP provides better long-term (≥6 months) functional improvement and better performance regarding long-term pain relief.
