Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 26, 2026
Effects of Allogeneic Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) on the Healing Process of Sectioned Achilles Tendons of Rats: A Methodological Description
Published on: March 19, 2018
Platelet-Rich Plasma Treatment on Pain, Thickness, and Elasticity in Achilles Tendinopathy: A Randomized Pilot Study
Scott K Crawford1,2,3, Alexander C Hayden4, Darryl Thelen3,5
1Department of Kinesiology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Introduction:
Achilles tendinopathy (AT) is a degenerative condition of the tendon. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has shown promise in treating tendinopathies. Shear wave elastography (SWE) can assess tendon elasticity in patients following treatment. This study investigated platelet-rich plasma (PRP) treatment efficacy compared to control on pain and function, conventional sonographic measures, and tendon shear wave speed (SWS) in AT.
Methods:
Twenty subjects were randomized to PRP treatment (N = 10) or control group (N = 10). Baseline and 24-week pain and function were assessed using the Victorian Institute of Sport-Achilles (VISA-A) questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Tendon thickness, echogenicity, and hyperemia were measured. Tendon SWS was obtained in passive neutral, dorsiflexed, and plantarflexed positions. Linear mixed effects models were used to assess differences between treatment groups over time. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to assess between group differences in tendon echogenicity and hyperemia.
Results:
PRP had greater improvements in VISA-A ((31.9 [5.7] vs. 9.7 [7.0] points); p = 0.03) and VAS scores (-5.6 [0.8] vs. -1.4 [1.0]; p = 0.01). No differences were observed between groups in tendon thickness (PRP: 10.8 [0.54], control: 9.9 [0.61] mm; p = 0.32), echogenicity (PRP: 0.11 (0.60), control: 0.14 (0.38); p = 1.00), or hyperemia (PRP: -0.56 (1.1), control: -0.14 (0.69); p = 0.44). No between group differences in SWS were observed in neutral (p = 0.96) or dorsiflexed (p = 0.24) positions but were observed in the plantarflexed position (PRP: 6.5 [0.38], control: 7.8 [0.43] m/s; p = 0.04).
Conclusion:
PRP improved pain and function compared to a wait-and-see control group with no between group differences in conventional sonographic measures or material properties assessed via elastography. Improvements in clinical measures appear unrelated to sonographic measures. PRP alone may not accelerate healing and may be best used in conjunction with other conservative treatments.
