2021
DOI: 10.1080/09537104.2021.1902969
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The efficacy of platelet rich plasma on anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This corresponded to a simultaneous growth in the clinical application and in scientific publications, including those on ligament pathologies such as ACLR. With the aim of summarising the growing body of evidence, many systematic reviews have been published on this topic, and recently even meta-analyses in the attempt to quantify the potential benefits of this biological augmentation [14,32,39,65]. In 2021, the meta-analysis of de Andrade et al [14] focusing on nine studies concluded that PRP showed no improvement in objective outcomes like ligamentisation and less tunnel widening, while it showed small improvements in terms of Lysholm, VAS and knee laxity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This corresponded to a simultaneous growth in the clinical application and in scientific publications, including those on ligament pathologies such as ACLR. With the aim of summarising the growing body of evidence, many systematic reviews have been published on this topic, and recently even meta-analyses in the attempt to quantify the potential benefits of this biological augmentation [14,32,39,65]. In 2021, the meta-analysis of de Andrade et al [14] focusing on nine studies concluded that PRP showed no improvement in objective outcomes like ligamentisation and less tunnel widening, while it showed small improvements in terms of Lysholm, VAS and knee laxity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2021, the meta‐analysis of de Andrade et al [14] focusing on nine studies concluded that PRP showed no improvement in objective outcomes like ligamentisation and less tunnel widening, while it showed small improvements in terms of Lysholm, VAS and knee laxity. In the same year, by including a larger number of 17 RCTs, Lv et al [32] found moderate quality of evidence suggesting that PRP could provide short‐term pain reduction. More recently, the meta‐analysis of McRobb et al [39] on 13 RCTs concluded that PRP influences healing through early vascularisation, culminating in higher rates of ligamentisation, and the meta‐analysis of Zhu et al [65] on 14 studies confirmed that PRP applied alongside ACLR could reduce postoperative pain and improve knee function in the short and medium terms.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Based on these data, the authors stated that orthopedic surgeons should cautiously consider the application of PRP during surgery for intra-articular knee injuries [18]. In a systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2021, Lv et al concluded that the use of PRP could significantly decrease pain in the short term but not in the long term [80].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As the primary static, dynamic stabilizing structure of the knee joint, the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) plays a critical role in maintaining the stability and normal motion of the knee joint [ 1 ]. ACL rupture can lead to knee instability and decreased function, and is associated with secondary meniscal and cartilage injury [ 2 ]. Some evidence stated that anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is the gold standard for regaining stability and improving knee function [ 3 , 4 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%