Trial reportClinical orthopaedics and related research2020
Platelet-rich Plasma or Autologous Blood Do Not Reduce Pain or Improve Function in Patients with Lateral Epicondylitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- The concentration of platelets in PRP does not affect pain outcomes in lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pain management · 2024Pooled it
- Autologous blood and platelet-rich plasma injection therapy for lateral elbow pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Molecular background behind lateral elbow pain reduction with Leukocyte-Rich and Leukocyte-Poor Platelet-Rich Plasma-randomized control trial and single-cell platelet analysis.International orthopaedics · 2026Trial
- Platelet-Rich Plasma Provides Superior Clinical Outcomes Without Radiologic Differences in Lateral Epicondylitis: Randomized Controlled Trial.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Trial
- No Benefit to Platelet-rich Plasma Over Placebo Injections in Terms of Pain or Function in Patients with Hemophilic Knee Arthritis: A Randomized Trial.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2022Trial
- Plasma versus autologous whole blood in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2026Review
- Are Platelet Volume, Density, and the Homeostatic Blueprint the Missing Link in Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapies? An Evidence-Based Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Focused Versus Radial Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy and Leukocyte-Poor Versus Leukocyte-Rich Platelet-Rich Plasma for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- Adherence rates to the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopedics guidelines for clinical studies on platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2026Review
- Time-Dependent Efficacy and Safety of Percutaneous Treatments for Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of pain research · 2026Review
- Platelet-Rich Plasma for Treating Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Pain and therapy · 2025Review
- How to explain the beneficial effects of platelet-rich plasma.Periodontology 2000 · 2025Review
- Comparative Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma, Corticosteroid, Hyaluronic Acid, and Placebo (Saline) Injections in Patients with Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Industry affiliation influence on randomized controlled trials for platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review.JSES international · 2024Article
- Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Medical and Surgical Specialties: Quality, Evaluation, Evidence, and Enforcement.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines on Regenerative Medicine Treatment for Chronic Pain: A Consensus Report from a Multispecialty Working Group.Journal of pain research · 2024Review
- Angiogenesis and Tissue Repair Depend on Platelet Dosing and Bioformulation Strategies Following Orthobiological Platelet-Rich Plasma Procedures: A Narrative Review.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Comparison of the Clinical Results of Platelet-Rich Plasma, Steroid and Autologous Blood Injections in the Treatment of Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Current concepts of natural course and in management of medial epicondylitis: a clinical overview.Orthopedic reviews · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlatelet-rich plasma (PRP) and autologous blood are commonly used therapies for lateral epicondylitis, but the evidence from randomized, placebo-controlled trials is conflicting. Thus, it is still unclear if patients benefit from these treatments. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: In the setting of a randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we compared PRP, autologous blood, and saline injections in the treatment of lateral epicondylitis with respect to: (1) VAS pain scores, and (2) functional outcomes (DASH score and grip strength) 1 year after treatment.
methodsWe performed a parallel-group, randomized, controlled participant- and assessor-blinded study including adults with clinically diagnosed lateral epicondylitis. We defined lateral epicondylitis as pain in the lateral humeral epicondyle area exacerbated during resisted wrist extension and epicondyle compression. The participants were recruited from a secondary referral center, after not responding to initial nonoperative treatment. Patients with other concomitant upper-limb symptoms and surgical treatment of the elbow were excluded. Randomization sequence was generated with computer software and concealed from the investigators. We randomized 119 participants to receive an injection of PRP, autologous blood, or saline (1:1:1) in the proximal insertion of the extensor carpi radialis brevis muscle; 40 participants received PRP, 40 received autologous blood, and 39 received a saline injection. To prepare the PRP, we collected venous blood with a syringe kit followed by centrifugation, whereas autologous blood group received unprepared blood injection. Two unblinded investigators gave injections while the participant was unable to see the injection. There was no formal postinjection rehabilitation protocol and the use of NSAIDs was similar between different treatment arms. Follow-up visits were at 4, 8, 12, 26, and 52 weeks after the injection. The primary outcome measure was improvement in pain, measured with VAS scale (without specification as to whether the pain was activity related or at rest; range 0-10; a higher score indicates worse pain; the minimum clinically important difference [MCID] on the 10-cm scale was 1.5 cm), from baseline to 52 weeks. The secondary outcomes were the DASH score (range 0-100; a higher indicates a poorer outcome, and the MCID was 10.2 points) and grip strength. All patients were included in the analyses, and analyses were performed using the intention-to-treat principle. There was no crossover between treatment groups. At 52 weeks, nearly all (95% [38 of 40]) participants in autologous blood group were available for analysis whereas 78% (31 of 40) and 82% (32 of 39) were available in PRP and saline groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov and funded by the local hospital district. With 40 patients in each group, we had 80% power to detect a clinically important improvement in pain (1.5 cm on the 10-cm VAS pain scale).
resultsThere were no clinically important differences in the mean VAS pain or DASH scores among the groups at any timepoint. At 52 weeks, the mean difference in the VAS score for pain was -0.2 (95% CI -1.5 to 1.1; p = 0.75) for PRP versus saline and 0.5 (95% CI -0.7 to 1.7; p = 0.40) for autologous blood versus saline. The corresponding mean differences in the DASH score were 0.0 (95% CI -9.2 to 9.2; p > 0.99) and 7.7 (95% CI -1.3 to 16.7; p = 0.09) and those for grip strength were 1.4 kg (95% CI -3.3 to 6.1; p = 0.56) and -0.2 kg (95% CI -5.0 to 4.5; p = 0.92). No complications occurred because of the injections.
conclusionsPRP or autologous blood injections did not improve pain or function at 1 year of follow-up in people with lateral epicondylitis compared with those who were given a saline injection. However, because the 95% CIs did not exclude the MCID in VAS scores for autologous blood versus saline at 52 weeks, it is possible that a larger study could identify a between-group difference that we missed, but the effect size of that difference (based on our findings), even if present, is likely still to be small. Until or unless future randomized trials convincingly show a benefit either to PRP or autologous blood injections, we recommend against their use in patients with lateral epicondylitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.