ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07688096Updated Oct 6, 2026

Regenerative Medicine for Joint Hypermobility and Instability

A Phase 1/2 interventional study of Dextrose 20% Prolotherapy and Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma in Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Hypermobility Type (hEDS), Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) and Joint Hypermobility, sponsored by Manhattan Pain Medicine, PLLC. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-06.

Sponsored by Manhattan Pain Medicine, PLLC · Phase 1/2, Interventional, and Treatment

Updated Oct 6, 2026Start date movedPrimary completion movedGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Phase 1/2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
100
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This clinical trial is designed to evaluate whether a stepwise injection-based treatment approach can reduce pain and improve function in adults with joint hypermobility, connective tissue laxity, and joint instability.

Joint hypermobility occurs when joints move beyond their normal range, often because of looser connective tissue. For some patients, this can contribute to chronic pain, recurrent instability, reduced function, and disability. This study focuses on adults with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS), hypermobility spectrum disorder (HSD), or joint instability after injury who have already completed physical therapy without adequate relief.

The main question this study aims to answer is whether the first treatment step, dextrose prolotherapy, can reduce pain by 40% or more two weeks after the second injection.

Participants will receive treatment in a step-by-step sequence, based on their response:

Step 1: Dextrose prolotherapy A dextrose-based injection used to stimulate a healing response in ligament, tendon, or joint-supporting tissue.

Step 2: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) An injection prepared from the participant's own blood, designed to support tissue repair and recovery.

Step 3: Doxycycline injections A low-dose injectable treatment used in this study to help protect joint-supporting tissue. It is not being used to treat infection.

Alternative option: Hyaluronic acid injections An injection into the joint that may be offered if the earlier treatment steps do not provide enough improvement.

Each treatment step begins with two injections, given approximately two weeks apart. If a participant improves by 40% or more, they may continue with that treatment pathway. If they do not improve enough, they may be offered the next step in the study.

Participants will be followed for up to 12 months, with study visits used to monitor pain, function, treatment response, and safety.

Read the detailed description

This is a prospective, open-label, single-arm, step-care interventional study evaluating a structured regenerative medicine treatment protocol for adults with symptomatic joint hypermobility or instability who have failed conservative therapy including physical therapy.

All eligible participants begin with dextrose prolotherapy (20% final concentration). Response is assessed at 2 weeks after the second injection using the Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) scale. Participants who improve by 40% or more continue with that treatment. Those who do not improve enough are offered the next treatment in the sequence.

The step-care sequence is:

Phase 1: Dextrose prolotherapy (20% dextrose with local anesthetic) Phase 2: Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) prolotherapy Phase 3: Investigational injectable doxycycline hyclate prolotherapy (10 mg/mL; 5-25 mg per joint site; maximum 100 mg per session) Alternative pathway: Visco-3 hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation (FDA-approved for knee osteoarthritis; off-label use in other joints disclosed in consent)

Each phase follows the same cycle: 2 injections approximately 2 weeks apart, followed by a decision point at 2 weeks after the second injection. The dextrose phase decision point is the study primary endpoint.

Outcome measures collected include the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI), and region-appropriate joint-specific functional measures (DASH for upper extremity, KOOS for knee, LEFS for lower extremity, ODI for spine). Long-term follow-up occurs at 3, 6, and 12 months.

Safety is monitored continuously. An Independent Medical Monitor reviews all serious adverse events. The injectable doxycycline use is investigational; an IND exemption determination request has been submitted to the FDA. Enrollment into the doxycycline phase will not begin until the FDA determination is received and IRB approval is in place.

The study is investigator-initiated with no external funding. It is conducted at a single site - Manhattan Pain Medicine, New York, NY.

02

Conditions studied

  • Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Hypermobility Type (hEDS)
  • Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS)
  • Joint Hypermobility
  • Joint Instability
  • Hypermobility Spectrum Disorder
  • Chronic Pain Syndrome
  • Musculoskeletal Pain
  • Sprain
  • Subluxation
  • Dislocation
  • Craniocervical Disfunction

Keywords

  • prolotherapy
  • dextrose prolotherapy
  • platelet-rich plasma
  • PRP
  • doxycycline
  • regenerative medicine
  • joint hypermobility
  • hEDS
  • hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
  • viscosupplementation
  • hyaluronic acid
  • step-care
  • ligament instability
  • MMP inhibition
  • dislocation
  • Subluxation
  • CCI
  • Craniocervical Disfunction
  • Craniocervical instability
03

In context

Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type 3

28 studies on the registry are indexed under Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type 3; 9 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 100 is above the median of 32 across 16 interventional studies indexed under Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type 3.

Browse Ehlers-Danlos syndrome type 3 studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Manhattan Pain Medicine, PLLC as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults age 18 years or older, any gender.
  • Symptomatic joint hypermobility or instability attributable to one of the following:

    1. hEDS diagnosed using the 2017 International Classification of the Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes diagnostic criteria;
    2. HSD classified using the 2017 framework (generalized, peripheral, localized, or historical HSD) with Beighton scoring; or
    3. post-traumatic joint instability with ligamentous injury documented by examination and/or imaging.
  • Objective evidence of instability or hypermobility at one or more target joints, defined as at least one of:

    1. a positive joint-specific instability provocation test on standardized physical examination;
    2. generalized hypermobility (Beighton score ≥ 5/9 for adults) or documented joint-specific hypermobility at the target joint; or
    3. imaging evidence of ligamentous laxity or injury at the target joint (dynamic ultrasound, stress radiograph, or MRI).
  • Pain attributable to the target joint for at least 3 months.
  • Baseline pain score of 4 or greater on a 0-10 numeric rating scale.
  • Failure of conservative treatment, including at least 6 weeks of physical therapy directed at the affected joint(s).
  • Not currently using NSAIDs and willing to avoid NSAIDs during the active treatment period, when clinically appropriate.
  • Able to provide and to comply with study procedures and follow-up.

Additional eligibility for the Hyaluronic Acid (HA) alternative pathway - a participant may enter the HA pathway if ALL of the following apply, in addition to the inclusion criteria above:

  • Has completed at least one regenerative medicine phase (dextrose, PRP, or doxycycline) and either

    1. was classified as an inadequate responder at the phase decision point (GPI \< 40%) and declined further regenerative rotation,
    2. completed all available regenerative phases without adequate response, or
    3. experienced an adverse reaction during a regenerative phase that, in the investigator's judgment, contraindicates further regenerative treatment.
  • A minimum waiting period of 4 weeks has elapsed since the last regenerative medicine treatment attempted, to allow resolution of post-injection effects before HA administration.
  • The target joint(s) have clinical or imaging features amenable to HA viscosupplementation (e.g., articular/osteoarthritic pain component identifiable on examination or imaging).
  • No to HA (see Exclusion Criteria).

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Impaired decision-making capacity that precludes valid .
  • Active local or systemic infection.
  • Known allergy or to study injections, local anesthetics, iodinated contrast (if fluoroscopy is planned), or required procedural materials.
  • Known or intolerance to tetracycline-class antibiotics, including doxycycline (relevant to the doxycycline treatment phase).
  • Mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) or other mast cell disorder that, in the investigator's judgment, elevates the risk of injection-related hypersensitivity or systemic reactions.
  • Active or systemic inflammatory connective-tissue disease that, in the investigator's judgment, may confound the response to regenerative treatment or increase procedural risk.
  • Known hypersensitivity to sodium hyaluronate or to the specific HA product to be used (Visco-3); active skin disease or infection over the planned injection site; venous or lymphatic stasis in the limb of the planned injection.
  • Active or anticancer treatment within the prior 12 months; a prior malignancy in documented remission may be enrolled at the investigator's discretion with documented rationale.
  • Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, defined as ≥ 8.5% on the most recent value within the prior 3 months; the investigator may also exclude for other objectively documented diabetes-related procedural or healing risk.
  • Prior joint replacement at the target joint.
  • Planned surgery during study participation.
  • injection to the target joint(s) within the prior 6 weeks.
  • Concurrent enrollment in another interventional study for the same pain condition.
  • Active litigation or disability claim related to the target condition (to limit secondary-gain confounding of self-reported outcomes).
  • Pregnancy, or unwillingness to undergo pregnancy testing when fluoroscopy is planned (persons of ).
  • Inability to comply with study procedures or follow-up.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(9)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Clinically significant

Judged by the study doctor to matter for your health or for the study. It is a doctor’s decision, so ask the study team if you are unsure whether something counts.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Contraindication

A reason a treatment, test or procedure should not be given to a particular person, such as an allergy, another illness or a medicine they take.

Hypersensitivity

An allergy, or another reaction of the immune system, to a substance. “Hypersensitivity to the study drug” means a known allergic reaction to it — not every side effect a medicine can have.

Autoimmune disease

A condition in which the immune system attacks the body’s own tissues, such as rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, psoriasis, type 1 diabetes or inflammatory bowel disease.

Immunotherapy studies often leave out active autoimmune disease, and some name exceptions, such as thyroid disease on replacement hormone. Check the exceptions this study lists.

Cancer (malignancy)

Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.

Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.

HbA1c

A blood test of average blood sugar over the past two to three months, given as a percentage or in mmol/mol. 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) or more is the usual threshold for diabetes, normally confirmed by a second test.

Corticosteroids (steroids)

Anti-inflammatory medicines such as prednisone, prednisolone and dexamethasone — not the anabolic steroids used for muscle.

Studies differ in what they allow: check which steroid medicines, routes (tablets, injections, creams, inhalers, eye drops) and doses this study accepts.

Childbearing potential

Able to become pregnant: from the first period until menopause, unless permanently unable to through surgery (removal of the womb, or of both ovaries or both fallopian tubes).

Criteria for people of childbearing potential usually ask for a negative pregnancy test and for contraception during the study and for a time after it.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 1 / Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Sequential assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
100 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Step-Care Regenerative Injection Treatment

    All participants receive a step-care sequence beginning with dextrose prolotherapy. Those who do not improve by 40% or more are offered rotation to platelet-rich plasma (PRP) prolotherapy, then to investigational doxycycline prolotherapy. A hyaluronic acid viscosupplementation pathway is available as an alternative for participants who do not respond to or cannot tolerate the regenerative steps.

    Drug: Dextrose 20% Prolotherapy · Biological: Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma · Drug: Doxycycline Hyclate Injectable (Investigational) · Device: Visco-3 Sodium Hyaluronate Viscosupplementation

Interventions

  • Hypertonic dextrose solution injected at periarticular ligament-bone junctions at 20% final concentration, combined with local anesthetic. Two injections approximately 2 weeks apart per phase. Up to 4 injections total.

  • Leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma prepared from a 30-60 mL autologous whole blood draw using an FDA-cleared PRP preparation system. Two injections approximately 2 weeks apart per phase. Up to 4 injections total.

    Also known as: PRP

  • Doxycycline hyclate 10 mg/mL reconstituted from commercially available lyophilized powder at point of care, combined with 20% dextrose and local anesthetic. Dose: 5-25 mg per joint site; maximum 100 mg per session. Two injections approximately 2 weeks apart per phase. Up to 4 injections total. Use as prolotherapy agent is investigational.

  • DeviceVisco-3 Sodium Hyaluronate Viscosupplementation

    Visco-3 (sodium hyaluronate 25 mg/2.5 mL), FDA-approved for knee osteoarthritis. Used as an alternative pathway for participants who do not respond to or cannot tolerate regenerative phases. Up to 3 syringes per joint per course. Off-label use in non-knee joints is disclosed in the informed consent form.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) Responder Rate After Dextrose Prolotherapy

    Proportion of participants achieving at least 40% improvement on the Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) scale relative to baseline. The GPI is a validated patient-reported outcome measure used in prolotherapy research in which participants rate their overall percentage of improvement from 0% (no improvement) to 100% (complete improvement). A participant is classified as a responder if they report 40% or greater improvement. This threshold also serves as the step-care decision rule: responders continue dextrose; non-responders are offered rotation to the next treatment.

    Time frame: 2 weeks after the second dextrose prolotherapy injection (approximately 4 weeks after enrollment)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Severity Score

    Change from baseline in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity subscale, a validated 4-item patient-reported measure assessing worst, least, average, and current pain on a 0-10 numeric rating scale. Scores range from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 weeks after second injection of each phase, and at 3, 6, and 12 months

  2. Change in Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Interference Score

    Change from baseline in the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) interference subscale, a validated 7-item patient-reported measure assessing how pain interferes with general activity, mood, walking, work, relationships, sleep, and enjoyment of life on a 0-10 numeric rating scale. Scores range from 0 to 10 per item and are averaged to a total interference score of 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no interference and 10 indicates complete interference. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 weeks after second injection of each phase, and at 3, 6, and 12 months

  3. Change in Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score

    Change from baseline in the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, a validated 30-item patient-reported outcome measure assessing physical function and symptoms in people with musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity. Scores range from 0 to 100, where 0 indicates no disability and 100 indicates maximum disability. Higher scores indicate worse outcome. Administered to participants whose primary target joint is in the upper extremity.

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 weeks after second injection of each phase, and at 3, 6, and 12 months

  4. Change in Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)

    Change from baseline in the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), a validated patient-reported outcome measure assessing symptoms, pain, function in daily living, function in sport and recreation, and knee-related quality of life. Each of five subscales is scored from 0 to 100, where 0 indicates extreme problems and 100 indicates no problems. Higher scores indicate better outcome. Administered to participants whose primary target joint is the knee.

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 weeks after second injection of each phase, and at 3, 6, and 12 months

  5. Change in Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) Score

    Change from baseline in the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), a validated 20-item patient-reported outcome measure assessing function in people with lower extremity musculoskeletal conditions. Scores range from 0 to 80, where 0 indicates inability to perform any activities and 80 indicates no difficulty with any activities. Higher scores indicate better outcome. Administered to participants whose primary target joint is in the lower extremity (excluding knee).

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 weeks after second injection of each phase, and at 3, 6, and 12 months

  6. Change in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Score

    Change from baseline in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), a validated 10-item patient-reported outcome measure assessing degree of disability and quality of life in people with low back pain. Scores range from 0 to 100, where 0 indicates no disability and 100 indicates maximum disability. Higher scores indicate worse outcome. Administered to participants whose primary target joint is in the spine.

    Time frame: Baseline, 2 weeks after second injection of each phase, and at 3, 6, and 12 months

  7. Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) Responder Rate After PRP Prolotherapy

    Proportion of participants rotated to platelet-rich plasma (PRP) prolotherapy who achieve at least 40% improvement on the GPI scale at the PRP phase decision point, among participants who did not respond to dextrose prolotherapy.

    Time frame: 2 weeks after the second PRP prolotherapy injection

  8. Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) Responder Rate After Doxycycline Prolotherapy

    Proportion of participants rotated to investigational doxycycline prolotherapy who achieve at least 40% improvement on the GPI scale at the doxycycline phase decision point, among participants who did not respond to dextrose and PRP prolotherapy.

    Time frame: 2 weeks after the second doxycycline prolotherapy injection

  9. Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) Response After Hyaluronic Acid Viscosupplementation

    GPI score at end-of-course assessment among participants who entered the alternative hyaluronic acid (HA) viscosupplementation pathway after failure of or adverse reaction to regenerative phases. Reported descriptively; not compared to regenerative phase outcomes.

    Time frame: 2 weeks after the final hyaluronic acid injection of the course

  10. Durability of Response: Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) Score at 3, 6, and 12 Months

    Global Percentage of Improvement (GPI) score at 3, 6, and 12 months from the primary endpoint assessment, evaluating maintenance of treatment response and need for additional treatment over time. The GPI is a patient-reported scale ranging from 0% to 100%, where 0% indicates no improvement and 100% indicates complete improvement relative to baseline. Higher scores indicate better outcome.

    Time frame: 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months from primary endpoint

  11. Durability of Response: Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Severity Score at 3, 6, and 12 Months

    Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain severity subscale score at 3, 6, and 12 months from the primary endpoint assessment, evaluating maintenance of pain reduction over time. Scores range from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.

    Time frame: 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months from primary endpoint

  12. Durability of Response: Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Pain Interference Score at 3, 6, and 12 Months

    Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) pain interference subscale score at 3, 6, and 12 months from the primary endpoint assessment, evaluating maintenance of functional improvement over time. Scores range from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no interference and 10 indicates complete interference with daily activities. Higher scores indicate worse outcome.

    Time frame: 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months from primary endpoint

  13. Incidence and Severity of Adverse Events

    Frequency, severity, and relatedness of adverse events for each study agent (dextrose, PRP, doxycycline) and for the hyaluronic acid pathway, assessed using a standardized Adverse Event Documentation Form at every study contact. Serious adverse events are reported separately. Severity is classified as mild, moderate, or severe.

    Time frame: From first injection through 12-month follow-up

  14. Number of Treatments Required to Achieve Adequate Response

    Total number of injection sessions required before a participant achieves GPI of 40% or greater, describing the treatment burden associated with the step-care approach.

    Time frame: From enrollment through completion of active treatment phase, up to 12 months

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)--a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010. Epub 2008 Sep 30. PubMed 18929686 ↗
  • Mahesh M; National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. NCRP 168: its significance to fluoroscopically guided interventional procedures. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013 Jul;10(7):551-2. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2013.04.003. No abstract available. PubMed 23827007 ↗
  • Beighton P, Solomon L, Soskolne CL. Articular mobility in an African population. Ann Rheum Dis. 1973 Sep;32(5):413-8. doi: 10.1136/ard.32.5.413. No abstract available. PubMed 4751776 ↗
  • Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Nov 15;25(22):2940-52; discussion 2952. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017. PubMed 11074683 ↗
  • Binkley JM, Stratford PW, Lott SA, Riddle DL. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. North American Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Research Network. Phys Ther. 1999 Apr;79(4):371-83. PubMed 10201543 ↗
  • Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998 Aug;28(2):88-96. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1998.28.2.88. PubMed 9699158 ↗
  • Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med. 1996 Jun;29(6):602-8. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:63.0.CO;2-L. PubMed 8773720 ↗
  • Cleeland CS, Ryan KM. Pain assessment: global use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann Acad Med Singap. 1994 Mar;23(2):129-38. PubMed 8080219 ↗
  • Glinkowski WM, Tomaszewski W. Intra-Articular Hyaluronic Acid for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Umbrella Review. J Clin Med. 2025 Feb 14;14(4):1272. doi: 10.3390/jcm14041272. PubMed 40004802 ↗
  • Peck J, Slovek A, Miro P, Vij N, Traube B, Lee C, Berger AA, Kassem H, Kaye AD, Sherman WF, Abd-Elsayed A. A Comprehensive Review of Viscosupplementation in Osteoarthritis of the Knee. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2021 Jul 10;13(2):25549. doi: 10.52965/001c.25549. eCollection 2021. PubMed 34745480 ↗
  • Castro MM, Kandasamy AD, Youssef N, Schulz R. Matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor properties of tetracyclines: therapeutic potential in cardiovascular diseases. Pharmacol Res. 2011 Dec;64(6):551-60. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2011.05.005. Epub 2011 May 31. PubMed 21689755 ↗
  • Golub LM, Lee HM, Lehrer G, Nemiroff A, McNamara TF, Kaplan R, Ramamurthy NS. Minocycline reduces gingival collagenolytic activity during diabetes. Preliminary observations and a proposed new mechanism of action. J Periodontal Res. 1983 Sep;18(5):516-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0765.1983.tb00388.x. No abstract available. PubMed 6315909 ↗
  • Alsousou J, Thompson M, Hulley P, Noble A, Willett K. The biology of platelet-rich plasma and its application in trauma and orthopaedic surgery: a review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Aug;91(8):987-96. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B8.22546. PubMed 19651823 ↗
  • Everts P, Onishi K, Jayaram P, Lana JF, Mautner K. Platelet-Rich Plasma: New Performance Understandings and Therapeutic Considerations in 2020. Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Oct 21;21(20):7794. doi: 10.3390/ijms21207794. PubMed 33096812 ↗
  • Refai H. Long-term therapeutic effects of dextrose prolotherapy in patients with hypermobility of the temporomandibular joint: a single-arm study with 1-4 years' follow up. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2017 Jun;55(5):465-470. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.12.002. Epub 2017 Apr 29. PubMed 28460873 ↗
  • Rabago D, Nourani B. Prolotherapy for Osteoarthritis and Tendinopathy: a Descriptive Review. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2017 Jun;19(6):34. doi: 10.1007/s11926-017-0659-3. PubMed 28484944 ↗
  • Nordstrom CR. Exploring pluralism--the many faces of Ayurveda. Soc Sci Med. 1988;27(5):479-89. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(88)90371-1. PubMed 3227356 ↗
  • Chopra P, Tinkle B, Hamonet C, Brock I, Gompel A, Bulbena A, Francomano C. Pain management in the Ehlers-Danlos syndromes. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2017 Mar;175(1):212-219. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31554. Epub 2017 Feb 10. PubMed 28186390 ↗
  • Palmer S, Bailey S, Barker L, Barney L, Elliott A. The effectiveness of therapeutic exercise for joint hypermobility syndrome: a systematic review. Physiotherapy. 2014 Sep;100(3):220-7. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2013.09.002. Epub 2013 Oct 5. PubMed 24238699 ↗
  • Tinkle B, Castori M, Berglund B, Cohen H, Grahame R, Kazkaz H, Levy H. Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (a.k.a. Ehlers-Danlos syndrome Type III and Ehlers-Danlos syndrome hypermobility type): Clinical description and natural history. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2017 Mar;175(1):48-69. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31538. Epub 2017 Feb 1. PubMed 28145611 ↗
  • Yew KS, Kamps-Schmitt KA, Borge R. Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome and Hypermobility Spectrum Disorders. Am Fam Physician. 2021 Apr 15;103(8):481-492. PubMed 33856167 ↗
  • Daylor V, Griggs M, Weintraub A, Byrd R, Petrucci T, Huff M, Byerly K, Fenner R, Severance S, Griggs C, Sharma A, Atwal P, Kautz SA, Shapiro S, Youkhana K, Lavallee M, Wilkerson A, Nichols M, Snyder A, Eichinger JK, Patel S, Maitland A, Gensemer C, Norris RA. Defining the Chronic Complexities of hEDS and HSD: A Global Survey of Diagnostic Challenges, Life-Long Comorbidities, and Unmet Needs. J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 9;14(16):5636. doi: 10.3390/jcm14165636. PubMed 40869462 ↗
  • Demmler JC, Atkinson MD, Reinhold EJ, Choy E, Lyons RA, Brophy ST. Diagnosed prevalence of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and hypermobility spectrum disorder in Wales, UK: a national electronic cohort study and case-control comparison. BMJ Open. 2019 Nov 4;9(11):e031365. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031365. PubMed 31685485 ↗
  • Tansey EM. Protection against dog distemper and Dogs Protection Bills: the Medical Research Council and anti-vivisectionist protest, 1911-1933. Med Hist. 1994 Jan;38(1):1-26. doi: 10.1017/s0025727300056027. No abstract available. PubMed 8145606 ↗
  • Adam MP, Ardinger HH, Pagon RA, et al., eds. Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome [GeneReviews]. Seattle: University of Washington; updated 2022. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1279/
  • Hauser RA, Lackner JB, Steilen-Matias D, Harris DK. A Systematic Review of Dextrose Prolotherapy for Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain. Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Jul 7;9:139-59. doi: 10.4137/CMAMD.S39160. eCollection 2016. PubMed 27429562 ↗
  • Malfait F, Francomano C, Byers P, Belmont J, Berglund B, Black J, Bloom L, Bowen JM, Brady AF, Burrows NP, Castori M, Cohen H, Colombi M, Demirdas S, De Backer J, De Paepe A, Fournel-Gigleux S, Frank M, Ghali N, Giunta C, Grahame R, Hakim A, Jeunemaitre X, Johnson D, Juul-Kristensen B, Kapferer-Seebacher I, Kazkaz H, Kosho T, Lavallee ME, Levy H, Mendoza-Londono R, Pepin M, Pope FM, Reinstein E, Robert L, Rohrbach M, Sanders L, Sobey GJ, Van Damme T, Vandersteen A, van Mourik C, Voermans N, Wheeldon N, Zschocke J, Tinkle B. The 2017 international classification of the Ehlers-Danlos syndromes. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2017 Mar;175(1):8-26. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.c.31552. PubMed 28306229 ↗
  • Reeves KD, Hassanein K. Randomized prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study of dextrose prolotherapy for knee osteoarthritis with or without ACL laxity. Altern Ther Health Med. 2000 Mar;6(2):68-74, 77-80. PubMed 10710805 ↗
  • Michalak N, Banks D, Kane L, Siefferman J. Dextrose Prolotherapy for the Treatment of Chronic Shoulder Pain in Patients With Joint Hypermobility: A Case Series. Clin Med Insights Arthritis Musculoskelet Disord. 2024 Jul 24;17:11795441241264821. doi: 10.1177/11795441241264821. eCollection 2024. PubMed 39055287 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — This is a single-site, investigator-initiated feasibility study with no external funding and no data sharing agreement in place. Individual participant data (IPD) will not be shared with other researchers. All participants are assigned unique study ID numbers and their data are maintained under HIPAA-compliant privacy protections at Manhattan Pain Medicine. Aggregate de-identified findings will be reported through peer-reviewed publication. Future sharing of de-identified data may be considered on a case-by-case basis consistent with the IRB-approved consent form and applicable privacy regulations.

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedDate before it movedWhere the date was before it moved

Start is estimated for Jan 2027; primary completion for Dec 2027, 11 months later.

Since we started tracking on Sep 25, 2026, the dates moved once, on Oct 6, 2026: start Jul 2026 → Jan 2027 and primary completion Sep 2027 → Dec 2027.

Earlier changes are on the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jun 25, 2026
First posted
Jul 7, 2026
StartEst.
Jan 15, 2027was Jul 2026
Primary completionEst.
Dec 31, 2027was Sep 2027
CompletionEst.
Dec 31, 2028
Last update
Oct 6, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Start date
Jul 15, 2026→Jan 15, 2027
Oct 6, 2026
Primary completion
Sep 30, 2027→Dec 31, 2027
Oct 6, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 6, 2026
    Start date Jul 15, 2026→Jan 15, 2027
    Primary completion Sep 30, 2027→Dec 31, 2027
    + 1 other change: verification date

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07688096
Lead sponsor
Manhattan Pain Medicine, PLLC
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Jul 7, 2026
Start date
Jan 15, 2027 (estimated)
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 31, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 6, 2026

Study contacts

Mariia Safroshkina, MD, Medical Doctor
Contact
research@manhattanpainmedicine.com
2139329721
Jason Siefferman, MD, Medical Doctor
Contact
research@manhattanpainmedicine.com
7735052512
Jason Siefferman, MD
principal investigator · Manhattan Pain Medicine
Mariia Safroshkina, MD
study director · Manhattan Pain Medicine

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
Yes
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Studies of the drugs tested here: Glucose · Platelet rich plasma · Doxycycline

Start the discussion