Cargando…

Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: Prolotherapy or proliferative therapy is a treatment option for damaged connective tissues involving the injection of a solution (proliferant) which theoretically causes an initial cell injury and a subsequent “proliferant” process of wound healing via modulation of the inflammatory proc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chung, Meng-Wu, Hsu, Chih-Yang, Chung, Wen-Kuei, Lin, Yen-Nung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7668443/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33181700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023201
_version_ 1783610485654945792
author Chung, Meng-Wu
Hsu, Chih-Yang
Chung, Wen-Kuei
Lin, Yen-Nung
author_facet Chung, Meng-Wu
Hsu, Chih-Yang
Chung, Wen-Kuei
Lin, Yen-Nung
author_sort Chung, Meng-Wu
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Prolotherapy or proliferative therapy is a treatment option for damaged connective tissues involving the injection of a solution (proliferant) which theoretically causes an initial cell injury and a subsequent “proliferant” process of wound healing via modulation of the inflammatory process. Nonetheless, the benefits of dextrose prolotherapy have not been adequately evaluated. Therefore, the present study assesses the effectiveness and superiority of prolotherapy separately in treating dense fibrous connective tissue injuries. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched from the earliest record to February 18, 2019. This study included randomized controlled trials which: 1. involved adult patients with tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries; 2. compared dextrose prolotherapy to placebo or no treatment or corticosteroid injection; 3. provided quantitative measurements of pain and activity before and after intervention. Both analysis at individual studies level and pooled meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS: Ten trials involving 358 participants were included for review. At study level, the majority of comparisons did not reveal significant differences between dextrose prolotherapy and no treatment (or placebo) regarding pain control. The meta-analysis showed dextrose prolotherapy was effective in improving activity only at immediate follow-up (i.e., 0–1 month) (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40–1.50; I(2) = 0%); and superior to corticosteroid injections only in pain reduction at short-term follow-up (i.e., 1–3 month) (SMD: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.14–1.27; I(2) = 51%). No other significant SMDs were found in this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support the clinical benefits of dextrose prolotherapy in managing dense fibrous tissue injuries. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted to establish the benefits of dextrose prolotherapy. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42019129044).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7668443
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-76684432020-11-17 Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis Chung, Meng-Wu Hsu, Chih-Yang Chung, Wen-Kuei Lin, Yen-Nung Medicine (Baltimore) 6300 OBJECTIVES: Prolotherapy or proliferative therapy is a treatment option for damaged connective tissues involving the injection of a solution (proliferant) which theoretically causes an initial cell injury and a subsequent “proliferant” process of wound healing via modulation of the inflammatory process. Nonetheless, the benefits of dextrose prolotherapy have not been adequately evaluated. Therefore, the present study assesses the effectiveness and superiority of prolotherapy separately in treating dense fibrous connective tissue injuries. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched from the earliest record to February 18, 2019. This study included randomized controlled trials which: 1. involved adult patients with tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries; 2. compared dextrose prolotherapy to placebo or no treatment or corticosteroid injection; 3. provided quantitative measurements of pain and activity before and after intervention. Both analysis at individual studies level and pooled meta-analysis were performed. RESULTS: Ten trials involving 358 participants were included for review. At study level, the majority of comparisons did not reveal significant differences between dextrose prolotherapy and no treatment (or placebo) regarding pain control. The meta-analysis showed dextrose prolotherapy was effective in improving activity only at immediate follow-up (i.e., 0–1 month) (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40–1.50; I(2) = 0%); and superior to corticosteroid injections only in pain reduction at short-term follow-up (i.e., 1–3 month) (SMD: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.14–1.27; I(2) = 51%). No other significant SMDs were found in this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support the clinical benefits of dextrose prolotherapy in managing dense fibrous tissue injuries. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted to establish the benefits of dextrose prolotherapy. REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42019129044). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-11-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7668443/ /pubmed/33181700 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023201 Text en Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0
spellingShingle 6300
Chung, Meng-Wu
Hsu, Chih-Yang
Chung, Wen-Kuei
Lin, Yen-Nung
Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort effects of dextrose prolotherapy on tendinopathy, fasciopathy, and ligament injuries, fact or myth?: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic 6300
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7668443/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33181700
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023201
work_keys_str_mv AT chungmengwu effectsofdextroseprolotherapyontendinopathyfasciopathyandligamentinjuriesfactormythasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT hsuchihyang effectsofdextroseprolotherapyontendinopathyfasciopathyandligamentinjuriesfactormythasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chungwenkuei effectsofdextroseprolotherapyontendinopathyfasciopathyandligamentinjuriesfactormythasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT linyennung effectsofdextroseprolotherapyontendinopathyfasciopathyandligamentinjuriesfactormythasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis