Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis Are at Least Equivalent to Corticosteroid or Saline Solution Injections: A Systematic Review of Prospective Cohort Studies

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the role of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for adhesive capsulitis (AC) as compared with other injectables.

Methods: A literature search of the PubMed and Embase online databases was performed to identify articles evaluating injection therapy for the treatment of AC. The inclusion criteria included prospective studies comparing PRP against alternative injectables with a minimum of 15 patients in each treatment arm and a minimum 12-week follow-up period. Pain scores, range of motion, and function scores were the primary outcomes assessed.

Results: Five articles comparing PRP with corticosteroid or saline solution injections met the inclusion criteria. A total of 157 patients were treated with PRP, with a follow-up duration ranging from 3 to 6 months. All 5 studies showed statistically significant improvements in pain scores, motion, and function scores in patients receiving PRP, corticosteroid, and saline solution injections. However, PRP was consistently superior on intergroup analyses in all but 1 study. In 4 studies, pain and function scores favored PRP over control at final follow-up (range in mean difference, -2.2 to 0.69 for visual analog scale pain score [n = 5] and -50.5 to -4.0 for Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score [n = 3]), whereas 3 studies found greater improvement in shoulder motion after PRP (range in mean difference, 0.7° to 34.3° for forward flexion and -2.3° to 20.4° for external rotation [n = 4]). One study found no significant difference between PRP and corticosteroid injections but noted that the results were comparable.

Conclusions: According to a limited number of prospective studies, PRP injections for AC are at least equivalent to corticosteroid or saline solution injections and often lead to improved pain, motion, and functional outcomes at 3- to 6-month follow-up. Given the small number of studies, with design heterogeneity, there is insufficient evidence to routinely recommend PRP for AC. However, the results are promising and do support considering PRP as an adjunct treatment option for AC, especially for patients refractory and/or averse to corticosteroids or alternative treatment modalities.

Level of evidence: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.