EFICÁCIA DO PLASMA RICO EM PLAQUETAS NA MELHORIA DA FUSÃO ESPINHAL: UMA REVISÃO SISTEMÁTICA E META-ANÁLISE

The effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) in the treatment of patients with Achilles tendon rupture (ATR) and Achilles tendinopathy (AT) has been controversial. To assess PRP injections' effectiveness in treating ATR and AT. A comprehensive review of relevant literature was conducted utilizing multiple databases such as Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, Chinese Science and Technology Journal, EMBASE, and China Biomedical CD-ROM. The present investigation integrated randomized controlled trials that assessed the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma injections in managing individuals with Achilles tendon rupture and tendinopathy. The eligibility criteria for the trials encompassed publications that were published within the timeframe of January 1, 1966 to December 2022. The statistical analysis was performed utilizing the Review Manager 5.4.1, the visual analogue scale (VAS), Victorian Institute Ankle Function Scale (VISA-A), and Achilles Tendon Thickness were used to assess outcomes. This meta-analysis included 13 randomized controlled trials, 8 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for AT and 5 of which were randomized controlled trials of PRP for ATR. PRP for AT at 6 wk [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 1.92, 95%CI: -0.54 to 4.38, I2 = 34%], at 3 mo [WMD = 0.20, 95%CI: -2.65 to 3.05, I2 = 60%], and 6 mo [WMD = 2.75, 95%CI: -2.76 to 8.26, I2 = 87%) after which there was no significant difference in VISA-A scores between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in VAS scores between the PRP group and the control group after 6 wk [WMD = 6.75, 95%CI: -6.12 to 19.62, I2 = 69%] and 6 mo [WMD = 10.46, 95%CI: -2.44 to 23.37, I2 = 69%] of treatment, and at mid-treatment at 3 mo [WMD = 11.30, 95%CI: 7.33 to 15.27, I2 = 0%] after mid-treatment, the PRP group demonstrated better outcomes than the control group. Post-treatment patient satisfaction [WMD = 1.07, 95%CI: 0.84 to 1.35, I2 = 0%], Achilles tendon thickness [WMD = 0.34, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.71, I2 = 61%] and return to sport [WMD = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.87 to 1.42, I2 = 0%] were not significantly different between the PRP and control groups. The study did not find any statistically significant distinction between the groups that received PRP treatment and those that did not, regarding the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment - Achilles scores at 3 mo [WMD = -1.49, 95%CI: -5.24 to 2.25, I2 = 0%], 6 mo [WMD = -0.24, 95%CI: -3.80 to 3.32, I2 = 0%], and 12 mo [WMD = -2.02, 95%CI: -5.34 to 1.29, I2 = 87%] for ATR patients. Additionally, no significant difference was observed between the PRP and the control groups in improving Heel lift height respectively at 6 mo [WMD = -3.96, 95%CI: -8.61 to 0.69, I2 = 0%] and 12 mo [WMD = -1.66, 95%CI: -11.15 to 7.83, I2 = 0%] for ATR patients. There was no significant difference in calf circumference between the PRP group and the control group after 6 mo [WMD = 1.01, 95%CI: -0.78 to 2.80, I2 = 54%] and 12 mo [WMD = -0.55, 95%CI: -2.2 to 1.09, I2 = 0%] of treatment. There was no significant difference in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups at 6 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.38, 95%CI: -2.34 to 1.58, I2 = 82%] and after 12 mo of treatment [WMD = -0.98, 95%CI: -1.41 to -0.56, I2 = 10%] there was a significant improvement in ankle mobility between the PRP and control groups. There was no significant difference in the rate of return to exercise after treatment [WMD = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.77 to 1.87, I2 = 0%] and the rate of adverse events [WMD = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.50 to 1.45, I2 = 0%] between the PRP group and the control group. The use of PRP for AT improved the patient's immediate VAS scores but not VISA-A scores, changes in Achilles tendon thickness, patient satisfaction, or return to sport. Treatment of ATR with PRP injections alone improved long-term ankle mobility but had no significant effect on VISA-A scores, single heel lift height, calf circumference or return to sport. Additional research employing more extensive sampling sizes, more strict experimental methods, and standard methodologies may be necessary to yield more dependable and precise findings.

Background:Knee osteoarthritis (KOA) has a high clinical prevalence and frequently interferes with patients normal lives. In KOA patients, evidence suggests that intra-articular (IA) injection improves joint function and decreases discomfort. Several IA injection treatments are used in daily practice to improve symptomatic control of knee osteoarthritis, but their efficacy is frequently disputed.Methods:This network meta-analysis compares the efficacy of different IA injections for mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. Seven databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China Biology Medicine disc, WanFang, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure) were searched for randomized controlled trials published up to and including December 20, 2021, and final follow up indicators were used. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score change from baseline were the primary outcomes. We used the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess the quality and risks of biases of papers. We calculated the weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each outcome. State (Version 15.1, Texas, USA) and SPSS (Version 20, Chicago, USA) was used in all statistical analyses, and Review Manager (version 5.4) was used in assessing the risks of biases.Results:Our study included 16 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1652 patients. platelet-rich plasma (PRP) IA injection therapy had the highest likelihood of being the best intervention in reducing WOMAC pain (surface under the cumulative ranking area [SUCRA] 84.7%), stiffness (SUCRA 95.1%), and function (SUCRA 98.5%) scores, according to the SUCRA. The best measures for lowering the WOMAC total and VAS scores were IA injection platelet-rich plasma-derived growth factor (SUCRA 84.9%) and hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma (SUCRA 84.9%). In the VAS score group, PRP outperformed hyaluronic acid (HA) (WMD 1.3, 95% CI 0.55–2.55) and corticosteroids (CS) (WMD 4.85, 95% CI 4.02–5.08), according to the forest map results. PRP also outperformed CS (WMD 14.76, 95% CI 12.11–17.41), ozone (WMD 9.16, 95% CI 6.89–11.43), and PRP + HA (WMD 2.18, 95% CI 0.55–3.81) in the WOMAC total score group. Furthermore, PRP outperforms other drugs in terms of reducing WOMAC function, stiffness, and function score.Conclusion:In patients with mild to moderate KOA, IA injection PRP outperformed IA injection ozone, HA, CS, platelet-rich plasma-derived growth factor, and hyaluronic acid and platelet-rich plasma in terms of pain, stiffness, and dysfunction.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of the application of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in spinal fusion surgery on the fusion rate of the spine.MethodsA comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct databases was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) or observational cohort studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of PRP in spinal fusion. Data on final fusion rate, changes in the visual analog scale (VAS), estimated blood loss (EBL), and operative time was collected from the eligible studies for meta-analysis. Patients were divided into PRP and non-PRP groups according to whether PRP was used during the spinal fusion procedure.ResultsAccording to the selection criteria, 4 randomized controlled trials and 8 cohort studies with 833 patients and 918 levels were included. The outcomes indicated that PRP application is associated with a lower fusion rat (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: (0.43, 0.89), P = 0.009) at final follow-up (>24 months). Subgroup analysis showed a lower rate of spinal fusion in the PRP group compared to the non-PRP group (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: (0.21, 0.58), P < 0.001) when spinal fusion was assessed using only anterior-posterior radiographs. When the bone graft material was a combination of autologous bone + artificial bone, the spinal fusion rate was lower in the PRP group than in the non-PRP group (OR = 0.34, 95% CI: (0.16, 0.71), P = 0.004). The PRP and non-PRP groups showed no significant differences in VAS changes at the 24th postoperative month (WMD = 0.36, 95% CI: (−0.37, 1.09), P = 0.33); Application of PRP does not reduce the estimated blood loss (WMD = −86.03, 95% CI: (−188.23, 16.17), P = 0.10). In terms of operation time, using PRP does not prolong operation time (WMD = −3.74, 95% CI: (−20.53, 13.04), P = 0.66).ConclusionCompared with bone graft fusion alone, PRP cannot increase the rate of spinal fusion. Inappropriate methods of spinal fusion assessment or mixing PRP with artificial/allograft bone may have been responsible for the lower rate of spinal fusion in the PRP group.Systematic Review Registrationdoi: 10.37766/inplasy2022.5.0055

The Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Improving Pain and Function in Lateral Epicondylitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with Risk-of-Bias Assessment

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a promising therapeutic intervention for knee osteoarthritis (OA), attracting substantial clinical and research attention. However, the clinical relevance of the treatment benefit remains controversial. Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of PRP compared with placebo in patients with knee OA in terms of minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and to investigate the possible influence of platelet concentration on the clinical outcome. Study Design: Meta-analysis. Level of evidence 1. Methods: The search was conducted on 5 databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science) using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials comparing PRP and placebo injections to treat knee OA, written in the English language, with no time limitation. The effects were quantified at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up points. Visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were used, with subanalyses based on platelet concentration performed using a 1,000,000 ± 20% platelets/µL cutoff. The MCID values (VAS, 1.37; WOMAC, 6.4) were used to interpret clinical improvement. The articles’ quality was assessed using the Revised Tool for Risk of Bias in Randomized Trials and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. Results: Among the 5499 articles retrieved, 18 randomized controlled trials (1995 patients) were included. PRP presented statistically superior improvements in VAS and WOMAC scores compared with placebo at all follow-up points, exceeding the MCID at 3- and 6-month follow-up points for VAS and at all follow-up points for WOMAC. The subanalysis based on platelet concentration showed that high-platelet PRP provided clinically significant pain relief with the improvement exceeding the MCID compared with placebo at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up points. In contrast, low-platelet PRP failed to offer a clinically perceivable benefit in terms of VAS score. WOMAC results showed that both products provided a clinically significant improvement at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. This benefit was maintained up to the 12-month follow-up in the high-platelet group but not in the low-platelet group, where the improvement compared with placebo did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed that PRP offered clinically relevant functional improvement at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up points and pain relief at 3- and 6-month follow-up points compared with placebo for the treatment of knee OA. Platelet concentration was found to influence treatment efficacy, with high-platelet PRP providing superior pain relief and more durable functional improvement compared with low-platelet PRP.

Objective To evaluate the postoperative pain and neck function of patients who under-went cervical disc replacement or anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) by Meta-analysis. Meth-otis In Medline (1966.1-2008.11), Embase (1966.1-2008.11), AMED (1985.1-2008.11) and Cochrane Li-brary, the randomized controlled trails about the comparison between cervical disc replacement and ACDF were collected. Then extracted the data of arm pain visual analogue scale (VAS), neck pain VAS and neck disability index (NDI) in these researches and made a Meta-analysis using Review Manager 4.2. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was selected for the evaluation of the overall effect. Results Four articles were ac-cepted in our Meta-analysis and all of them were high quality researches identified by modified Jadad Scale.Altogether, 213 patients were included. The combined WMD of arm pain VAS was -2.91[95% confidence in-terval (CI) (-4.19,-1.62), P< 0.05] 6 weeks after surgery and -2.67[95%CI (-4.02,-1.33), P<0.05] 6 months after surgery. The combined WMD of NDI was -11.93[95%CI (-15.66,-8.19), P< 0.05] 6 weeks after surgery and -11.2[95%CI (-14.74,-7.69), P< 0.05] 6 months after surgery. Conclusion The arm pain VAS of treatment group (cervical disc replacement) is lower than that of control group (ACDF) both 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. The NDI of treatment group is lower than that of control group both 6 weeks and 6 months after surgery. Key words: Intervertebral disk; Spinal fusion; Decompression; surgical; Meta-analysis

Background:Plantar fasciitis is a common cause of heel pain, which often results in significant morbidity. There have been several treatment options that are used for plantar fasciitis, including nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, orthoses, physical therapy, and steroid injections.Objectives:The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the effects of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and other treatments in patients with plantar fasciitis.Search methods:Medline, Web of Science, and Embase were systematically searched to identify relevant trials.Selection criteria:Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the effects of PRP and other treatments on plantar fasciitis were included.Data collection and analysis:The main outcomes included changes from baseline in visual analog scale (VAS) score, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS), and Roles–Maudsley score (RMS). Results were expressed as weight mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI). The meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effects or random-effects model according to heterogeneity.Main results:Ten RCTs involving a total of 445 patients with plantar fasciitis were included. Among these studies, 9 compared PRP with steroid, and 1 compared PRP with whole blood.Four studies were categorized as being at low risk of bias, and the remaining 6 as being at unclear risk of bias.Pooled estimates suggested that PRP had greater changes in VAS and AOFAS scores than other treatments. However, it had no benefit effect in the RMS.Subgroup analysis for VAS and AOFAS showed that PRP had superior effect than other treatments at 12 months, but not at the 1, 3, 6 months.Subgroup analysis based on treatment regimens demonstrated that PRP was more effective than steroid in the change from baseline in AOFAS, but not in VAS and RMS scores.Authors’ conclusion:PRP was as effective as other treatments in reducing pain and improving function in patients with plantar fasciitis. Subgroup analysis indicated that PRP had better effect than steroid in AOFAS Score and its effect was durable in a long term. However, considering the potential limitations in this study, more large-scale RCTs are needed to confirm the current findings.

Efficacy of Using Platelet-Rich Plasma in Spinal Fusion Surgery—A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses–Compliant Meta-Analysis

Comparison between platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid treatments for talar osteochondral lesions: A systematic review with a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Herbal Medicine.

Background Lumbar radicular discomfort is often induced by mechanical compression of the nerve root and inflammatory reactions. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is an efficacious therapy modality, albeit ongoing controversies regarding its effectiveness, and it possesses the advantage of minimal side effects. Therefore, we conducted the current systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of PRP in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH). Methods We conducted our database searching on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception till August 2024 to look for articles that fulfil our aim. The search strategy was based on three main keywords: “Platelet-rich plasma” AND “Lumbar” AND “Hernia*”. We conducted the pooled analysis of continuous variables using mean difference (MD) and we used pooled odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results The use of PRP was statistically significant associated with reduced visual analogue scale (VAS) compared with no PRP with MD of -0.44 (95%CI:-0.76, -0.11, p=0.008), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) with MD of -5.36 (95%CI: -8.25, -2.48, p=0.0003). However, no significant difference was observed regarding Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) with MD of 2.52 (95%CI:-0.8, 5.84, p=0.14) with non-significant heterogeneity. PRP was also associated with reduced risk of complications with OR of 0.22 (95%CI:0.07, 0.68, p=0.009) and non-significant heterogeneity. Conclusion PRP use in patients with LDH is associated with positive outcomes presented in reduction of pain, and disability (decrease in ODI scale) in addition to being safe with less incidence of complications compared with patients not receiving PRP.

ObjectiveThis meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) administration in reducing adhesion recurrence and improving pregnancy outcomes in patients with intrauterine adhesion (IUA).MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI) from inception to February 10, 2023, without any language or regional restrictions. We used random-effects models to assess odds ratios (OR) and weight mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).ResultsOur meta-analysis included a total of 730 patients from 10 clinical studies (6 RCTs and 4 non-RCTs). The results showed that PRP administration significantly increased endometrial thickness (WMD = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.40–1.19; P < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%), menstrual volume (WMD = 2.96, 95% CI = 2.30–3.61; P < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%), and days of menstruation (WMD = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.86–1.41; P < 0.001; I2 = 0.0%). Additionally, the clinical pregnancy rate was also improved (OR = 1.82, 95% CI: 1.19-2.78; P = 0.006; I2 = 0.0%). However, there was insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion regarding the effects of PRP on the recurrence rate of moderate to severe IUA, changes in AFS scores, miscarriage rate, and live birth rate.ConclusionsOur analysis confirms that autologous PRP is an effective treatment for IUA. However, the limited sample size suggests that the results should be interpreted with caution. Therefore, larger and well-designed studies are necessary in the future to confirm these findings and explore the optimal PRP dosing regimens further.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023391115.

IntroductionCervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) is the most common pattern of cervical spondylosis, which is a serious and common degenerative disease. Both acupotomy and acupuncture have been widely used clinically to...

Improved outcomes for proximal humerus fracture open reduction internal fixation augmented with a fibular allograft in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been used very successfully in enhancing bone fusion in animal experiments. Also, the efficaciousness of PRP in other specialties of medicine such as dentistry, dermatology ophthalmology, and sports medicine is well documented. But the use of PRP to augment bone fusion after spinal surgery in humans is still controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the role of PRP in enhancing spinal fusion by fastening the rate of new bone formation and decreasing pain after spinal surgery in humans. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library studies that compared PRP versus control in enhancing spinal fusion after deformity correction. Results Five retrospective studies with 253 participants and nine prospective cohort studies with 460 participants were identified. The bone fusion rate was excellent for studies that used a high platelet concentration in PRP relative to control (odds ratio (OR) = 4.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) (2.13, 8.83), and P < 0.05) while bone fusion was poor to studies that used a low concentrate of platelet in PRP relative to control. The rate of new bone formation was high in the PRP group compared to the control group with the mean difference in Hounsfield unit (HU) 144.91 (95% CI (80.63, 209.18), P < 0.05). Time to bone fusion was short in the PRP group during the first six months of surgery relative to the control group with a mean difference of −2.03 (95% CI (−2.35, −1.7); P < 0.05). No difference was found in pain reduction by visual analog score (VAS) between the PRP group and control. Conclusion PRP facilitates new bone formation and bone fusion with a minimum concentration of the growth factor 5 times that of the peripheral blood. PRP stimulatory effects are not continuous and are very effective within six months of implantation.