Level of evidence 1.

Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of prolotherapy injections for the treatment of plantar fasciitis. Material and methods:Between October 2014 and October 2015, 60 patients with symptomatic chronic plantar fasciitis were randomly divided into two groups, as control (n=31) and prolotherapy (n=29) groups. In the prolotherapy group, ultrasound-guided prolotherapy injections into the plantar fascia up to five different points were performed three times every 21 days. In the control group, the patients received instructions for plantar fascia and Achilles tendon stretching exercises three times a week for three months. Additionally, all patients were given heel lifts and instructed to refrain from heavy loading activity. The patients were evaluated via the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Food and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and Foot Function Index (FFI) at baseline and at 21, 42, 90, and 360 days during follow-up.Results: A total of 50 patients completed follow-up (26 patients in the prolotherapy group and 24 patients in the control group). The VAS, FAOS, and FFI scores were significantly improved in both groups (p<0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in the pain and functional scores at 21 days of treatment between the groups. The VAS and FAOS scores were higher in the prolotherapy group than the control group at 42, 90, and 360 days of treatment. The FFI scores were also higher in the prolotherapy group than the controls at 42 and 90 days of treatment; however, both groups had similar scores at 360 days. Conclusion:Our study results suggest that prolotherapy is an effective auxiliary method for treating chronic plantar fasciitis.

ContextMusculoskeletal injuries may be painful, troublesome, life limiting and also one of the global health problems. There has been considerable amount of interest during the past two decades to stem cells and tissue engineering techniques in orthopedic surgery, especially to manage special and compulsive injuries within the musculoskeletal system.Evidence AcquisitionThe aim of this study was to present a literature review regarding the most recent progress in stem cell procedures and current indications in orthopedics clinical care practice. The Medline and PubMed library databases were searched for the articles related with stem cell procedures in the field of orthopedic surgery and additionally the reference list of each article was also included to provide a comprehensive evaluation.ResultsVarious sources of stem cells have been studied for orthopedics clinical care practice. Stem cell therapy has successfully used for major orthopedic procedures in terms of bone-joint injuries (fractures-bone defects, nonunion, and spinal injuries), osteoarthritis-cartilage defects, ligament-tendon injuries, femoral head osteonecrosis and osteogenesis imperfecta. Stem cells have also used in bone tissue engineering in combining with the scaffolds and provided faster and better healing of tissues.ConclusionsLarge amounts of preclinical studies have been made of stem cells and there is an increasing interest to perform these studies within the human population but preclinical studies are insufficient; therefore, much more and efficient studies should be conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of stem cells.

Background Osteochondral lesions of talus (OLT) are among the most common ankle problems. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and prolotherapy (PrT) are 2 successful injection-based techniques for treatment of chronic musculoskeletal problems. The aim of the present study was to compare PRP and PrT injections for the management of OLT. Material/Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 49 patients with OLT symptoms of more than 6 months who had been refractory to 3 months of treatment using conservative methods. The patients were divided into 2 groups: PrT injections (PrT group, n=27) or PRP injections (PRP group, n=22). The patients were given 3 injections of 4 mL solution into periarticular and intra-articular ankle joint spaces. After treatment, patients were evaluated via Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS), and Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS) at baseline and 21-, 90-, 180-, and 360-day follow-up periods. Results Both PRP and PrT treatments resulted in greater improvement in pain and ankle functions at follow-up periods extending to 1 year ( P <0.001) and there was no difference between the groups for the outcomes at follow-up periods ( P >0.05). Excellent or good outcomes were reported by 88.8% of the patients in PrT group and 90.9% of the patients in PRP group. Conclusions Both PRP and PrT are efficient and safe methods in treatment of OLT. PrT offers advantages of less cost and minimal invasiveness.

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to present characteristics and publication patterns of studies arise from orthopedic theses obtained from National Thesis Center; database in terms of publication years, study types, topics, level of evidence between 1974 and 2014.MethodsFirstly, National Thesis Center database was searched for orthopedics and Traumatology theses. The theses, which their summary or full text were available were included in the study. The topics, study types and quality of study designs were reviewed. Then theses were searched in the PubMed database. Journals of published theses were classified according to category, scope and impact factors of the year 2014.Results1508 theses were included into the study. Clinical studies comprised 71,7% of the theses, while 25,6% of the theses were non-clinical experimental and 2,7% of the theses were observational studies. Clinical studies were Level I in 8,6% (n = 93) and Level II in 5,8% of the theses (n = 63). A total of 224 theses (14,9%) were published in the journals indexed in PubMed database from 1974 to 2012. Fifty-two (23,2%) were published in SCI; 136 theses (60,7%) were published in SCI-E journals and 36 theses (16%) were published in other Journals indexed in PubMed.ConclusionThe quantity and quality of published theses need to be improved and effective measures should be taken to promote quality of theses. Theses from universities and Training hospitals which did not allow open access, and; incomplete records of the National Thesis Center database were major limitations of this study.