1.
Effect of platelet-rich plasma vs standard management for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer wounds: A meta-analysis
Gong F, Zhang Y, Gao J, Li X, Zhang H, Ma G, Huang Y, Zhang B, Zhao F
International wound journal. 2022
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of platelet-rich plasma vs standard management for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer wounds. A systematic literature search up to March 2022 was performed and 1435 subjects with diabetic foot ulcer wounds at the baseline of the studies; 723 of them were treated with platelet-rich plasma, and 712 used control. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated to assess the effect of platelet-rich plasma vs standard management for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer wounds using the dichotomous method with a random or fixed-effect model. The use of autologous platelet-rich plasma resulted in significantly higher complete-healed diabetic foot ulcer wounds compared with control (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.49-2.56, Pā<ā0.001). The use of allogeneic platelet-rich plasma resulted in significantly higher complete-healed diabetic foot ulcer wounds compared with control (OR, 6.19; 95% CI, 2.32-16.56, Pā<ā0.001). The use of autologous and allogeneic platelet-rich plasma resulted in significantly higher complete-healed diabetic foot ulcer wounds compared with control. Though, the analysis of outcomes should be with caution because of the low number of studies in certain comparisons, for example, allogeneic platelet-rich plasma compared with control.
2.
The effects of platelet-rich plasma injection in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Dong Y, Zhang B, Yang Q, Zhu J, Sun X
Clin Rheumatol. 2020
Abstract
OBJECTIVE We conducted this updated meta-analysis to evaluate the effects of PRP in patients with knee or hip OA. METHOD PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy of PRP with other intra-articular injections. The outcomes of interest included Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Harris Hip Score (HHS), and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC). RESULTS Twenty-four RCTs with 21 at knee OA and three at hip OA were included in this meta-analysis. The PRP injections significantly improved the WOMAC score, VAS score, IKDC score, and HHS score as compared with comparators. The WOMAC pain, stiffness, and physical function scores were also significantly better in the PRP group than in the control group. Most of the evaluated parameters that favored PRP were observed in knee OA but not in hip OA, at short-term (at 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 months) but not long-term follow-up (at 18 months), in RCTs with low risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS Intra-articular PRP injection provided better effects than other injections for OA patients, especially in knee OA patients, in terms of pain reduction and function improvement at short-term follow-up.Key Points* This updated meta-analysis, based on great sample size and high-quality studies, evaluates the effects of PRP in patients with knee or hip OA.* Intra-articular PRP injection provided better effects than other injections for OA patients.* Most of the evaluated parameters that favored PRP were observed in knee OA at short term (at 1, 2, 3, 6, 12 months).