Platelet Rich Plasma Therapy in Non-insertional Achilles Tendinopathy: The Efficacy is Reduced in 60-years Old People Compared to Young and Middle-Age Individuals
Vincenzo Salini, Daniele Vanni, Andrea Pantalone, Michele Abate
Abstract
Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) has shown positive and long-lasting effects in patients with tendinopathies. However, information about age-related differences in the clinical outcome is limited. Aim of this retrospective study was to compare the efficacy of PRP therapy in young and elderly subjects suffering for Achilles tendinopathy.
Patients with recalcitrant non-insertional Achilles tendinopathy were enrolled. Clinical (VISA-A) and instrumental (ultrasonography) data were collected at baseline and after 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. PRP injections (once a week for 3 weeks) were performed in sterile conditions and under ultrasound (US) control.
Forty-four subjects (29 young: mean age 39.5 ± 6.9; 15 elderly: mean age 61.5 ± 5.3) were retrospectively evaluated. At baseline, no significant differences were observed in the clinical and US parameters. Throughout the whole length of the study, a significant increase of VISA-A score was seen in both groups (from 50.3 ± 8.8 to 76.1 ± 6.6 in the young group, and from 48.7 ± 7.6 to 61.1 ± 9.4 in the elderly group); however, the infra-groups comparison showed better results in young patients, compared to the aged counterpart.
Our results show that PRP is less effective in aged people. This finding can be ascribed to several biochemical and biomechanical differences documented in tendons of young and elderly subjects (reduced number and functionality of tenocytes and tenoblasts), which becomes more evident in the long-term tissue healing. However, prospective trials, using different PRP preparations and enrolling a larger number of subjects, are needed to draw more sound and definitive conclusions.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,778,896
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,805
of 4,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,397
of 388,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#46
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 388,835 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
