Cargando…

Efficacy of Intraoperative Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation and Postoperative Platelet-Rich Plasma Booster Injection for Rotator Cuff Healing: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been applied as an adjuvant treatment for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) to enhance rotator cuff healing. However, it remains debatable whether PRP enhances tendon-to-bone healing. PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of intraoperative augmentation and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Bei, Jeong, Hyeon Jang, Yeo, Ji Hyun, Oh, Joo Han
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8182201/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34159208
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211006100
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been applied as an adjuvant treatment for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) to enhance rotator cuff healing. However, it remains debatable whether PRP enhances tendon-to-bone healing. PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy of intraoperative augmentation and postoperative injection of PRP that was prepared using the double-spin method and calcium activation without thrombin in patients with ARCR. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1; and cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 58 patients underwent ARCR using intraoperative PRP augmentation. Half of the patients were randomly assigned to receive an additional ultrasound-guided PRP injection at the repair site at 2 weeks postoperatively (PRP-booster group); the other half did not receive the booster injection (PRP-only group). A control group that did not receive any PRP treatment was retrospectively matched using propensity score matching. Structural integrity was assessed using magnetic resonance imaging at 1 year postoperatively, and healing rates were compared between patients with tear sizes ≤2 cm versus >2 cm. Functional outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; VAS for satisfaction; shoulder range of motion; and Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Simple Shoulder Test scores at minimum 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: In patients with tears >2 cm, the rate of healing failure at 1-year follow-up was significantly less in the overall PRP group than in the control group (12.9% vs 35.7%, respectively; P = .040), however, the PRP-booster group did not present a better healing rate than did the PRP-only group. The overall PRP group had lower VAS for pain scores compared with the control group (0.5 ± 1.1 vs 1.3 ± 1.8, respectively; P = .016) and higher VAS for satisfaction scores (9.2 ± 1.2 vs 8.6 ± 1.7; P = .023) at the final follow-up, whereas no statistical difference was found between the PRP-only and PRP-booster groups in functional outcomes. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative PRP augmentation during ARCR demonstrated superior anatomic healing results in patients with rotator cuff tears >2 cm as well as reduced pain and increased subjective satisfaction. PRP booster injection provided no additional benefit to tendon integrity or functional recovery.