
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
|
|
Sign up for our free newsletter to get training tips and stay up to date on Catalyst Athletics, and get a FREE issue of the Performance Menu journal.
|
|
|
 |
|
01-22-2011, 01:40 AM
|
#1
|
|
New Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2
|
---
---
|
|
|
01-22-2011, 01:48 PM
|
#2
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 102
|
My ortho did the PRP thing for my pec repair. He said the research at this point is inconclusive, but anything that may help is worth a shot. Plus its your own blood, so is not super invasive. Not sure that helps, but Im healing well! Good luck!
|
|
|
01-22-2011, 04:22 PM
|
#3
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 102
|
[QUOTE As long as there aren't any known down sides I will probably give it a shot. Appreciate the response.[/quote]
that is almost exactly what my doc said. Its your own material, so there are no side effects. I hope it works!
|
|
|
01-22-2011, 06:12 PM
|
#4
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,369
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Thomas
This is kind of where I'm at. As long as there aren't any known down sides I will probably give it a shot. Appreciate the response.
|
The downsides are the same with any intra-articular injection: potential infection.
If proper precautions are taken, there should be no issue...and if there was, be glad you aren't getting it done in a hospital, as there are much nastier bugs there.
Ask your doc how long they have been doing it, what their specific training in prolo/PRP is (and with which organizations), and then get back. I could help much more with that info.
|
|
|
01-22-2011, 09:30 PM
|
#5
|
|
New Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 45
|
I had a good experience with it for tennis elbow.
|
|
|
01-23-2011, 05:55 AM
|
#6
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,369
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Thomas
I am living overseas, so the organizations and training of the doctors probably wouldn't have much meaning to you.
Is there a significant difference (in either effectiveness or potential harm) between prolotherapy using an irritant and the platelet injections?
There are two procedures available here. The first is a "thread" that is implanted and dissolves over time. The process consists of three treatments over the span of three months. Apparently, it is a traditional treatment they have been doing for a long time. So, it's similar to, but probably not exactly the same thing as, the prolotherapy that is going on in the US.
The second procedure is the PRP injection. From what I have been able to find on the web, it looks like most doctors are using PRP for post-surgery recovery, but some are starting to use it for arthritis/joint pain treatment. The PRP therapy is considerably more expensive.
|
From what I understand of the mechanisms, effectiveness would depend on what the issue is with a joint.
Prolo would tend to be best for injured joints where they seem "loose", as in, the ligaments have been stretched/sprained/torn due to trauma and tightening up the joint would help.
PRP is more for healing degenerative processes in areas that don't normally have good bloodflow (ie. inside joint capsules).
The "thread" treatment is something I'm not familiar with.
|
|
|
01-27-2011, 05:00 PM
|
#7
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,091
|
The mechanism of effect is the same for all of them honestly.... any or either should work.
Prolo is generally a salt solution, and PRP/autologous blood is obviously platelets etc.
Basically they're aiming to irritate the area to try to induce inflammatory processes to heal the area or hypertrophy some structures if there's either chronic degeneration or laxity.
Platelets function similarly to the salt solutions in this regard -- they both signal inflammatory processes to come to the area to initiate healing/hypertrophy.
|
|
|
01-27-2011, 08:06 PM
|
#8
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,369
|
I learned some important things from a DO I know well-versed in the research.
PRP is generally more effective if done correctly. Prolo is less expensive.
Don't let them put you on a schedule of return visits. Give it some time to heal/recover in between and you be the judge of how many treatments you need. PRP is also generally fewer visits.
|
|
|
01-28-2011, 06:50 AM
|
#9
|
|
Super Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,091
|
That would make sense as platelets should be more effective at healing than an irritant salt solution
|
|
|
01-28-2011, 11:57 AM
|
#10
|
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,369
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Low
That would make sense as platelets should be more effective at healing than an irritant salt solution
|
Prolo is a dextrose- and anesthetic-based (procaine or lidocaine) solution. Practitioners may add a bunch of other things, ranging from methylcobalamin (B12) to injectable Traumeel or Zeel.
I'm not too familiar with the standard solutions for PRP other than the obvious ingredient.
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:28 AM.
|
|
Submit your question to be answered by Greg or Aimee Everett in the Performance Menu or on the website
Submit Your Question
|
Catalyst Athletics is a USA Weightlifting team of competitive Olympic-style weightlifters. We are currently recruting new lifters and offer sponsorship opportunities.
Read More
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All content © Catalyst Athletics, Inc. | 1257 Tasman Drive Suite A | Sunnyvale, CA 94089 | 408-400-0067 | Site Terms & Conditions
|
|
|

|