Avicenna Journal of Clinical Medicine-Spring
Back to the articles list |
Back to browse issues page
Danial Pourghaz1 
, Mahdi Tavassoli2 , Mehrdad Mostafaloo3 , Rahmatollah Jowkar2 , Fatemeh Hosseinpour3
, Mahdi Tavassoli2 , Mehrdad Mostafaloo3 , Rahmatollah Jowkar2 , Fatemeh Hosseinpour3
1- Department of Orthopedics, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran , manson.evil@gmail.com
2- Department of Orthopedics, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran
3- Department of Radiology, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran
2- Department of Orthopedics, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran
3- Department of Radiology, Babol University of Medical Sciences, Babol, Iran
Abstract: (49 Views)
Background and Objective: Rotator cuff (RC) tendinopathy is an important etiology of shoulder pain. One of the proposed new treatments is intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) injection, which has numerous advantages over corticosteroids (CS). The present study aimed to compare the treatment outcomes of PRP and CS in RC tendinopathy.
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted as a double-blind clinical trial on patients with RC tendinopathy. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups (PRP and CS). Pre-intervention visits and follow-up visits were performed one, three, and six months after the intervention. The outcomes of pain intensity, function, and range of motion were evaluated.
Results: Among all patients, 27 (46.6%) cases were male and 31 (53.4%) subjects were female. The patients' mean (± SD) age was 56.6 (10.217) years. PRP was not inferior to CS in any of the measured parameters. Both groups experienced similar benefits from injectable treatments with no statistical differences in function, ROM (Range of Motion), or VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) at one, three, and six months. No side effects were observed in any of the two groups.
Conclusion: As evidenced by the results of the present study, PRP injection for the treatment of RC tendinopathy did not exhibit any observable difference in any of the studied outcomes, such as pain intensity, functional improvement, and ROM during a six-month follow-up period compared to CS injection, and it can be used as an alternative treatment to CS
Materials and Methods: This study was conducted as a double-blind clinical trial on patients with RC tendinopathy. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups (PRP and CS). Pre-intervention visits and follow-up visits were performed one, three, and six months after the intervention. The outcomes of pain intensity, function, and range of motion were evaluated.
Results: Among all patients, 27 (46.6%) cases were male and 31 (53.4%) subjects were female. The patients' mean (± SD) age was 56.6 (10.217) years. PRP was not inferior to CS in any of the measured parameters. Both groups experienced similar benefits from injectable treatments with no statistical differences in function, ROM (Range of Motion), or VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) at one, three, and six months. No side effects were observed in any of the two groups.
Conclusion: As evidenced by the results of the present study, PRP injection for the treatment of RC tendinopathy did not exhibit any observable difference in any of the studied outcomes, such as pain intensity, functional improvement, and ROM during a six-month follow-up period compared to CS injection, and it can be used as an alternative treatment to CS
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Orthopedic
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Articles Copyright © The Author(s).
Owned by Hamadan University of Medical Sciences
Published by UMSHA Press
Journal Tel: +988138380924
Publisher Tel:+988138380548
Website: http://sjh.umsha.ac.ir
Email: s_ journal[at]umsha.ac.ir
