Pain fellowship programs that practice regenerative medicine?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

oreosandsake

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2007
Messages
2,064
Reaction score
1,015
I know of attendings in the community that practice this way.

I'm interested in BMAC and PRP

would like to follow enough of a N to observe how these patients do long term
(i.e. develop my own biased perspective)

any program work like this?

Members don't see this ad.
 
bumpity

is this something only to be found in the un-accredited fellowship world?
 
bumpity

is this something only to be found in the un-accredited fellowship world?

This is something that you'd explore in a weekend course and through journal club. There isn't enough good data to devote a lot of curriculum time to it at this point.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
pure cash, no insurance will reimburse this. Medicare slammed T codes on it long ago. so to do it you gotta invest capital and market it, be concierge/boutique. No ACGME fellowship is gonna get heavily into this
 
I have been paid for PRP by a WC carrier for epicondylitis
 
yes I used to as well. but last year it started trailing off and getting denied more and more
 
I have been paid for PRP by a WC carrier for epicondylitis
Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis With Platelet-Rich Plasma, Glucocorticoid, or Saline: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.
Krogh TP, Fredberg U, Stengaard-Pedersen K, Christensen R, Jensen P, Ellingsen T.
Am J Sports Med. 2013 Jan 17. [Epub ahead of print]

METHODS:A total of 60 patients with chronic LE were randomized (1:1:1) to receive either a blinded injection of PRP, saline, or glucocorticoid. The primary end point was a change in pain using the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) questionnaire at 3 months. Secondary outcomes were ultrasonographic changes in tendon thickness and color Doppler activity.

RESULTS:pain reduction at 3 months (primary end point) was observed in all 3 groups, with no statistically significant difference between the groups; mean differences were the following: glucocorticoid versus saline: -3.8 (95% CI, -9.9 to 2.4); PRP versus saline: -2.7 (95% CI, -8.8 to 3.5); and glucocorticoid versus PRP: -1.1 (95% CI, -7.2 to 5.0). At 1 month, however, glucocorticoid reduced pain more effectively than did both saline and PRP; mean differences were the following: glucocorticoid versus saline: -8.1 (95% CI, -14.3 to -1.9); and glucocorticoid versus PRP: -9.3 (95% CI, -15.4 to -3.2). Among the secondary outcomes, at 3 months, glucocorticoid was more effective than PRP and saline in reducing color Doppler activity and tendon thickness. For color Doppler activity, mean differences were the following: glucocorticoid versus PRP: -2.6 (95% CI, -3.1 to -2.2); and glucocorticoid versus saline: -2.0 (95% CI, -2.5 to -1.6). For tendon thickness, mean differences were the following: glucocorticoid versus PRP: -0.5 (95% CI, -0.8 to -0.2); and glucocorticoid versus saline: -0.8 (95% CI, -1.2 to -0.5).

CONCLUSION:Neither injection of PRP nor glucocorticoid was superior to saline with regard to pain reduction in LE at the primary end point at 3 months. However, injection of glucocorticoid had a short-term pain-reducing effect at 1 month in contrast to the other therapies. Injection of glucocorticoid in LE reduces both color Doppler activity and tendon thickness compared with PRP and saline.
 
Top