富血小板血浆注射治疗髌骨肌腱病:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 4.1 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Knee Surgery & Related Research Pub Date : 2022-05-04 DOI:10.1186/s43019-022-00151-5
Apurba Barman, Mithilesh K Sinha, Jagannatha Sahoo, Debasish Jena, Vikas Patel, Suman Patel, Souvik Bhattacharjee, Debanjan Baral
{"title":"富血小板血浆注射治疗髌骨肌腱病:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Apurba Barman, Mithilesh K Sinha, Jagannatha Sahoo, Debasish Jena, Vikas Patel, Suman Patel, Souvik Bhattacharjee, Debanjan Baral","doi":"10.1186/s43019-022-00151-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of the study was to assess the efficacy of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for clinical trials which compared PRP injection with other 'active treatment' interventions ('Non-PRP' injection and 'No-injection' treatments) or 'No-active treatment' interventions. Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials that had been published up to 15 November 2021, were included in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome, pain relief, was measured on a 'visual analog scale.' Secondary outcomes were knee functional activities and quality of life (QoL). The PRISMA guidelines were followed throughout the study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight comparative studies were identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Assessment of these studies revealed that there were no significant differences in pain relief, functional outcomes, and QoL in the short, medium, and long term between PRP injection and Non-PRP injection interventions. Similarly, comparison of PRP injection to the No-active treatment intervention showed no differences in short- and medium-term pain relief. However, when PRP injection was compared to the No-injection treatment intervention extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ECWT), the former was found to be more effective in terms of pain relief in the medium term (mean difference [MD] - 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 2.72 to - 0.28) and long term (MD - 1.70; 95% CI, - 2.90 to - 0.50) and functional outcomes in the medium term (MD 13.0; 95% CI 3.01-22.99) and long term (MD 13.70; 95% CI 4.62-22.78).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In terms of pain relief and functional outcomes, the PRP injection did not provide significantly greater clinical benefit than Non-PRP injections in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy. However, in comparison with ESWT, there was a significant benefit in favor of PRP injection.</p>","PeriodicalId":17886,"journal":{"name":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9066802/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Platelet-rich plasma injection in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Apurba Barman, Mithilesh K Sinha, Jagannatha Sahoo, Debasish Jena, Vikas Patel, Suman Patel, Souvik Bhattacharjee, Debanjan Baral\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43019-022-00151-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The objective of the study was to assess the efficacy of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for clinical trials which compared PRP injection with other 'active treatment' interventions ('Non-PRP' injection and 'No-injection' treatments) or 'No-active treatment' interventions. Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials that had been published up to 15 November 2021, were included in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome, pain relief, was measured on a 'visual analog scale.' Secondary outcomes were knee functional activities and quality of life (QoL). The PRISMA guidelines were followed throughout the study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight comparative studies were identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Assessment of these studies revealed that there were no significant differences in pain relief, functional outcomes, and QoL in the short, medium, and long term between PRP injection and Non-PRP injection interventions. Similarly, comparison of PRP injection to the No-active treatment intervention showed no differences in short- and medium-term pain relief. However, when PRP injection was compared to the No-injection treatment intervention extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ECWT), the former was found to be more effective in terms of pain relief in the medium term (mean difference [MD] - 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 2.72 to - 0.28) and long term (MD - 1.70; 95% CI, - 2.90 to - 0.50) and functional outcomes in the medium term (MD 13.0; 95% CI 3.01-22.99) and long term (MD 13.70; 95% CI 4.62-22.78).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In terms of pain relief and functional outcomes, the PRP injection did not provide significantly greater clinical benefit than Non-PRP injections in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy. However, in comparison with ESWT, there was a significant benefit in favor of PRP injection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Knee Surgery & Related Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9066802/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Knee Surgery & Related Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-022-00151-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knee Surgery & Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43019-022-00151-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估自体富血小板血浆(PRP)注射治疗髌腱病的疗效:方法: 在 PubMed、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL 和 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 数据库中搜索比较 PRP 注射与其他 "积极治疗 "干预("非 PRP "注射和 "无注射 "治疗)或 "无积极治疗 "干预的临床试验。荟萃分析纳入了截至 2021 年 11 月 15 日发表的随机和非随机临床试验。主要结果是疼痛缓解程度,采用 "视觉模拟量表 "进行测量。次要结果为膝关节功能活动和生活质量(QoL)。整个研究过程都遵循了 PRISMA 指南:荟萃分析确定了八项比较研究。对这些研究的评估结果显示,PRP 注射与非 PRP 注射干预在短期、中期和长期的疼痛缓解、功能结果和 QoL 方面没有显著差异。同样,将 PRP 注射与非主动治疗干预进行比较后发现,在短期和中期疼痛缓解方面没有差异。然而,当 PRP 注射与非注射治疗干预措施体外冲击波疗法(ECWT)进行比较时,发现前者在中期疼痛缓解方面更为有效(平均差 [MD] - 1.50; 95%置信区间[CI] - 2.72 to - 0.28)和长期(MD - 1.70; 95% CI, - 2.90 to - 0.50),以及中期(MD 13.0; 95% CI 3.01-22.99)和长期(MD 13.70; 95% CI 4.62-22.78)的功能结果:就疼痛缓解和功能结果而言,在治疗髌骨肌腱病时,PRP注射的临床疗效并不明显优于非PRP注射。不过,与 ESWT 相比,PRP 注射的疗效更明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Platelet-rich plasma injection in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose: The objective of the study was to assess the efficacy of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy.

Methods: The PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for clinical trials which compared PRP injection with other 'active treatment' interventions ('Non-PRP' injection and 'No-injection' treatments) or 'No-active treatment' interventions. Randomized and non-randomized clinical trials that had been published up to 15 November 2021, were included in the meta-analysis. The primary outcome, pain relief, was measured on a 'visual analog scale.' Secondary outcomes were knee functional activities and quality of life (QoL). The PRISMA guidelines were followed throughout the study.

Results: Eight comparative studies were identified for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Assessment of these studies revealed that there were no significant differences in pain relief, functional outcomes, and QoL in the short, medium, and long term between PRP injection and Non-PRP injection interventions. Similarly, comparison of PRP injection to the No-active treatment intervention showed no differences in short- and medium-term pain relief. However, when PRP injection was compared to the No-injection treatment intervention extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ECWT), the former was found to be more effective in terms of pain relief in the medium term (mean difference [MD] - 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 2.72 to - 0.28) and long term (MD - 1.70; 95% CI, - 2.90 to - 0.50) and functional outcomes in the medium term (MD 13.0; 95% CI 3.01-22.99) and long term (MD 13.70; 95% CI 4.62-22.78).

Conclusions: In terms of pain relief and functional outcomes, the PRP injection did not provide significantly greater clinical benefit than Non-PRP injections in the treatment of patellar tendinopathy. However, in comparison with ESWT, there was a significant benefit in favor of PRP injection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A novel practical method to predict anterior cruciate ligament hamstring graft size using preoperative MRI Evaluating the accuracy and relevance of ChatGPT responses to frequently asked questions regarding total knee replacement Phenotype-considered kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty for windswept-deformity-associated osteoarthritis: surgical strategy and clinical outcomes Analysis of radiographic factors affecting the significant differences in knee alignment between hip-to-talus and hip-to-calcaneus radiographs after opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy Ramp lesion in anterior cruciate ligament injury: a review of the anatomy, biomechanics, epidemiology, and diagnosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1