Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Orthop. Jun 18, 2023; 14(6): 485-501
Published online Jun 18, 2023. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v14.i6.485
Effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of Achilles tendon disease
Dan Huang, Djandan Tadum Arthur Vithran, Hao-Li Gong, Ming Zeng, Zhong-Wen Tang, Zhou-Zhou Rao, Jie Wen, Sheng Xiao
Dan Huang, Hao-Li Gong, Ming Zeng, Zhong-Wen Tang, Jie Wen, Sheng Xiao, Department of Pediatric Orthopedics, Hunan Provincial People’s Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University, Changsha 410013, Hunan Province, China
Djandan Tadum Arthur Vithran, Department of Orthopaedics, Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha 410013, Hunan Province, China
Zhou-Zhou Rao, Department of Physiology, Hunan Normal University School of Medicine, Changsha 410005, Hunan Province, China
Jie Wen, Department of Anatomy, Hunan Normal University School of Medicine, Changsha 410005, Hunan Province, China
Author contributions: Huang D, Arthur Vithran DT and Gong HL contribute equally to this study, they share co-first author; Wen J conceived and coordinated the study, designed; Xiao S performed and analyzed the experiments; Tang ZW wrote the paper; Zeng M, Arthur Vithran DT and Gong HL did the data analysis and carried out the data collection; Zeng M revised the paper; and all authors approved the final version of the manuscript.
Supported by Scientific Research Project of Hunan Education Department, No. 21B0031 and No. 21B0042.
Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article.
PRISMA 2009 Checklist statement: The authors have read the PRISMA 2009 Checklist, and the manuscript was prepared and revised according to the PRISMA 2009 Checklist.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Jie Wen, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Pediatric Orthopedics, Hunan Provincial People’s Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Hunan Normal University, No. 61 West Jiefang Road, Changsha 410013, Hunan Province, China. cashwj@qq.com
Received: December 24, 2022
Peer-review started: December 24, 2022
First decision: March 28, 2023
Revised: March 28, 2023
Accepted: April 20, 2023
Article in press: April 20, 2023
Published online: June 18, 2023
Processing time: 176 Days and 21.4 Hours
Abstract
BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the treatment of patients with Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) and Achilles tendinopathy (AT) has been controversial.

AIM

To assess PRP injections’ effectiveness in treating ATR and AT.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of relevant literature was conducted utilizing multiple databases such as Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese Science and Technology Journal, EMBASE, and China Biomedical CD-ROM. The present investigation integrated randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma injections in managing individuals with Achilles tendon rupture and tendinopathy. The eligibility criteria for the trials encompassed publications that were published within the timeframe of January 1, 1966 to December 2022. The statistical analysis was performed utilizing the Review Manager 5.4.1, the visual analogue scale (VAS), Victorian Institute Ankle Function Scale (VISA-A), and Achilles Tendon Thickness were used to assess outcomes.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 13 randomized controlled trials, 8 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for AT and 5 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for ATR. PRP for AT at 6 wk [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.92, 95%CI: -0.54 to 4.38, I2 = 34%], at 3 mo [WMD = 0.20, 95%CI: -2.65 to 3.05, I2 = 60%], and 6 mo [WMD = 2.75, 95%CI: -2.76 to 8.26, I2 = 87%) after which there was no significant difference in VISA-A scores between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in VAS scores between the PRP group and the control group after 6 wk [WMD = 6.75, 95%CI: -6.12 to 19.62, I2 = 69%] and 6 mo [WMD = 10.46, 95%CI: -2.44 to 23.37, I2 = 69%] of treatment, and at mid-treatment at 3 mo [WMD = 11.30, 95%CI: 7.33 to 15.27, I2 = 0%] after mid-treatment, the PRP group demonstrated better outcomes than the control group. Post-treatment patient satisfaction [WMD = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.35, I2 = 0%], Achilles tendon thickness [WMD = 0.34, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.71, I2 = 61%] and return to sport [WMD = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.87 to 1.42, I2 = 0%] were not significantly different between the PRP and control groups. The study did not find any statistically significant distinction between the groups that received PRP treatment and those that did not, regarding the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment - Achilles scores at 3 mo [WMD = -1.49, 95%CI: -5.24 to 2.25, I2 = 0%], 6 mo [WMD = -0.24, 95%CI: -3.80 to 3.32, I2 = 0%], and 12 mo [WMD = -2.02, 95%CI: -5.34 to 1.29, I2 = 87%] for ATR patients. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the PRP and the control groups in improving Heel lift height respectively at 6 mo [WMD = -3.96, 95%CI: -8.61 to 0.69, I2 = 0%] and 12 mo [WMD = -1.66, 95%CI: -11.15 to 7.83, I2 = 0%] for ATR patients. There was no significant difference in calf circumference between the PRP group and the control group after 6 mo [WMD = 1.01, 95%CI: -0.78 to 2.80, I2 = 54%] and 12 mo [WMD = -0.55, 95%CI: -2.2 to 1.09, I2 = 0%] of treatment. There was no significant difference in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups at 6 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.38, 95%CI: -2.34 to 1.58, I2 = 82%] and after 12 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.98, 95%CI: -1.41 to -0.56, I2 = 10%] there was a significant improvement in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in the rate of return to exercise after treatment [WMD = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.77 to 1.87, I2 = 0%] and the rate of adverse events [WMD = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.50 to 1.45, I2 = 0%] between the PRP group and the control group.

CONCLUSION

The use of PRP for AT improved the patient’s immediate VAS scores but not VISA-A scores, changes in Achilles tendon thickness, patient satisfaction, or return to sport. Treatment of ATR with PRP injections alone improved long-term ankle mobility but had no significant effect on VISA-A scores, single heel lift height, calf circumference or return to sport. Additional research employing more extensive sampling sizes, more strict experimental methods, and standard methodologies may be necessary to yield more dependable and precise findings.

Keywords: Platelet-Rich plasma; Achilles tendon rupture; Achilles tendinopathy; Systematic evaluation; Randomized controlled trial

Core Tip: Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) and Achilles tendinopathy (AT) are commonly seen in orthopaedic outpatient clinics. The effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the treatment of patients with ATR and AT has been controversial. This study aims to inform the decisions of physicians faced with challenges when making treatment choices.