Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Sep 6;25(1):718.
doi: 10.1186/s12891-024-07629-1.

The clinical efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma on frozen shoulder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Wen-Bin Zhang #  1 , Yu-Lin Ma #  1 , Fei-Long Lu  1 , Hai-Rui Guo  1 , Hao Song  1 , Yi-Mei Hu  2   3
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The clinical efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma on frozen shoulder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Wen-Bin Zhang et al. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. .

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review the clinical efficacy (pain, function, quality of life) and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of frozen shoulder through meta-analysis, and provide evidence-based medical evidence for the effectiveness of PRP in the treatment of frozen shoulder.

Methods: A search was conducted on international databases (Pubmed, Web of science, Embase) and Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang, VIP) to search the clinical studies on the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma in treating frozen shoulder (adhesive capsulitis/periarthritis/50 shoulder) and their corresponding references published from inception until January 2024. Thoroughly excluded literature not meeting the predetermined inclusion criteria, extracted relevant data from the literature, and input it into RevMan5.4 for meta-analysis.

Results: This study ultimately included 14 RCTs, with a total of 1024 patients. The results showed that PRP has significant advantages compared with control groups in VAS (mean difference (MD) =-0.38, 95% confidence interval(CI)(-0.73, -0.03), P = 0.03), UCLA (MD = 3.31, 95% CI (1.02,5.60),P = 0.005), DASH (MD = -4.94,95% CI (-9.34, -0.53),P = 0.03), SPADI (SPADI Total: MD =-16.87, 95% CI (-22.84, -10.91), P < 0.00001; SPADI Pain: MD =-5.38, 95% CI (-7.80, -2.97), P < 0.0001; SPADI Disability: MD =-11.00, 95% CI (-13.61,-8.39), P < 0.00001), and the active and passive Range of Motion (active flexion: MD = 12.70, 95% CI (7.44, 17.95), P < 0.00001; passive flexion: MD = 9.47, 95% CI(3.80, 15.14), P = 0.001; active extension: MD = 3.45, 95% CI(2.39, 4.50), P < 0.00001; active abduction: MD = 13.54, 95% CI(8.42, 18.67), P < 0.00001; passive abduction: MD = 14.26, 95% CI (5.97, 22.56), P = 0.0008; active internal rotation: MD = 5.16, 95% CI (1.84, 8.48), P = 0.002; passive internal rotation: MD = 3.65, 95% CI(1.15, 6.15), P = 0.004; active external rotation: MD = 10.50, 95% CI(5.47, 15.53), P < 0.0001; passive external rotation: MD = 6.00, 95% CI (1.82, 10.19), P = 0.005) except passive extension (MD = 2.25, 95% CI (-0.77, 5.28), P = 0.14). In terms of safety, most studies reported no adverse effects, and only one study reported common complications of joint puncture such as swelling and pain after treatment in both PRP and control groups. Previous studies have shown a risk of osteonecrosis caused by corticosteroids. Therefore, the safety of PRP treatment is more reliable.

Conclusion: The results showed that PRP was more durable and safer than corticosteroids and other control groups in the treatment of frozen shoulder.

Study design: Systematic review.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42022359444, date of registration: 22-09-2022.

Keywords: Adhesive capsulitis; Frozen shoulder; Meta-analysis; PRP; Periarthritis of shoulder; Platelet-rich plasma; Randomized Controlled Trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the selection process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Quality assessment results of the RCT studies
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot for meta-analysis of VAS score
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot for Meta-analysis of active flexion
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot for Meta-analysis of SPADI Total
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Funnel plot of VAS
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lin J. Platelet-rich plasma injection in the treatment of frozen shoulder: a randomized controlled trial with 6-month follow-up. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018;56(8):366–71. 10.5414/CP203262. 10.5414/CP203262 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kelley MJ, Shaffer MA, Kuhn JE, Michener LA, Seitz AL, Uhl TL, et al. Shoulder pain and mobility deficits: adhesive capsulitis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2013;43(5):A1–31. 10.2519/jospt.2013.0302. 10.2519/jospt.2013.0302 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ewald A. Adhesive capsulitis: a review. Am Fam Physician. 2011;83(4):417–22. - PubMed
    1. Cho CH, Lee YH, Kim DH, Lim YJ, Baek CS, Kim DH, Definition. Diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of frozen shoulder: a Consensus Survey of Shoulder specialists. Clin Orthop Surg. 2020;12(1):60–7. 10.4055/cios.2020.12.1.60. 10.4055/cios.2020.12.1.60 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pinnaka VS, Thati B, Sunkara R. A R. A comparative study on the effectiveness of platelet rich plasma injection versus corticosteroid injection in treatment of adhesive capsulitis of shoulder. Trends Clin Med Sci 2021; SI: Recent developments ofmedical and surgical research 476–485. 10.30538/psrp-tmcs2023.si-rdmsr066.