Effectiveness of Platelet-rich Plasma in Partial-thickness Rotator Cuff Tears: a meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCTs) commonly affect overhead athletes, leading to a decline in sports performance. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is being explored as an alternative treatment modality for individuals with PTRCTs, to reduce discomfort and enhance functional recovery. We conducted a systematic review study of randomized controlled clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of PRP in treating PTRCTs.

AIM: To determine the effectiveness of PRP in treating PTRCTs.

EVIDENCE REVIEW: We conducted a comprehensive literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effectiveness of PRP with eccentric exercise and placebo injections as treatments for PTRCTs. We searched databases such as the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE. The Visual analog scale (VAS) score, American shoulder and elbow surgeon (ASES) score, and Constant-Murley score (CMS) were utilized as outcome measures. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software.

FINDINGS: Our meta-analysis included 12 studies involving 762 patients. At six weeks post-treatment, the PRP group had significantly higher VAS scores compared to the control group, indicating improvement (Standard mean difference (SMD), -2.04 [95% Confidence interval (CI), -4.00 to -0.08], I2 =97%, P-value =0.04). Patients who received PRP showed statistically significant improvements in VAS scores at 3 months and 6 months follow-up (SMD, -1.78 [95% CI, -3.03 to -0.52], I2 =96%, P-value =0.005) (SMD, -2.26 [95% CI, -3.77 to -0.76], I2 =97%, P-value =0.003). A statistically significant difference was also observed in VAS scores at the long-term 1-year follow-up (SMD, -2.27 [95% CI, -4.07 to -0.47]; I2 =98%; P-value =0.031). There were statistically significant differences in ASES scores and CMS scores in the short-term (SMD, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.19 to 2.24], I2 =96%, P-value =0.02) (SMD, 2.01 [95% CI, 0.14 to 3.88], I2 =97%, P-value =0.04). However, in the long-term ASES and CMS scores did not show any statistical significance (SMD, 2.06 [95% CI, -0.54 to 4.65], I2 =99%, P-value=0.12) (SMD, 4.36 [95% CI, -5.48 to 14.21], I2 =99%, P-value=0.39).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Our findings suggest that PRP treatment is effective in reducing pain for individuals with PTRCTs, providing benefits in the short term and long term. However, its impact on functional recovery appears somewhat constrained and doesn't endure over time. Additionally, significant heterogeneity exists among studies, encompassing variations in PRP composition and control group treatments. Consequently, we conclude that compelling evidence for symptom improvement in PTRCT patients following PRP treatment remains elusive.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.