6 results
Sort By
Results Per Page
6 results
Download the following citations:
Email the following citations:
Print the following citations:
  • Peng Y
  • Li F
  • Ding Y
  • Sun X
  • Wang G
  • et al.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2023 Jun;32(6):1303-1313 doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2023.01.037.

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroids are used to treat rotator cuff diseases. However, few reviews have compared the effects of these 2 treatments. In this study, we compared the effects of PRP and corticosteroid injection on the prognosis of rotator cuff diseases.


According to the Cochrane Manual of Systematic Review of Interventions, the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched comprehensively. Two independent authors screened suitable studies and performed data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Only randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of PRP and corticosteroid in the treatment of rotator cuff injuries were included, as measured by clinical function and pain during different follow-up periods.


Nine studies with 469 patients were included in this review. In short-term treatment, corticosteroids were superior to PRP in the improvement of Constant, Simple Shoulder Test, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (mean difference [MD] -5.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.26, 0.06; P = .05 and MD -0.97, 95% CI -1.68, -0.07; P = .03 and MD -6.67, 95% CI -12.85, -0.49; P = .03, respectively). No statistically significant difference was observed between the 2 groups at midterm (P > .05), and the recovery of the Simple Shoulder Test and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores in PRP treatment was significantly better than that in corticosteroid treatment in the long term (MD: 1.21, 95% CI: 0.68, 1.74; P < .00001 and MD: 6.96, 95% CI: 3.90, 9.61; P < .00001, respectively). In pain reduction based on visual analog scale score, corticosteroids led to better pain reduction (MD: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.03, 1.64; P = .04), but no significant difference was observed in pain reduction between the 2 groups in the any term (P > .05). However, these differences did not reach the minimum clinically important difference.


Current analysis showed that corticosteroids have better efficacy in short term, whereas PRP is more beneficial for long-term recovery. However, no difference was observed in the mid-term efficacy between the 2 groups. Randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods and larger sample sizes are also needed to determine the optimal treatment.

  • Li F
  • Wu C
  • Sun H
  • Zhou Q
  • Li, F.
  • et al.
J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2020 Spring;34(2):149-156 doi: 10.11607/ofph.2470.

To study the effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections on pain reduction in patients with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ OA).


The authors performed a comprehensive search of the MEDLINE, PubMed, and Web of Science databases to retrieve RCTs published up to July 2018. Pain outcomes (visual analog scale scores) were extracted to assess the effect of PRP injections on TMJ OA. All data analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.3.


Six studies were included. According to the results of these trials, intra-articular injections of PRP were more effective than placebo for pain reduction (6 months postinjection: mean difference [MD] -2.82, 95% CI -3.39 to -2.25, P < .00001; 12 months postinjection: MD -3.29; 95% CI -4.07 to -2.52, P < .00001). Additionally, the comparison between PRP and hyaluronic acid injections showed a statistically significant difference in pain reduction in support of PRP (MD -0.81; 95% CI -1.22 to -0.40; P = .0001) at 12 months postinjection. All trials revealed a moderate risk of bias.


Based on current evidence, PRP injections may reduce pain more effectively than placebo injections in TMJ OA at 6 months (level of evidence: moderate) and 12 months (level of evidence: moderate) postinjection. This significant difference in pain reduction could also be seen when PRP was compared to hyaluronic acid at 12 months postinjection (level of evidence: low). It can be cautiously interpreted that PRP has a beneficial effect on the relief of TMJ OA pain. Large-scale, low-bias RCTs are needed to test whether PRP injection should be a routine treatment for patients with TMJ OA.

  • Ping WD
  • Zhao QM
  • Sun HF
  • Lu HS
  • Li F
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Apr;98(16):e15202 doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015202.

Nasal surgeries (such as Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery, Rhinoplasty, and Septorhinoplasty) are popular procedures. But perioperative bleeding, eyelid edema, and periorbital ecchymosis remain problems. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic, and it was used to reduce the perioperative bleeding. However, there is no enough evidence judging its safety and efficiency. Therefore, a meta-analysis is conducted by us to evaluate the role of TXA in patients undergoing nasal surgeries.


A search of the literature was performed until June 2018; the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases were searched for related articles using search strategy. Two authors independently assessed the methodological quality of the included studies and extracted data. Surgical information and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Only randomized controlled trial (RCT) articles were included, and subgroup analysis was established to deal with heterogeneity. RevMan 5.3 software was selected to conduct the meta-analysis.


Eleven RCTs were included in our meta-analysis. There were significant differences in blood loss (P < .001), surgical field quality (P < .001), edema rating of upper (P < .001) and lower (P < .001) eyelid, ecchymosis rating of upper (P < .001) and lower eyelid (P < .001) when comparing the TXA group to the placebo group. However, the difference in operation time (P = .57) was not significant between the two groups.


Perioperative TXA could reduce the blood loss and improve the quality of surgery field during nasal surgery, and it was helpful for reducing the edema and ecchymosis after nasal surgeries, but it has little influence in reducing the operation time.

  • Tan J
  • Cao Q
  • He GL
  • Cai YH
  • Yu JJ
  • et al.
J Evid Based Med. 2016 Nov;9(4):194-204 doi: 10.1111/jebm.12201.

To compare the effects of misoprostol versus ergometrine-oxytocin for postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) prevention, and provide important evidence to choose optimal agents for preventing PPH in developing countries.


The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMbase, and ClinicalTrails.gov were searched from inception to 1st January 2016. Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of studies according to Cochrane Handbook5.1.0. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan5.2.4 software.


A total of 4034 women from six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Meta-analyses showed that the PPH rate (7.6% vs. 4.2%, RR = 1.81, 95%CI (1.40, 2.35), P < 0.01), and the additional uterotonic therapy (19.2% vs. 10.5%, RR = 1.83, 95%CI (1.57, 2.14), P < 0.01) for misoprostol group were significantly higher than ergometrine-oxytocin group, respectively. But there was no significant difference of severe PPH rate between two groups (1.2% vs. 0.76%, RR = 1.55, 95%CI (0.78, 3.07), P = 0.21). The need for manual removal of placenta in misoprostol was only about one-third of ergometrine-oxytocin (0.5% vs. 1.4%, RR = 0.33, 95%CI (0.15, 0.76), P < 0.01).


Misoprostol can be used in the third stage of labor for preventing PPH where sterilized syringe and trained midwife were absent, and ergoetrine-oxytocin could be deemed as alternative agent in low-resource setting due to recognized effect. As a result of limited evidence about these uterotonic agents, the more high-quality RCTs are needed to determine the potentials and harms of various uterotonic agents for preventing PPH in developing countries.

  • Li J
  • Sun SL
  • Tian JH
  • Yang K
  • Liu R
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 23;1(1):CD007379 doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007379.pub2.

Trauma is the leading cause of death in people under the age of 45 years. Over the past 20 years, intraoperative autologous transfusions (obtained by cell salvage, also known as intraoperative blood salvage (IBS)) have been used as an alternative to blood products from other individuals during surgery because of the risk of transfusion-related infections such as hepatitis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In this review, we sought to assess the effects and cost of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic surgery.


To compare the effect and cost of cell salvage with those of standard care in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery.


We ran the search on 25 November 2014. We searched the Cochrane Injuries Group's Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library), Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid OLDMEDLINE, EMBASE Classic + EMBASE (OvidSP), PubMed, and ISI Web of Science (SCI-Expanded & CPSI-SSH). We also screened reference lists and contacted principal investigators.


Randomised controlled trials comparing cell salvage with no cell salvage (standard care) in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery.


Two authors independently extracted data from the trial reports. We used the standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration.


Only one small study (n = 44) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Results suggested that cell salvage did not affect mortality overall (death rates were 67% (14/21 participants) in the cell salvage group and 65% (15/23) in the control group) (odds ratio (OR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31 to 3.72). For individuals with abdominal injury, mortality was also similar in both groups (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.10).Less donor blood was needed for transfusion within the first 24 hours postinjury in the cell salvage group compared with the control group (mean difference (MD) -4.70 units, 95% CI -8.09 to -1.31). Adverse events, notably postoperative sepsis, did not differ between groups (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.55). Cost did not notably differ between groups (MD -177.81, 95% CI -452.85 to 97.23, measured in GBP in 2002).


Evidence for the use of cell salvage in individuals undergoing abdominal or thoracic trauma surgery remains equivocal. Large, multicentre, methodologically rigorous trials are needed to assess the relative efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of cell salvage in different surgical procedures in the emergency context.

  • Li X
  • Sun Z
  • Zhao W
  • Zhang J
  • Chen J
  • et al.
J Neurosurg. 2013 Jan;118(1):94-103 doi: 10.3171/2012.9.JNS112286.

The authors evaluated the effects of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) usage and transfusion of previously frozen apheresis platelets on postoperative hemorrhage, activities of daily living (ADL) score, and mortality rate in patients with acute hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhage undergoing craniotomy.


This was a prospective, double-blind, parallel, randomized controlled trial in patients with acute hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhage, who had either not received ASA therapy (control) or received ASA therapy. The patients who received ASA therapy were divided according to the results of a platelet aggregation test into ASA-resistant, ASA-semiresponsive, and ASA-sensitive groups. All patients required an emergency craniotomy for hematoma removal after hospitalization. The patients who were sensitive to ASA were randomized to receive one of the following transfusion regimens of previously frozen apheresis platelets: no transfusion, 1 therapeutic dose before surgery, or 2 therapeutic doses (1 before surgery and 1 after 24 hours of hospitalization). The postoperative hemorrhage rate and the average postoperative hemorrhage volume were recorded and the ADL scores and mortality rate were measured during a 6-month follow-up period.


The rate of postoperative hemorrhage, average postoperative hemorrhage volume, and mortality rate were significantly higher in the ASA-sensitive patients who received ASA therapy compared with patients who did not receive ASA therapy (all p < 0.005). The ADL scores were grouped into different grades and the number of cases in the lower grades was higher and the overall scores were poorer in patients who received ASA therapy compared with those who did not (all p < 0.005). After transfusion of previously frozen apheresis platelets, the postoperative hemorrhage rate, average postoperative hemorrhage volume, and mortality rate of the ASA-sensitive patients were significantly lowered (all p < 0.005), and the ADL scores and their classification level were better than those of patients who did not undergo transfusion (all p < 0.005).


Transfusion of previously frozen apheresis platelets reduces the rate of postoperative hemorrhage, average postoperative hemorrhage volume, disability rate, and mortality rate in ASA-sensitive patients with acute hypertensive basal ganglia hemorrhage undergoing craniotomy.