Is PRP Effective For Achilles Tendinopathy-What the Research Actually Shows

BY DR. SARANG DESAI   |   Fellowship-Trained Orthopedic Surgeon   |   Dallas–Fort Worth

Platelet-rich plasma — better known as PRP — is one of the most heavily marketed treatments in sports medicine today. If you've been dealing with chronic Achilles tendon pain, there's a good chance someone has recommended it, you've seen it advertised online, or you've heard that a professional athlete used it.

THE CENTRAL QUESTION

EVIDENCE-BASED ANSWER

The short answer, based on the best available evidence: no, it does not. Multiple high-quality randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have consistently found that PRP injections do not improve pain, function, or tendon structure compared to sham (placebo) injections for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy.

That's a difficult message to hear when you're in pain and looking for answers. But as a surgeon who treats Achilles tendon problems every day, I believe you deserve an honest assessment of the evidence — not marketing claims. This article walks you through exactly what the research shows, what PRP is, why it was thought to work, and what treatments actually do have strong evidence behind them.

PATIENT GUIDE

Key Takeaways

·     The largest randomized trial ever conducted (240 patients, published in JAMA) found no benefit of PRP injection over sham injection for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy — at 3 months or 6 months.

·     Multiple meta-analyses (including a 2025 analysis of 6 RCTs with 422 patients) confirm no significant improvement in pain or function with PRP compared to placebo at any time point.

·     Publication bias may have actually overstated the apparent benefits of PRP in earlier, smaller studies.

·     PRP for acute Achilles tendon ruptures also shows no meaningful long-term benefit. The PATH-2 trial (230 patients, published in BMJ) found no improvement in muscle-tendon function, patient-reported outcomes, or quality of life.

·     Eccentric exercise and heavy slow resistance training remain the gold standard treatments for Achilles tendinopathy, with strong evidence from multiple randomized trials.

·     PRP is not covered by most insurance plans for Achilles tendinopathy, and out-of-pocket costs typically range from $500 to $2,000 per injection.

·     The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine notes that well-designed RCTs have found no difference between PRP and saline injections for Achilles tendinopathy.

·     PRP remains an area of active research, and future studies may identify specific patient populations or preparation methods that show benefit — but the current evidence does not support its routine use.

PATIENT GUIDE

What Patients Need to Know

If you're considering PRP for your Achilles tendon, here's the most important thing to understand: the gap between what PRP is marketed to do and what the research actually shows is enormous.

PRP sounds compelling in theory. It uses your own blood, concentrates the healing factors, and delivers them directly to the injured tendon. The logic seems sound. But medicine doesn't work on logic alone — it works on evidence. And the evidence for PRP in Achilles tendinopathy is consistently negative.

This doesn't mean PRP is useless for everything. There is reasonable evidence supporting PRP for other conditions, such as lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow) and possibly plantar fasciitis. But the Achilles tendon is different — and the data are clear.

Before spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on a treatment that hasn't been shown to work, it's worth understanding what the research actually says.

What Is PRP?

PRP stands for platelet-rich plasma. It's made by drawing a small amount of your blood (usually about 15 to 60 mL), placing it in a centrifuge to separate the components, and concentrating the platelet-rich portion. This concentrated solution is then injected into the injured tissue — in this case, the Achilles tendon.

Platelets contain growth factors — proteins that play a role in tissue repair, including:

·     Platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF)

·     Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β)

·     Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)

·     Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)

Growth factors found in PRP include:

Growth Factor	Role in Healing
Platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF)	Stimulates cell growth and blood vessel formation
Transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β)	Promotes collagen production
Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)	Stimulates new blood vessel growth
Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)	Supports cell repair and regeneration

The theory is that delivering a high concentration of these growth factors directly to the site of tendon degeneration will stimulate healing, promote new collagen production, and accelerate recovery.

In laboratory studies and animal models, PRP has shown promising effects on tendon cells. Growth factors from PRP can stimulate tenocyte (tendon cell) activity and promote collagen synthesis in a petri dish. However — and this is the critical point — these effects have not been demonstrated in humans with Achilles tendinopathy.

What Does the Research Actually Show?

The Landmark JAMA Trial (2021)

The most important study on PRP for Achilles tendinopathy is a multicenter randomized clinical trial published in JAMA in 2021. This trial enrolled 240 patients across 24 sites — making it by far the largest and most rigorous study on this topic.

Patients with chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy (pain lasting more than 3 months, confirmed by ultrasound or MRI) were randomly assigned to receive either:

·     A single intratendinous PRP injection, or

·     A sham injection (a dry needle inserted under the skin without entering the tendon)

The results were unequivocal: no difference between PRP and sham injection at any time point.

Outcome	PRP Group	Sham Group	Difference
VISA-A score at 6 months	54.4	53.4	−2.7 (not significant)
VISA-A score at 3 months	No difference	No difference	Not significant
Quality of life (EQ-5D-5L)	No difference	No difference	Not significant
Pain scores (VAS)	No difference	No difference	Not significant

The results were unequivocal: no difference between PRP and sham injection at any time point.

·     VISA-A score at 6 months: 54.4 (PRP) vs. 53.4 (sham) — adjusted mean difference of −2.7 (95% CI, −8.8 to 3.3)

·     No difference in VISA-A scores at 3 months

·     No difference in quality of life (EQ-5D-5L)

·     No difference in pain scores (VAS)

Importantly, the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval excluded a clinically meaningful effect, meaning the study had sufficient statistical power to detect a real benefit if one existed. It simply didn't.

The PRP group did experience more injection site discomfort (97 vs. 73 patients) and more mild adverse effects than the sham group.

The 2025 Meta-Analysis (Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research)

The most comprehensive and up-to-date meta-analysis was published in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research in 2025. It included 6 randomized controlled trials with 422 patients and specifically addressed methodological shortcomings of earlier meta-analyses.

The findings were definitive:

Time Point	Outcome	Mean Difference	P Value
3 months	VISA-A score	1.7 (−1.8 to 5.2)	0.34
6 months	VISA-A score	0.5 (−8.5 to 9.3)	0.92
1 year	VISA-A score	−7.9 (−27.3 to 11.6)	0.43
3 months	VAS pain	−0.22 (−0.56 to 0.12)	0.21

The findings were definitive:

·     VISA-A scores at 3 months: No benefit (mean difference 1.7; 95% CI, −1.8 to 5.2; p = 0.34)

·     VISA-A scores at 6 months: No benefit (mean difference 0.5; 95% CI, −8.5 to 9.3; p = 0.92)

·     VISA-A scores at 1 year: No benefit (mean difference −7.9; 95% CI, −27.3 to 11.6; p = 0.43)

·     VAS pain scores at 3 months: No benefit (mean difference −0.22; 95% CI, −0.56 to 0.12; p = 0.21)

The authors also identified publication bias through funnel plot asymmetry — meaning that if anything, the published literature may have overstated the apparent benefits of PRP. Their conclusion was direct: "Until future high-quality RCTs show a clear clinical benefit, PRP should not be used to treat Achilles tendinopathy."

The 2025 Meta-Analysis (Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery)

A separate 2025 meta-analysis published in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery analyzed 4 RCTs with 337 patients comparing PRP to placebo. The results were consistent:

·     No significant difference in VISA-A scores at 3 or 6 months

·     No significant difference in VAS pain scores at 3 or 6 months

·     No significant changes in tendon thickness or vascularity on imaging

The authors concluded: "This meta-analysis found no significant clinical or radiological benefit of PRP injections compared to placebo in the treatment of Achilles tendinopathy."

Earlier Meta-Analyses

Multiple earlier meta-analyses reached similar conclusions:

·     A 2023 meta-analysis (8 RCTs, 288 patients) found no statistically significant differences in VISA-A scores at 6, 12, or 24 weeks between PRP and placebo groups.

·     A 2019 meta-analysis (5 RCTs, 189 patients) published in Medicine found no significant differences in VISA-A scores at 12 weeks, 24 weeks, or 1 year.

·     A JAMA review (2023) summarized a meta-analysis of 4 RCTs (170 patients) showing no difference in VISA-A scores between PRP plus eccentric training and saline injection plus eccentric training.

The consistency of these findings across multiple independent research groups, using different methodologies and patient populations, makes the conclusion robust: PRP does not work for midportion Achilles tendinopathy.

The One Positive Study — And Why It's an Outlier

One small randomized trial (60 patients) did show a benefit of PRP combined with eccentric training compared to eccentric training alone. In this study, high-volume injection (HVI) outperformed both PRP and placebo at 6 and 12 weeks, while both HVI and PRP outperformed placebo at 24 weeks.

However, this study had important limitations:

·     It included only 60 patients (20 per group)

·     It used four PRP injections given 14 days apart — a very different protocol than the single injection used in larger trials

·     The HVI group received corticosteroid as part of the injection, making it difficult to isolate the effect of any single component

This study is often cited by PRP proponents, but it is an outlier in the context of the larger, more rigorous evidence base. The 2025 CORR meta-analysis specifically noted that PRP was less effective than high-volume injection in the short term.

PATIENT GUIDE

What About PRP for Achilles Tendon Ruptures?

Some patients ask whether PRP can help heal a torn Achilles tendon — either as a standalone treatment or as an addition to surgery.

The PATH-2 Trial (BMJ, 2019)

The PATH-2 trial was a large, multicenter randomized controlled trial published in the BMJ that enrolled 230 patients with acute Achilles tendon ruptures treated nonoperatively. Patients received either a PRP injection or a placebo (dry needle) injection, in addition to standard rehabilitation.

The results: no difference in any outcome.

·     No difference in muscle-tendon function (heel-rise endurance test) at 24 weeks

·     No difference in patient-reported function (Achilles tendon rupture score)

·     No difference in quality of life

·     No difference in pain

·     No difference in adverse events

The PRP used in this trial was confirmed to be of good quality with expected growth factor content — ruling out the possibility that the PRP preparation was inadequate.

PRP as Surgical Augmentation

A 2026 comprehensive review of PRP augmentation during surgical Achilles repair found mixed results. Some smaller studies reported early improvements in range of motion and faster return to running. However, the three randomized controlled trials included in the review showed no significant long-term differences in functional outcomes between PRP-augmented and standard surgical repair.

The bottom line: PRP has not been shown to meaningfully improve outcomes after Achilles tendon rupture — whether treated surgically or nonoperatively.

Why Doesn't PRP Work for the Achilles Tendon?

This is a fair question. If PRP contains growth factors that promote healing, why doesn't it help the Achilles tendon?

Several theories have been proposed:

The biology of tendinopathy is different from acute injury. Chronic Achilles tendinopathy is not primarily an inflammatory condition — it's a degenerative one. The tendon has undergone structural changes at the cellular level, including disorganized collagen, increased ground substance, and neovascularization (abnormal blood vessel growth). Simply adding growth factors to a degenerative tendon may not address the underlying problem.

The mechanical environment matters more than biology. Tendons respond primarily to mechanical loading — the forces placed on them during exercise. Eccentric exercises work because they provide a specific mechanical stimulus that promotes collagen reorganization and tendon remodeling. An injection cannot replicate this stimulus.

PRP preparation is not standardized. There are dozens of different PRP preparation systems, and they produce products with widely varying platelet concentrations, white blood cell content, and growth factor profiles. This lack of standardization makes it difficult to compare studies and may explain some of the variability in results.

A single injection may not be enough. Some researchers have suggested that multiple PRP injections might be more effective than a single injection. However, the largest and most rigorous trials used single injections, and the one study that used multiple injections was small and had significant methodological limitations.

What the Professional Organizations Say

The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) published a position statement on regenerative medicine in sports medicine. Regarding Achilles tendinopathy, the statement notes that "well-designed, randomized controlled trials have found no difference between PRP and saline injections" for this condition. The AMSSM contrasts this with lateral epicondylitis (tennis elbow), where multiple RCTs have demonstrated positive results with PRP.

This distinction is important: PRP is not universally ineffective. It appears to work for some conditions. The Achilles tendon simply isn't one of them based on current evidence.

What Actually Works for Achilles Tendinopathy?

If PRP doesn't work, what does? The evidence strongly supports several treatments:

Eccentric exercise is the gold standard. Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses confirm that structured eccentric loading programs (like the Alfredson protocol) produce significant, lasting improvements in pain and function. A 2026 meta-analysis of 21 RCTs confirmed eccentric exercise as a first-line treatment.

Heavy slow resistance (HSR) training is equally effective. A randomized trial in the American Journal of Sports Medicine found that HSR produced similar improvements to eccentric training at 52 weeks.

Shockwave therapy (ESWT) may help patients who haven't responded to exercise alone. A meta-analysis of 8 RCTs found that ESWT improved pain and function scores with sustained benefits beyond 6 months.

Activity modification — reducing provocative loads while maintaining fitness — is an important component of treatment. Current evidence suggests that continuing sports at a self-monitored pain level of 2 to 5 out of 10 does not limit improvement.

Physical therapy provides structured guidance for progressive loading, biomechanical correction, and return to activity.

For a complete guide to evidence-based treatment, see our article on whether Achilles tendinitis can heal without surgery. For specific exercises, see our guide to the best exercises for Achilles tendon pain.

PATIENT GUIDE

The Cost Factor

PRP injections are typically not covered by insurance for Achilles tendinopathy. Out-of-pocket costs generally range from $500 to $2,000 per injection, depending on the provider and preparation system used.

Given that the evidence shows no benefit over placebo, this represents a significant financial cost for a treatment that is unlikely to help. By contrast, the most effective treatment — eccentric exercise — is free and can be performed at home.

This doesn't mean that every patient who received PRP and felt better was imagining things. The placebo effect is real and powerful, particularly with injection therapies. Both PRP and sham injection groups in the JAMA trial improved over time — they just improved equally. The natural history of Achilles tendinopathy includes periods of improvement, and any treatment given during an improving phase may appear to "work" even if it had no actual effect.

Recovery Expectations With Evidence-Based Treatment

If you commit to a structured exercise program for Achilles tendinopathy, here's what you can realistically expect:

·     6 to 12 weeks: Noticeable reduction in morning stiffness and activity-related pain

·     3 to 6 months: Significant functional improvement for most patients

·     6 to 12 months: Maximum improvement, particularly for longstanding cases

These timelines are based on data from multiple randomized trials. Recovery takes patience and consistency — but the outcomes are good for the majority of patients.

For more detail on healing timelines, see our article on how long it takes an Achilles tendon to heal.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does PRP work for Achilles tendinopathy?

Based on the best available evidence — including the largest randomized trial (240 patients, JAMA) and multiple meta-analyses — PRP does not improve pain, function, or tendon structure compared to placebo for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy.

Why do some doctors still recommend PRP for the Achilles tendon?

PRP is heavily marketed, and some clinicians rely on anecdotal experience or smaller, lower-quality studies rather than the totality of the evidence. Additionally, PRP does work for some other conditions (like tennis elbow), which may create a perception that it works for all tendon problems. It does not.

Is PRP safe for the Achilles tendon?

PRP is generally safe. The most common side effects are injection site discomfort, swelling, and bruising. Serious complications are rare. However, "safe" and "effective" are not the same thing — a treatment can be safe without providing any benefit.

How much does PRP cost for Achilles tendinopathy?

PRP is typically not covered by insurance for this indication. Out-of-pocket costs range from approximately $500 to $2,000 per injection, depending on the provider and preparation method.

What about multiple PRP injections — would those work better?

One small study (60 patients) used four PRP injections and showed some benefit over placebo at 24 weeks. However, this study had significant limitations, and the larger, more rigorous evidence does not support PRP at any dose. The hypothesis that multiple injections might be more effective has not been validated in large trials.

Does PRP help after Achilles tendon surgery?

The evidence is mixed but generally negative. The PATH-2 trial (230 patients, BMJ) found no benefit of PRP for nonoperatively treated Achilles ruptures. A 2026 review of PRP augmentation during surgical repair found some early improvements in small studies, but randomized trials showed no significant long-term differences.

What about PRP for insertional Achilles tendinopathy?

The major trials have focused on midportion tendinopathy. There is very limited high-quality evidence specifically for insertional Achilles tendinopathy. It would be inappropriate to extrapolate the negative midportion data to the insertional type, but there is also no strong evidence supporting PRP for insertional disease.

If PRP doesn't work, what should I do instead?

The most effective treatment for Achilles tendinopathy is a structured eccentric exercise or heavy slow resistance training program, performed consistently for 3 to 6 months. Physical therapy, activity modification, and shockwave therapy are also evidence-based options. See our complete guide to Achilles tendinitis treatment.

My friend had PRP and got better. How do you explain that?

The placebo effect is powerful, especially with injection therapies. In the JAMA trial, both the PRP and sham groups improved over time — they just improved equally. Additionally, Achilles tendinopathy naturally fluctuates, and improvement may coincide with — but not be caused by — any treatment given during that period.

Will PRP ever be proven effective for the Achilles tendon?

It's possible that future research could identify specific PRP formulations, dosing protocols, or patient populations that benefit. However, the current evidence — spanning multiple large trials and meta-analyses over more than a decade — is consistently negative. Until new evidence emerges, PRP cannot be recommended for Achilles tendinopathy.

Should I get a second opinion if my doctor recommends PRP for my Achilles?

If PRP is being recommended as a primary treatment for Achilles tendinopathy — particularly before you've completed a structured exercise program — it's reasonable to seek a second opinion from a fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeon who can review the evidence with you and discuss all available options.

Myth vs. Fact

MYTH  PRP uses your body's own healing factors, so it must work.

FACT  While PRP does contain growth factors, delivering them to a degenerative tendon has not been shown to improve outcomes in humans. Laboratory findings don't always translate to clinical benefit. Multiple large randomized trials confirm no benefit over placebo.

MYTH  PRP is a natural treatment with no downsides.

FACT  PRP is generally safe, but it's not free of downsides. It causes more injection site discomfort than sham injection, costs $500 to $2,000 out of pocket, and — most importantly — may delay patients from pursuing treatments that actually work, like eccentric exercise.

MYTH  The studies just haven't used the right PRP preparation.

FACT  This is a common argument, but the JAMA trial specifically verified that the PRP used was of good quality with expected growth factor content. The PATH-2 trial did the same. The problem isn't the PRP preparation — it's that PRP doesn't address the underlying pathology of Achilles tendinopathy.

MYTH  Professional athletes use PRP for their Achilles tendons, so it must be effective.

FACT  Professional athletes have access to comprehensive rehabilitation programs, world-class physical therapists, and the ability to modify their training extensively. Any improvement they experience is far more likely attributable to these factors than to PRP. Celebrity endorsements are not evidence.

MYTH  PRP is better than cortisone for Achilles tendinopathy.

FACT  Neither PRP nor corticosteroid injections are recommended as primary treatments for Achilles tendinopathy. Corticosteroids carry the additional risk of tendon weakening and rupture. The best treatment is structured exercise — not any injection.

MYTH  If one PRP injection doesn't work, you just need more.

FACT  The hypothesis that multiple injections might be more effective has not been validated in large, rigorous trials. The one small study that used multiple injections had significant methodological limitations and is an outlier in the overall evidence base.

MYTH  PRP is the future of tendon treatment.

FACT  PRP may have a role in treating certain musculoskeletal conditions (like tennis elbow), but the Achilles tendon has consistently failed to respond. The future of Achilles tendinopathy treatment is more likely to involve optimized loading programs, better understanding of tendon biology, and potentially other regenerative approaches — but not PRP as currently used.

MYTH  Doctors who don't offer PRP are behind the times.

FACT  Doctors who don't offer PRP for Achilles tendinopathy are practicing evidence-based medicine. Offering a treatment that multiple large trials have shown to be ineffective — particularly at significant cost to the patient — is not progressive. It's the opposite.

Research Summary

Here's a plain-English summary of the most important research on PRP for Achilles tendinopathy:

THE LARGEST RANDOMIZED TRIAL FOUND NO BENEFIT.

A 240-patient, 24-site randomized trial published in JAMA (2021) compared a single PRP injection to sham injection for chronic midportion Achilles tendinopathy. There was no difference in pain, function, or quality of life at 3 or 6 months. The confidence intervals excluded a clinically meaningful effect.

EVERY MAJOR META-ANALYSIS AGREES: PRP DOESN'T WORK FOR THE ACHILLES.

A 2025 meta-analysis in Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (6 RCTs, 422 patients) found no benefit at 3 months, 6 months, or 1 year. A separate 2025 meta-analysis in the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery (4 RCTs, 337 patients) confirmed these findings. Publication bias analysis suggested that earlier studies may have actually overstated PRP's benefits.

PRP DOESN'T HELP ACHILLES RUPTURES EITHER.

The PATH-2 trial (230 patients, BMJ, 2019) found no benefit of PRP for nonoperatively treated acute Achilles ruptures. A 2026 review of PRP augmentation during surgical repair found no consistent long-term benefit in randomized trials.

PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS DO NOT RECOMMEND PRP FOR ACHILLES TENDINOPATHY.

The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine notes that well-designed RCTs have found no difference between PRP and saline for Achilles tendinopathy, in contrast to conditions like lateral epicondylitis where PRP has shown benefit.

ECCENTRIC EXERCISE REMAINS THE GOLD STANDARD.

A 2026 meta-analysis of 21 RCTs confirmed eccentric exercise as a first-line treatment for Achilles tendinopathy. Heavy slow resistance training is equally effective. These free, exercise-based treatments outperform PRP, NSAIDs, and other passive therapies.

HIGH-VOLUME INJECTION MAY OUTPERFORM PRP.

One randomized trial found that high-volume injection (HVI) produced greater short-term improvements than PRP for chronic Achilles tendinopathy. The 2025 CORR meta-analysis confirmed that PRP was less effective than HVI in the short term.

Conclusion

The evidence on PRP for Achilles tendinopathy is remarkably consistent: it does not work. This conclusion is supported by the largest randomized trial ever conducted on this topic, multiple independent meta-analyses, and position statements from professional sports medicine organizations.

This doesn't mean your Achilles pain can't get better — it absolutely can. But the path to improvement runs through structured exercise, not injections. Eccentric training and heavy slow resistance programs have strong evidence behind them, cost nothing, and produce lasting results when performed consistently.

If you've been told that PRP is your best option for Achilles tendinopathy, consider seeking a second opinion. A fellowship-trained foot and ankle surgeon can review your imaging, assess your specific condition, and develop an evidence-based treatment plan tailored to your goals.

Your money — and your time — are better spent on treatments that actually work.

CONTINUE READING

Related Achilles Guides

Can Achilles Tendinitis Heal Without Surgery? — Evidence-based nonsurgical treatment and recovery guidance.

Best Exercises for Achilles Tendon Pain — How to choose and progress the right tendon-loading program.

Insertional vs. Midportion Achilles Tendinopathy — Why pain location changes exercise selection and treatment.

How Long Does It Take an Achilles Tendon to Heal? — Realistic healing and return-to-activity timelines.

Achilles Tendon Rupture Surgery — A complete guide for patients with an acute Achilles tear.

PATIENT GUIDE

About the Author

Dr. Sarang Desai is a fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon specializing in foot and ankle surgery and sports medicine, based in the Dallas–Fort Worth area. A former All-American athlete at the University of Texas, Dr. Desai brings a unique understanding of what it takes to recover from injury and return to peak performance.

Dr. Desai has served as a professional sports team physician and currently owns multiple professional sports teams, giving him a distinctive perspective on athlete care and return-to-play decisions that few surgeons can offer. He is the inventor of multiple orthopedic implants and surgical devices and has authored numerous peer-reviewed scientific publications.

With more than 15 years of clinical experience, Dr. Desai treats everyone from weekend warriors and recreational athletes to collegiate and professional competitors. His practice is built on evidence-based, personalized care — combining the latest research with real-world clinical expertise to help every patient achieve the best possible outcome.

PATIENT GUIDE

Schedule an Appointment

If you're experiencing persistent Achilles tendon pain and want an honest, evidence-based evaluation of your treatment options, schedule an appointment with Dr. Sarang Desai.

SCHEDULE AN EVALUATION

Dr. Sarang Desai  •  Orthopedic Institute of North Texas  •  (972) 899-4400  •  theachillesdoc.com  •  McKinney & Flower Mound, Texas

ARTICLE INFORMATION

Medical Disclaimer

MEDICAL DISCLAIMER

This article is intended for educational purposes only and should not replace an evaluation by a qualified healthcare professional. Every injury is unique, and treatment recommendations should be individualized based on your symptoms, examination, imaging findings, and goals.

ARTICLE INFORMATION

References

Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection vs Sham Injection on Tendon Dysfunction in Patients With Chronic Midportion Achilles Tendinopathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Kearney RS, Ji C, Warwick J, et al. JAMA. 2021;326(2):137-144. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.6986.