Plasma rich in growth factors versus corticosteroid injections for management of chronic rotator cuff tendinopathy: a prospective double-blind randomized controlled trial with 1 year of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tendinopathy (RCT) is a painful and dysfunctional shoulder condition traditionally considered as a degenerative pathology. However, evidence is pointing to immunocompetent cells and activated stromal fibroblasts as the drivers of a nonresolved inflammatory condition in RCT. As potent anti-inflammatory agents, corticosteroid injections have been among the first-line and the most common therapeutic strategies. Recently, another adjuvant therapy to treat musculoskeletal inflammation-driven painful conditions, namely, platelet-rich plasma (PRP), has emerged as safe and effective. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of intratendinous injections of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) with conventional intratendinous corticosteroid injections on patients with chronic RCT using patient-reported outcome measures. METHODS: A total of 39 patients received PRGF treatment (3 infiltrations, 1 every other week), whereas 40 patients, as a control group, received corticosteroid (3 infiltrations, 1 every other week). Patients were evaluated before treatment and at 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up using the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) scale, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and Constant test. The primary outcome of the study was a 15% superior improvement of the PRGF group compared with the corticosteroid group in the UCLA scale and QuickDASH test at 6 months of follow-up, considering this difference to be clinically relevant. RESULTS: Both PRGF and corticosteroid groups showed significant clinical improvement in the 3 scores at all time points of the study compared with baseline. However, at 6 and 12 months of follow-up, the PRGF group had 22.1% and 21.2% superior improvement of the UCLA test, 14.3% and 13.5% for QuickDASH, and 16.4% and 20.2% for the Constant-Murley test, respectively, compared to the corticosteroid group. CONCLUSIONS: Three PRGF intratendinous injections every other week in patients with chronic rotator cuff tendinopathy show significantly superior and sustained pain-relieving and functional improvements compared with corticosteroid intratendinous injections assessed by 3 patient-reported outcome scales at 6 and 12 months of follow-up.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Applications for Achilles Tendon Repair: A Bridge between Biology and Surgery.

Achilles tendon ruptures are very common tendon ruptures and their incidence is increasing in modern society, resulting in work incapacity and months off sport, which generate a need for accelerated and successful therapeutic repair strategy. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is emerging as adjuvant human blood-derived constructs to assist Achilles tendon rupture treatment. However, myriad PRP preparation methods in conjunction with poor standardization in the modalities of their applications impinge on the consistent effectiveness of clinical and structural outcomes regarding their therapeutic efficacy. The purpose of this review is to provide some light on the application of PRP for Achilles tendon ruptures. PRP has many characteristics that make it an attractive treatment. Elements such as the inclusion of leukocytes and erythrocytes within PRP, the absence of activation and activation ex vivo or in vivo, the modality of application, and the adjustment of PRP pH can influence the biology of the applied product and result in misleading therapeutic conclusions. The weakest points in demonstrating their consistent effectiveness are primarily the result of myriad PRP preparation methods and the poor standardization of modalities for their application. Selecting the right biological scaffold and applying it correctly to restitutio ad integrum of ruptured Achilles tendons remains a daunting and complex task.

Two cycles of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF-Endoret) intra-articular injections improve stiffness and activities of daily living but not pain compared to one cycle on patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of a treatment based on one cycle versus two cycles of intra-articular injections of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF-Endoret) on patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Ninety patients with knee OA were included and evaluated. A total of 48 patients received one cycle (OC group) (3 injections on a weekly basis), while 42 patients received two cycles of PRGF-Endoret (TC group) spaced 6 months between them. Patients were evaluated with LEQUESNE and WOMAC scores before treatment and after 48 weeks. Safety assessment was also performed. RESULTS: A significant reduction of all assessed outcome measures was shown for both groups at 48 weeks compared with baseline values (P < 0.001). Patients of TCs group showed a significantly higher reduction (P < 0.05) in WOMAC stiffness subscales. Regarding LEQUESNE INDEX, a significantly higher reduction was observed in the TC group in all subscales except in pain score. In the maximum walking distance subscale (MCD), the improvement rate was 31.8% higher for the TCs group compared with the OC group (P < 0.01). In addition, the TC group showed a significant improvement in LEQUESNE activities of daily living (ADV) and global subscales of 14.7 and 11.8% (P < 0.05) higher, respectively, than the OC group. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with two cycles of PRGF did not show a significantly higher pain reduction compared with one cycle treatment. However, two cycles of PRGF showed a significant improvement in WOMAC stiffness, LEQUESNE MCD, LEQUESNE ADV and LEQUESNE global subscales. Therefore, patients treated with two cycles present an improvement in quality of life. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Comparison of intra-articular injections of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF-Endoret) versus Durolane hyaluronic acid in the treatment of patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety in a randomized, clinical trial of 3 injections of PRGF-Endoret (BTI Biotechnology Institute, Vitoria, Spain) versus one single intra-articular injection of Durolane hyaluronic acid (HA) (Q-MED AB, Uppsala, Sweden) as a treatment for reducing symptoms in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: Ninety-six patients with symptomatic knee OA were randomly assigned to receive PRGF-Endoret (3 injections on a weekly basis) or one infiltration with Durolane HA. The primary outcome measures were a 30% decrease and a 50% decrease in the summed score for the pain, physical function, and stiffness subscales of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Lequesne scores from baseline to weeks 24 and 48. The percentage of OMERACT-OARSI (Outcome Measures for Rheumatology Committee and Osteoarthritis Research Society International Standing Committee for Clinical Trials Response Criteria Initiative) responders was also documented. As secondary outcomes, pain, stiffness, and physical function by use of the WOMAC and the Lequesne score were considered and overall safety of the injection themselves. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 63.6 years. Treatment with PRGF-Endoret was significantly more efficient than treatment with Durolane HA in reducing knee pain and stiffness and improving physical function in patients with knee OA. The rate of response to PRGF-Endoret was significantly higher than the rate of response to HA for all the scores including pain, stiffness, and physical function on the WOMAC, Lequesne index, and OMERACT-OARSI responders at 24 and 48 weeks. Adverse events were mild and evenly distributed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that PRGF-Endoret is safe and significantly superior to Durolane HA in primary and secondary efficacy analysis both at 24 and 48 weeks; provides a significant clinical improvement, reducing patients' pain and improving joint stiffness and physical function with respect to basal levels in patients with knee OA; and should be considered in the treatment of patients with knee OA.