The level of ratio between matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1) and tissue inhibitor matrix metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) after prolotherapy intervention and the functional outcome in patient with frozen shoulder: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of prolotherapy on functional outcome changes, along with ratio of matrix metalloproteinase-1 (MMP-1)/tissue inhibitor matrix metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1) as an indicator of tissue repair in the glenohumeral joint in frozen shoulder patients. DESIGN: Single-blinded randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS: Participants with frozen shoulder. METHODS: The prolotherapy group is the study group, and the normal saline (NS) group is the control group. Each group was given injections at weeks 0, 2, 4, and 6. Level of biomarker levels was measured at week 6 and week 12 after there. Functional outcomes were measured at weeks 0, 6, and 12. RESULTS: A significant difference in week 6 and week 12 was demonstrated in the ratio of MMP-1/TIMP-1 level between the prolotherapy group and the normal saline group (P value = .002). Both groups performed well regarding the Numerical Rating Scale score and functional outcome. Compared to the normal saline group, prolotherapy changed the mean range of motion in flexion and internal rotation. CONCLUSION: Prolotherapy is considered to play a role in repairing cartilage based on biomarker assessment, particularly the ratio of MMP-1/TIMP-1-prolotherapy effectiveness in improving functional outcome and Numerical Rating Scale score.

A Case Series: Effect of Comorbidities on the Outcomes of Prolotherapy Injection for Frozen Shoulder Patients.

Frozen shoulder (FS) is a disease caused by an inflammatory condition that causes severe pain and decreased range of motion by loss of glenohumeral mobility. Frozen Shoulder restricts daily life's functional aspect, increasing morbidity. Hypertension and diabetes mellitus are risk factors that make an FS poor prognosis during treatment because of the diabetes glycation process and hypertension-enhanced vascularization. Prolotherapy injects an irritant solution into the tendon, joints, ligaments, and joint spaces to release growth factors and collagen deposition, reducing pain, restoring joint stability, and increasing the quality of life. We report 3 cases of patients with confirmed FS. Patient A with no comorbidity, patient B with diabetes mellitus, and patient C with hypertension, with all patient's chief complaints of shoulder pain and limited ROM, and symptoms affected the general quality of daily life. This patient was provided injection with Prolotherapy treatment combined with physical therapy intervention. Patient A had significantly improved ROM to maximum after 6 weeks with relieved pain and improved shoulder function. Patients B and C showed increased ROM, still tiny, decreased pain, and improved shoulder function. In conclusion, prolotherapy demonstrated a beneficial effect in a patient with FS with comorbidities, although not to the maximum extent in patients without comorbidity.

Effectiveness of Prolotherapy Combined with Physical Therapy Versus Physical Therapy Only for Frozen Shoulder: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND Frozen shoulder (FS) is a common conditions that causes significant morbidity. It is characterized by restriction of both active and passive shoulder motion (ROM) of the glenohumeral joint. The etiology, pathology, and most efficacious treatments are unclear. The purpose of FS treatment is complete elimination of pain and recovery of shoulder joint function. Prolotherapy injects certain compounds into articular spaces, ligaments, and/or tendons to relieve pain and disability around joint spaces and to stimulate a proliferation cascade to enhance tissue repair and strength. This case report aims to describe functional outcome changes in 2 patients with FS, comparing prolotherapy combined with physical therapy vs physical therapy only. CASE REPORT We report the cases of 2 patients with confirmed FS. Patient A was 66-year-old man with chief concern of right shoulder pain and limited ROM in the past 3 months, which disrupted daily life, with a visual analog scale (VAS) of 6 out of 10. Patient B was 65-year-old man with chief concern of right shoulder pain and limited ROM in the past 2 months. The symptoms affected his general quality of life, with a VAS of 5 out of 10. Patient A underwent prolotherapy combined with physical therapy and had significantly improved ROM after 2 weeks, with relieved pain and improved shoulder function. Patient B underwent physical therapy only and showed similar ROM and no significant pain improvement. CONCLUSIONS Initial treatment with prolotherapy combined with physical therapy for patients with frozen shoulder achieved fast improvement of active and passive ROM, significantly decreased pain, and improved quality of life compared to physical therapy intervention only.

Changes in levels of cartilage oligomeric proteinase and urinary C-terminal telopeptide of type II collagen in subjects with knee osteoarthritis after dextrose prolotherapy: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of dextrose prolotherapy in patients with knee osteoarthritis on the levels of serum cartilage oligomeric proteinase and urinary C-terminal telopeptide of type II collagen, and on the Western Ontario McMaster Universities Index and numerical rating scale score for pain. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial, in which participants were randomly allocated into 2 groups, receiving injections of either hyaluronic acid or dextrose prolotherapy. The hyaluronic acid group received 5 injections, 1 each on weeks 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, and the dextrose prolotherapy group received 3 injections, 1 each on weeks 1, 5 and 9. Serum cartilage oligomeric proteinase, urinary C-terminal telopeptide of type II collagen, Western Ontario McMaster Universities Index score, and numerical rating scale score for pain were measured at baseline and 3 weeks after the last injection. Comparative analysis was conducted using Wilcoxon test within groups and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) test between groups. RESULTS: A total of 47 participants (21 allocated to hyaluronic acid, 26 allocated to dextrose prolotherapy) completed the protocol. Both interventions resulted in significant improvements in numerical rating scale scores for pain, total Western Ontario McMaster Universities Index scores, and its subscales score. However, the dextrose prolotherapy outperformed hyaluronic acid in numerical rating scale score for pain and level of urinary C-terminal telopeptide of type II collagen, with score changes differences of 0.93 (p = 0.042) and 0.34 (p = 0.048), respectively. No significant changes in level of serum cartilage oligomeric proteinase were found in either group. CONCLUSION: Dextrose prolotherapy is an alternative injection therapy for knee osteoarthritis, which was found to be associated with a significant reduction in urinary C-terminal telopeptide of type II collagen compared with hyaluronic acid injection. Neither injection method resulted in reduced serum cartilage oligomeric proteinase.