Rebecca S Kearney1,2, Chen Ji1, Jane Warwick1, Nicholas Parsons1, Jaclyn Brown1, Paul Harrison3, Jonathan Young2, Matthew L Costa4. 1. Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom. 2. University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire, Coventry, United Kingdom. 3. Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. 4. Oxford Trauma and Emergency Care, Nuffield Department of Rheumatology, Musculoskeletal and Orthopaedic Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Abstract
Importance: Platelet-rich plasma injections are used as a treatment for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy, but evidence for this treatment is limited. Objective: In adults with midportion Achilles tendinopathy, to assess the effects of a single platelet-rich plasma injection, compared with sham injection, on the outcome of the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) score (a single composite measure of Achilles tendinopathy severity). Design, Setting, and Participants: A participant-blinded, multicenter randomized clinical trial that included 240 people from 24 sites assigned to either a platelet-rich plasma injection or a sham injection between April 2016 and February 2020. Final follow-up was July 2020. Participants were older than 18 years with midportion Achilles tendon pain for more than 3 months as confirmed by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, or both. Interventions: A single intratendinous platelet-rich plasma injection (n = 121) or a single sham injection (insertion of a subcutaneous dry needle not entering the tendon) (n = 119). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the VISA-A score, measured 6 months after treatment allocation. The VISA-A score contains 8 questions that cover 3 domains of pain, function, and activity, analyzed as a composite score (range, 0 [worst symptoms] to 100 [no symptoms]; minimal clinically important difference in score, 12 points). The primary analysis was adjusted for laterality, age, sex, and baseline VISA-A score. Results: Among 240 patients assigned to a platelet-rich plasma or sham injection (mean age, 52 years; 138 [58%] women), 221 (92%) completed the trial. At 6-month follow-up, mean VISA-A score values in the plasma-rich plasma group vs the sham injection group were 54.4 vs 53.4 (adjusted mean difference, -2.7 [95% CI, -8.8 to 3.3]). The most common adverse events compared between patients in the platelet-rich plasma group vs the sham group were injection site discomfort (97 vs 73 patients), swelling (56 vs 52 patients) and bruising (48 vs 49 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy, treatment with a single injection of intratendinous platelet-rich plasma, compared with insertion of a subcutaneous dry needle, did not reduce Achilles tendon dysfunction at 6 months. These findings do not support the use of this treatment for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN13254422.
Importance: Platelet-rich plasma injections are used as a treatment for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy, but evidence for this treatment is limited. Objective: In adults with midportion Achilles tendinopathy, to assess the effects of a single platelet-rich plasma injection, compared with sham injection, on the outcome of the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) score (a single composite measure of Achilles tendinopathy severity). Design, Setting, and Participants: A participant-blinded, multicenter randomized clinical trial that included 240 people from 24 sites assigned to either a platelet-rich plasma injection or a sham injection between April 2016 and February 2020. Final follow-up was July 2020. Participants were older than 18 years with midportion Achilles tendon pain for more than 3 months as confirmed by ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, or both. Interventions: A single intratendinous platelet-rich plasma injection (n = 121) or a single sham injection (insertion of a subcutaneous dry needle not entering the tendon) (n = 119). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the VISA-A score, measured 6 months after treatment allocation. The VISA-A score contains 8 questions that cover 3 domains of pain, function, and activity, analyzed as a composite score (range, 0 [worst symptoms] to 100 [no symptoms]; minimal clinically important difference in score, 12 points). The primary analysis was adjusted for laterality, age, sex, and baseline VISA-A score. Results: Among 240 patients assigned to a platelet-rich plasma or sham injection (mean age, 52 years; 138 [58%] women), 221 (92%) completed the trial. At 6-month follow-up, mean VISA-A score values in the plasma-rich plasma group vs the sham injection group were 54.4 vs 53.4 (adjusted mean difference, -2.7 [95% CI, -8.8 to 3.3]). The most common adverse events compared between patients in the platelet-rich plasma group vs the sham group were injection site discomfort (97 vs 73 patients), swelling (56 vs 52 patients) and bruising (48 vs 49 patients). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy, treatment with a single injection of intratendinous platelet-rich plasma, compared with insertion of a subcutaneous dry needle, did not reduce Achilles tendon dysfunction at 6 months. These findings do not support the use of this treatment for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN13254422.
Authors: Lars Engebretsen; Kathrin Steffen; Joseph Alsousou; Eduardo Anitua; Norbert Bachl; Roger Devilee; Peter Everts; Bruce Hamilton; Johnny Huard; Peter Jenoure; Francois Kelberine; Elizaveta Kon; Nicola Maffulli; Gordon Matheson; Omer Mei-Dan; Jacques Menetrey; Marc Philippon; Pietro Randelli; Patrick Schamasch; Martin Schwellnus; Alan Vernec; Geoffrey Verrall Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: J M Robinson; J L Cook; C Purdam; P J Visentini; J Ross; N Maffulli; J E Taunton; K M Khan Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Robert J de Vos; Adam Weir; Hans T M van Schie; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra; Jan A N Verhaar; Harrie Weinans; Johannes L Tol Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-01-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Thøger P Krogh; Torkell Ellingsen; Robin Christensen; Pia Jensen; Ulrich Fredberg Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Youichi Yasui; Ichiro Tonogai; Andrew J Rosenbaum; Yoshiharu Shimozono; Hirotaka Kawano; John G Kennedy Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2017-04-30 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Joseph Alsousou; David J Keene; Philippa A Hulley; Paul Harrison; Susan Wagland; Christopher Byrne; Michael Maia Schlüssel; Susan J Dutton; Sarah E Lamb; Keith Willett Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Finn Johannsen; Jens Lykkegaard Olesen; Tommy Frisgaard Øhlenschläger; Mathilde Lundgaard-Nielsen; Camilla Kjaer Cullum; Anna Svarre Jakobsen; Michael Skovdal Rathleff; Peter Stig Magnusson; Michael Kjær Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2022-07-01