Plantar Fasciitis—A Comparison of Treatment with Intralesional Steroids versus Platelet-Rich Plasma

Acosta-Olivo, Carlos; Elizondo-Rodriguez, Jorge; Lopez-Cavazos, Ricardo; Vílchez-Cavazos, Félix; Simental‐Mendía, Mario; O, Mendoza-Lemus

doi:10.7547/15-125

Cited by 60 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, they concluded that the use of PRP is an effective treatment method for patients with plantar fasciitis who do not respond to conservative treatment because PRP demonstrates an efficacy equal to that of steroids. 32 In contrast to our results, a meta-analysis conducted by Yang et al 2007 concluded that PRP is superior to steroid treatments for long-term pain relief; however, significant differences were not observed between short and intermediate effects. 35 In our series, no difference was seen in pain or functional result in between the two groups at any of the follow-up visits.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…The mean age was similar to another study done by Acosta-Olivo et al in 2017 who reported the average age of the patients was 44.8 years (range, 24-61 years). 32 Also another study of PRP injection done by Ragab et al in 2012, on 25 patients with chronic plantar fasciitis, reported mean age of 44 years in their patients. 33 In our study a total of 120 sites were affected and left side was more common.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparative study of functional outcome between platelet rich plasma injection versus steroid infiltration in plantar fasciitis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Plantar fasciitis (PF) is considered as degenerative tendinopathies. Repeated micro trauma is the major etiology of these diseases. Autologous platelet rich plasma (PRP) injections are becoming more popular in the treatment of enthesopathies like PF. The growth factors in PRP cause tissue healing. We compared the result of injecting intra-lesional autologous PRP injections versus steroid infiltration in chronic PF.Methods: A prospective, interventional and analytic comparative study was done and 81 patients (120 heels) were included in this study and were followed up for 6 months. We assessed the outcome of each patient using visual analog score (VAS) and foot and ankle disability index (FADI) on follow-up at 1, 3, and 6 months. Results: In our study, female preponderance was seen. Left side was more common as compared to right side. Unilateral PF is more common than bilateral. The difference with in the individual group at baseline and at 1,3 and 6 months was statistically highly significant in terms of VAS and FADI (p=0.0001) But the difference in the between the two groups was insignificant for VAS and FADI at 1, 3 and 6 months.Conclusions: In our study, as there is no significant difference in VAS and FADI score between corticosteroid injection group and PRP injection group at 1, 3 and 6 months follow up. So, it’s reasonable to conclude that both are equally effective in PF. But as PRP injection comes out to be more time consuming and more costly, corticosteroid seems to be more efficient, cost and time wise. Hence, the latter should be a better choice.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

A comparative study of functional outcome between platelet rich plasma injection versus steroid infiltration in plantar fasciitis

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22,[25][26][27] Females were more frequently affected (52% in PRP group and 57% in the corticosteroid group) in our study. Though gender differences have not been shown in patients with planter fasciitis, a recent study observed a slight male preponderance (57.5%) contrary to our finding.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 45%

“…22 Others also have reported equal efficacy for both PRP and corticosteroid therapy. 25,26 Functional assessment in terms of the AOFAS score also showed that corticosteroid is more effective for short term relief and PRP is more effective for long term relief as evidenced by a significant increase in AOFAS in the Corticosteroid group compared to PRP group at 6 weeks (p<0.001) which increased in the PRP group at 3 months (85.72) and still further increased at 6 months (90.03). However it decreased in the corticosteroid group at 3 months (78.57) and 6 months (74.67).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Efficacy of intralesional corticosteroid versus autologous platelet rich plasma injection in the management of chronic plantar fasciitis

Kumar¹,

Koramutla

2018

Int J Res Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Plantar fasciitis is a common pathological condition affecting the hind foot, and a common cause of heel pain. The present study was taken up to assess the efficacy of intralesional corticosteroid compared to autologous platelet rich plasma injection in the management of chronic plantar fasciitis.Methods: Patients were randomized into two groups (Group A and Group B) of 30 each. Group-A received Corticosteroid injection while Group-B received PRP injection. Patients were assessed functionally using American Orthopaedic Foot and ankle score (AOFAS), Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores before treatment and on follow-up visit at 6 weeks, 3rd month, and 6th month. Ultrasound of heel for plantar fascia thickness was measured before treatment and follow up visit at 6th month.Results: A significant decrease in VAS score was observed in the corticosteroid group compared to PRP group at 6 weeks while the VAS score continued to decrease in the PRP group at 3 months and 6 months with an increase in the corticosteroid group at 3 months and 6 months. A significant increase in AOFAS was observed in the Corticosteroid group compared to PRP group at 6 weeks which increased in the PRP group at 3 months and 6 months. However it decreased in the corticosteroid group at 3 months and 6 months. Ultrasonographic evaluation showed improvement in fascial thickness in both the groups, but was better in the PRP group.Conclusions: To conclude our study shows that corticosteroid is more effective for short term relief and PRP is more effective for long term relief.

show abstract

“…PRP injections have been investigated in hip and knee osteoarthritis, ankle sprains, healing of non-united fractures, tennis elbow, chronic refractory patellar tendi-nopathy, plantar fasciitis and sports injuries in many clinical studies (17)(18)(19) . A prospective randomized controlled study concluded that local application of autologous PRP improved tendon healing in patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and reduced pain in the first postoperative months (20) .…”

Section: Orthopedicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Platelet-rich Plasma: Three Decades and Ongoing, Do We Have a Conclusion?

Kamel

2019

Suez Canal University Medical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blood components for non-transfusion uses have been the focus of researches in various clinical fields for the last thirty years. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) can expedite healing, with minimal side effects. As a biologic autologous product, it is well-tolerated, and safe choice for many physicians and patients. Yet, no consensus has been reached regarding PRP preparation, needed volume, the use of an activator, number of sessions, and the period between the sessions in different clinical scenarios. Thus, further clinical studies are needed with higher level of evidence taking into consideration the optimization of these aspects. Up to date, there are many PRP preparation systems on the market with FDA clearance. Meanwhile, FDA has not attempted to regulate activated PRP. Determining the main bioactive components which are responsible for the clinical effects of PRP and the inter-individual variability of growth factors and cytokines production and the synergy of platelets count and growth factors will remain as major obstacles to achieve standardization of PRP. PRP is yet to become the standard of care; nevertheless, more clinical studies with longer periods of follow up to understand the best candidate and to determine the best ways to use it to improve healing; it may be an approved practice in the future.

show abstract

Plantar Fasciitis—A Comparison of Treatment with Intralesional Steroids versus Platelet-Rich Plasma

Cited by 60 publications

References 31 publications

A comparative study of functional outcome between platelet rich plasma injection versus steroid infiltration in plantar fasciitis

A comparative study of functional outcome between platelet rich plasma injection versus steroid infiltration in plantar fasciitis

Efficacy of intralesional corticosteroid versus autologous platelet rich plasma injection in the management of chronic plantar fasciitis

Platelet-rich Plasma: Three Decades and Ongoing, Do We Have a Conclusion?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About