Skip to content

Ultrasound-guided PRP Versus Steroid Injections in Management of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Ultrasound-guided PRP Versus Steroid Injections in Management of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; a Comparative Study

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04434105
Enrollment
90
Registered
2020-06-16
Start date
2020-02-01
Completion date
2020-12-31
Last updated
2020-06-16

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Keywords

PRP injection, Local injection, CTS

Brief summary

Patients will be randomly divided into 3 equal groups: Group I received ultrasound guided injection of 2 mL PRP into the affected carpal tunnel. Group II received ultrasound guided injection of 2 mL steroids (40 mg triamcinolone acetonide). Group III received ultrasound guided injection of 2 mL saline as placebo control.

Detailed description

Patients will be randomly divided into 3 equal groups: Group I received ultrasound guided injection of 2 mL PRP into the affected carpal tunnel. Group II received ultrasound guided injection of 2 mL steroids (40 mg triamcinolone acetonide). Group III received ultrasound guided injection of 2 mL saline as placebo control. Each group will be injected twice with 2 weeks intervals. All procedures were done after informed consent. Evaluation of the patients at baseline, 3 and 6 months after last injection was done clinically by measuring visual analogue scale (VAS), electrophysiologically (by measuring motor and sensory nerve conduction studies of median nerve using a standardized technique) and ultrasonographic study by measuring cross sectional area (CSA) of median nerve at the level of pisiform.

Interventions

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) promotes angiogenesis, neurogenesis, and nerve regeneration, also it could reduce swelling and inflammation of the flexor tenosynovitis.

DRUGTriamcinolone Acetonide

40 mg triamcinolone acetonide

DRUGSaline

Saline

Sponsors

Tanta University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
TRIPLE (Subject, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 60 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* mild or moderate idiopathic CTS (diagnosed clinically, ultrasonography & electrophysiologically and classified according to the American Association of neuromuscular diagnostic medicine monograph).

Exclusion criteria

* Patients with severe or secondary type of CTS

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
visual analogue scaleChange from 3 months after last injection and 6 months after last injectionScale for assessement the degree of pain along 0-10 scale
measuring motor and sensory nerve conduction studies of median nerve using a standardized techniqueChange from 3 months after last injection and 6 months after last injectionelectrophysiologically by measuring motor and sensory nerve conduction studies of median nerve using a standardized technique
cross-sectional area (CSA) of the median nerve at the level of the pisiform.Change from 3 months after last injection and 6 months after last injectionultrasonographic study by measuring cross-sectional area (CSA) of the median nerve at the level of the pisiform.

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026