PRINT Trial (Platelet Rich Injection vs Needle Tenotomy)

NCT03504111 · Status: UNKNOWN · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 50

Last updated 2019-03-13

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

Chronic tendinopathy is often very difficult to treat and causes many patients who suffer from it to have significant pain and loss of function leading to disability. Ultrasound has been shown to be very effective in aiding in the diagnosis of soft tissue disorders including tendinopathy and can help to rule in or out other potential causes that may be confounders. Numerous methods have been tried to treat tendinopathy including rest, NSAIDs, bracing, physical therapy, extracorporal shock wave therapy, anesthetic injections, steroid injections, prolotherapy, nitro patches, surgery and more recently platelet rich plasma, all of which have had conflicting results in the literature. Platelet rich plasma (PRP) is an autologous blood product that contains a high concentration of platelet-derived growth factors that have the potential to enhance healing. In a study by Mishra et al, common extensor tenindosis showed improved pain symptoms (71% vs 55% at 24 weeks) with tenontomy combined with PRP compared to percutaneous needle tenontomy alone. Current studies show conflicting results as to whether PRP improves chronic tendinopathy when compared to steroid injections, and many do not have any control group or comparison group. Percutaneous needle tenotomy is the use of a large gauge needle (18 gauge), which may be performed under ultrasound guidance, to fenestrate repeatedly the area of tendinopathy within a tendon in order to disrupt tendinopathic tissue and to induce bleeding and clot formation with release of growth factors. To date there are no published studies comparing percutaneous needle tenotomy (PNT) alone vs. PRP without concomitant tenotomy. Current literature suggests that needle tenotomy may be superior but no head to head studies are currently found in the literature. Most of the published literature of non-operative treatment of tendinosis does not yield clearly designed trials with clear selection criteria. Current literature also lacks studies with significant number of patients that meet both clinical and ultrasound criteria thus previous studies lack sufficient power. The PRINT TRIAL: may enhance the understanding of a superior treatment if it exists.

Hypothesis: In active adults with chronic tendinopathy who have failed to respond to standard of care treatment, the use of ultrasound guided percutaneous needle tenotomy (PNT) alone is superior to PRP without concomitant tenotomy.

Conditions

  • Lateral Epicondylitis
  • Tendinosis
  • Elbow, Tennis
  • Elbows Tendonitis

Interventions

PROCEDURE

Percutaneous Needle Tenotomy

A sham phlebotomy sample will be drawn on all study participants. Participants in this treatment group will be given local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine and then blinded to the intervention using a blind fold or shielding. Ultrasound guided needle tenontomy with be performed at the common extensor tendon at the area of tendinosis. There will be approximately 25 passes through the tendon with an 18 gauge needle. Investigators will keep track of the number of passes through the tendon. Investigators will keep track of the amount and type of anesthetic used to provide adequate and effective anesthesia

PROCEDURE

PRP

A sham phlebotomy sample will be drawn on all study participants. Participants in this treatment group will be given local anesthesia with 1% lidocaine and then blinded to the intervention using a blind fold or shielding. Ultrasound guided injection of the PRP will be performed at the common extensor tendon at the area of tendinosis. Investigators will keep track of the amount and type of anesthetic used to provide adequate and effective anesthesia to the local skin

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Kaiser Permanente

    lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

  • Marissa S Vasquez, MD · Kaiser Permanente

Study Design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Max Age
80 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2016-07-31
Primary Completion
2019-12-31
Completion
2019-12-31

Countries

  • United States

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT03504111 on ClinicalTrials.gov