Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Platelet-rich plasma versus lidocaine as tenotomy adjuvants in people with elbow epicondylopathy: a randomized controlled trial

Authors
  • Martin, Jose Ignacio
  • Atilano, Leire
  • Merino, Josu
  • Gonzalez, Igor
  • Iglesias, Gotzon
  • Areizaga, Luis
  • Bully, Paola
  • Grandes, Gonzalo
  • Andia, Isabel
Type
Published Article
Journal
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
Publisher
Springer (Biomed Central Ltd.)
Publication Date
Apr 23, 2019
Volume
14
Issue
1
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1186/s13018-019-1153-6
Source
Springer Nature
Keywords
License
Green

Abstract

ObjectivesTo determine the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) compared to lidocaine as a tenotomy adjuvant for people with elbow tendinopathy.MethodsOur study was a parallel-group, double-blind, randomized trial involving 71 patients with recalcitrant elbow tendinopathy who received two sessions of ultrasound-guided tenotomy with either PRP or lidocaine in a tertiary public hospital. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with an improvement exceeding 25% reduction in disability (Spanish version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaires–DASH-E) at 6 and 12 months; the secondary outcome was the percentage of patients exceeding 25% reduction in pain (VAS-P).ResultsThere was no evidence of significant differences in the proportion of patients who experienced clinically relevant improvements. After 6 months, 18 patients (78.59%) in the lidocaine group and 19 patients (73.08%) in the PRP group showed improved function above 25% (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90 (0.17 to 4.60)); 21 patients (72.21%) in the lidocaine group versus 22 patients (84.62%) in the PRP group achieved more than 25% pain reduction (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.10 to 2.37). After 12 months, 17 patients (70.83%) in the lidocaine group versus 19 patients (76%) in the PRP group had improved function (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.13 to 3.84), and 19 patients (76%) in the lidocaine group versus 20 patients (90.91%) in the PRP group had improved pain above 25% (unadjusted odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.06 to 2.51). Hypercholesterolemia and baseline vascularization influenced outcomes. There were no differences between groups in the adjusted odds ratios.ConclusionPRP results in similar improvements to those obtained with lidocaine. Selecting patients according to their pretreatment status can improve treatment efficacy.Trial registrationNCT01945528, EudraCT 2013-000478-32. Registered 18 August 2013, enrolment of the first participant 10 March 2014

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times