Liu Chun-Jie, Yu Kun-Lun, Bai Jiang-Bo, Tian De-Hu, Liu Guo-Li
Department of Orthopedics, Tangshan Workers Hospital, Tangshan City.
Department of Hand Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Apr;98(16):e15278. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015278.
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is used as an alternative therapy to reduce pain and improve functional restoration in patients with Achilles tendinopathy (AT). We evaluated the current evidence for the efficacy of PRP as a treatment for chronic AT.
The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases were searched for articles on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of PRP with that of with placebo injections plus eccentric training as treatment for AT. The articles were uploaded over the establishment of the databases to May 01, 2018. The Cochrane risk of bias (ROB) tool was used to assess methodological quality. Outcome measurements included the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A), visual analog scale (VAS) and Achilles tendon thickness. Statistical analysis was performed with RevMan 5.3.5 software.
Five RCTs (n = 189) were included in this meta-analysis. Significant differences in the VISA-A were not observed between the PRP and placebo groups after 12 weeks [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.2, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.36 to 0.76, I = 71%], 24 weeks (SMD = 0.77, 95% CI: -0.10-1.65, I = 85%) and 1 year (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI: -0.76-2.42, I = 72%) of treatment. However, PRP exhibited better efficacy than the placebo treatment after 6 weeks (SMD = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.15-0.77, I = 34%). Two studies included VAS scores and tendon thickness. VAS scores after 6 weeks (SMD = 1.35, 95% CI: -0.1.04-3.74, I = 93%) and 24 weeks (SMD = 1.48, 95% CI: -0.1.59-4.55, I = 95%) were not significantly different. However, VAS scores at the 12th week (SMD = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.53-1.68, I = 83%) and tendon thickness (SMD = 1.51, 95% CI: 0.39-2.63, I = 53%) were significantly different.
PRP injection around the Achilles tendon is an option for the treatment of chronic AT. Limited evidence supports the conclusion that PRP is not superior to placebo treatment. These results still require verification by a large number of well designed, heterogeneous RCT studies.
富血小板血浆(PRP)被用作一种替代疗法,以减轻跟腱病(AT)患者的疼痛并改善功能恢复。我们评估了PRP治疗慢性AT疗效的现有证据。
在PubMed、Embase、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆数据库中检索关于随机对照试验(RCT)的文章,这些试验比较了PRP与安慰剂注射加离心训练作为AT治疗方法的疗效。文章上传时间为数据库建立至2018年5月1日。使用Cochrane偏倚风险(ROB)工具评估方法学质量。结局测量包括维多利亚运动评估 - 跟腱(VISA - A)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)和跟腱厚度。使用RevMan 5.3.5软件进行统计分析。
本荟萃分析纳入了5项RCT(n = 189)。治疗12周后,PRP组和安慰剂组在VISA - A方面未观察到显著差异[标准化均数差(SMD)= 0.2,95%置信区间(95%CI):0.36至0.76,I = 71%],24周时(SMD = 0.77,95%CI: - 0.10 - 1.65,I = 85%)以及1年时(SMD = 0.83,95%CI: - 0.76 - 2.42,I = 72%)。然而,治疗6周后,PRP的疗效优于安慰剂治疗(SMD = 0.46,95%CI:0.15 - 0.77,I = 34%)。两项研究纳入了VAS评分和肌腱厚度。6周后(SMD = 1.35,95%CI: - 0.1.04 - 3.74,I = 93%)和24周后(SMD = 1.48,95%CI: - 0.1.59 - 4.55,I = 95%)的VAS评分无显著差异。然而,第12周时的VAS评分(SMD = 1.10,95%CI:0.53 - 1.68,I = 83%)和肌腱厚度(SMD = 1.51,95%CI:0.39 - 2.63,I = 53%)有显著差异。
在跟腱周围注射PRP是治疗慢性AT的一种选择。有限的证据支持PRP并不优于安慰剂治疗这一结论。这些结果仍需要大量设计良好、异质性的RCT研究进行验证。