Search

Background: The probiological healing effect of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) during tissue repair has recently gathered much attention. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of patients with diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) receiving PRP or conventional treatment to evaluate their efficacy., Methods: PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) databases were comprehensively searched by 2 independent reviewers following PRISMA guidelines for the inclusion of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing PRP with conventional treatments for DFUs. The primary measurements of healing rate and healing time, the methodological quality and extracted data were assessed using Review Manager 5.3. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05., Results: A total of 10 RCTs involving 550 patients were included in this study, PRP was observed to significantly improve the healing rate (risk ratio [RR] = 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05-1.82, P = 0.02) and shorten the healing time (mean difference [MD] = -23.23, 95% CI -45.97 to -0.49, P = 0.05) of patients with DFU when compared to the conventional treatment., Conclusions: Compared to conventional treatment, PRP effectively promoted the healing of patients with DFU by evidently improving the healing rate and healing time., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Basic scientific studies have demonstrated positive effects of platelet-rich therapies, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF), on tendon repair. However, clinical evidence indicating improved prognosis is controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine whether augmentation of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with PRP and PRF improves outcomes compared to arthroscopic repair alone., Literature Survey: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until June 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. No language restriction was applied., Methodology: The primary outcomes were the rate of repeat tears after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (retear rate) and clinical function scores (Constant-Murley Score, University of California, Los Angeles Score), and the extracted data were assessed for quality. Statistical analyses were performed using Review manager 5.3, and p < .05 was considered statistically significant., Synthesis: Ten RCTs with 628 patients were included. The results showed that augmenting surgery with PRP reduces retear rates compared to surgery alone (risk ratio [RR] = 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.69, p = .001), whereas PRF has no effect on retear rates (p = .92). Regarding clinical function, PRP improves Constant-Murley scores (mean difference [MD] = 2.03, 95% CI 0.13-3.93, p = .04) and University of California, Los Angeles scores (MD = 1.30, 95% CI 0.36-2.24, p = .007), whereas PRF improves only Constant-Murley scores (MD = 3.93, 95% CI 1.50-6.36, p = .002). However, these differences were small and below the minimum clinically important difference threshold., Conclusions: This study showed that compared to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair alone, the application of PRP in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair reduces retear rate and improves clinical function scores, whereas the application of PRF has no clinically meaningful benefit. The small number and heterogeneity of studies as well as methodological limitations and risk of bias limit confidence in the true effect., (© 2023 American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation.)

Hypothesis: 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., Materials and Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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., (Copyright © 2023 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is widely used clinically to treat tendon injuries, and often contains leukocytes. However, the debate regarding the concentration of leukocytes in PRP is still ongoing. This study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effects of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma (LR-PRP) and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma (LP-PRP) on the healing of the bone-tendon interface (BTI) of the rotator cuff. A total of 102 C57BL/6 mice were used. Thirty mice were used to prepare the PRP, while 72 underwent acute supraspinatus tendon injury repair. The animals were then randomly assigned to three groups: LR-PRP, LP-PRP and control groups. The mice were euthanized at 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively, and histological, immunological and biomechanical analyses were performed. The histological results showed that the fusion effect at the bone-tendon interface at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery was greater in the PRP groups and significantly increased at 4 weeks; however, at 8 weeks, the area of the fibrocartilage layer in the LP-PRP group increased significantly. M2 macrophages were observed at the repaired insertion for all the groups at 4 weeks. At 8 weeks, M2 macrophages withdrew back to the tendon in the control group, but some M2 macrophages were retained at the repaired site in the LR-PRP and LP-PRP groups. Enzyme-linked immunoassay results showed that the concentrations of IL-1β and TNF-α in the LR-PRP group were significantly higher than those in the other groups at 4 and 8 weeks, while the concentrations of IL-1β and TNF-α in the LP-PRP group were significantly lower than those in the control group. The biomechanical properties of the BTI were significantly improved in the PRP group. Significantly higher failure load and ultimate strength were seen in the LR-PRP and LP-PRP groups than in the control group at 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively. Thus, LR-RPR can effectively enhance the early stage of bone-tendon interface healing after rotator cuff repair, and LP-PRP could enhance the later stages of healing after rotator cuff injury.

To systematically review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compared the effects of leukocyte-rich and leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Two independent reviewers comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Comparison of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma or leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma in rotator cuff repair in a level I RCTs. Methodological quality assessment was carried out using Cochrane Review Manager 5.3 software. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Nine RCTs with 540 patients were included in this review. Meta-analysis showed that leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma in significantly reduced retear rate in rotator cuff repair [RR=0.56 95% CI (0.42, 0.75); P<0.05), and in clinical results, the constant score [MD=3.67, 95% CI (1.62, 5.73); P=0.0005], UCLA score [MD=1.60, 95% CI (0.79, 2.42); P=0.0001], ASES score [MD=2.16, 95% CI (0.12, 4.20); P=0.04] were significantly improved. There was a significant result in favor of PRP for the Constant score [MD=-1.24, 95% CI (-1.50, -0.99); P<0.00001], while SST scores were not significantly different among all groups [MD=0.21, 95% CI (-0.21, 0.64); P=0.32]. In conclusion, leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma can improved the clinical function and reduced retear rate in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. In contrast, the efficacy of leukocyte-rich platelet-rich plasma was not significantly improved with the exception of VAS score., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mechanical stimulation and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have been shown to be beneficial for healing of the bone-tendon interface (BTI), but few studies have explored the efficacy of a combination of these applications. We investigated the effect of mechanical stimulation combined with PRP on rotator cuff repair in mice., Hypothesis: Mechanical stimulation combined with PRP can enhance BTI healing in a murine model of rotator cuff repair., Study Design: Controlled laboratory study., Methods: A total of 160 C57BL/6 mice were used. Overall, 40 mice were used to prepare PRP, while 120 mice underwent acute supraspinatus tendon (SST) repair. The animals were randomly assigned to 4 groups: control group, mechanical stimulation group, PRP group, and mechanical stimulation combined with PRP group (combination group). At 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively, animals were sacrificed, the eyeballs were removed to collect blood, and the SST-humeral complexes were collected. Histological, biomechanical, immunological, and bone morphometric tests were performed., Results: Histologically, at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery, the area of the fibrocartilage layer at the BTI in the combination group was larger than in the other groups. The content and distribution of proteoglycans in this layer in the combination group were significantly greater than in the other groups. At 8 weeks postoperatively, trabecular number, and trabecular bone thickness of the subchondral bone area of interest at the BTI of the combination group were greater than those of the other groups, bone volume fraction of the combination group was greater than the control group. On biomechanical testing at 4 and 8 weeks after surgery, the failure load and ultimate strength of the SST-humeral complex in the combination group were higher than in the other groups. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay results showed that, at 4 weeks postoperatively, the serum concentrations of transforming growth factor beta 1 and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) in the combination group were significantly higher than in the other groups; at 8 weeks, the PDGF-AB concentration in the combination group was higher than in the control and mechanical stimulation groups., Conclusion: Mechanical stimulation combined with PRP can effectively promote the early stage of healing after a rotator cuff injury., Clinical Relevance: These findings imply that mechanical stimulation combined with PRP can serve as a potential therapeutic strategy for rotator cuff healing.

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has demonstrated beneficial effects on healing of the bone-tendon interface (BTI). Purpose: To determine the optimal initiation time for PRP application after rotator cuff repair in an animal model. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: A total of 136 C57BL/6 mice were included; 40 mice were used to prepare PRP, while 96 mice underwent acute supraspinatus tendon (SST) repair. The animals were randomly divided into 4 groups: a control group and 3 groups in which PRP was injected into the injury interface immediately after surgery, on the 7th postoperative day (PRP-7d), and on the 14th postoperative day. At 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively, the animals were sacrificed, blood was collected by eyeball removal, and samples of the SST-humerus complex were collected. Histological, imaging, immunological, and biomechanical data were compared among the groups using 1-way analysis of variance with the Bonferroni post hoc test. Results: Histological analysis revealed that the fibrocartilage layer at the BTI was larger in the PRP-7d group compared to the other groups at both 4 and 8 weeks postoperatively. Moreover, the PRP-7d group exhibited improved proteoglycan content and distribution compared to the other groups. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay results demonstrated that at 4 weeks postoperatively, higher concentrations of transforming growth factor–β1 and platelet-derived growth factor–BB (PDGF-BB) were seen in the PRP-7d group versus the PRP-14d and control gruops (P <.05), and at 8 weeks postoperatively, the concentration of PDGF-BB was higher in the PRP-7d group versus the control group (P <.05). Biomechanical testing at 4 weeks postoperatively revealed that the failure load and ultimate strength of the SST-humerus complex were superior in the PRP-7d group compared to the other groups (P <.05), at 8 weeks, PRP-7d group was superior to the control group (P <.05). Additionally, at 8 weeks postoperatively, the PRP-7d group exhibited a greater trabecular number and trabecular thickness at the BTI compared to the PRP-14d and control gruops (P <.05). Conclusion: PRP promoted healing of the BTI after a rotator cuff injury at an early stage. Clinical Relevance: A PRP injection on the 7th postoperative day demonstrated superior therapeutic effects compared with injections at other time points. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Basic scientific studies have demonstrated positive effects of platelet‐rich therapies, such as platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) and platelet‐rich fibrin (PRF), on tendon repair. However, clinical evidence indicating improved prognosis is controversial. In this study, we aimed to determine whether augmentation of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with PRP and PRF improves outcomes compared to arthroscopic repair alone. Literature Survey: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases were comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published until June 2022 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. No language restriction was applied. Methodology: The primary outcomes were the rate of repeat tears after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (retear rate) and clinical function scores (Constant‐Murley Score, University of California, Los Angeles Score), and the extracted data were assessed for quality. Statistical analyses were performed using Review manager 5.3, and p <.05 was considered statistically significant. Synthesis: Ten RCTs with 628 patients were included. The results showed that augmenting surgery with PRP reduces retear rates compared to surgery alone (risk ratio [RR] = 0.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–0.69, p =.001), whereas PRF has no effect on retear rates (p =.92). Regarding clinical function, PRP improves Constant‐Murley scores (mean difference [MD] = 2.03, 95% CI 0.13–3.93, p =.04) and University of California, Los Angeles scores (MD = 1.30, 95% CI 0.36–2.24, p =.007), whereas PRF improves only Constant‐Murley scores (MD = 3.93, 95% CI 1.50–6.36, p =.002). However, these differences were small and below the minimum clinically important difference threshold. Conclusions: This study showed that compared to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair alone, the application of PRP in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair reduces retear rate and improves clinical function scores, whereas the application of PRF has no clinically meaningful benefit. The small number and heterogeneity of studies as well as methodological limitations and risk of bias limit confidence in the true effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]