• Jianjun Qiu, Changqing Zhang, Yanjie Guo, Ting Yuan, and Zongping Xie.
• Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Sixth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200233, P.R. China.
• Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2009 Jul 1; 23 (7): 784-7.

ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of PRP in improving bone repair so as to provide an experimental basis for repairing bone defect.MethodsFrom January 2007 to March 2007, 59 cases of fresh fracture were treated with PRP (PRP group, n=29) and with conventional open reduction and fixation (control group, n=30). In PRP group, there were 19 males and 10 females, aging 18-57 years (mean 43.62 years), including 8 cases of femoral fracture, 12 cases of tibio-fibula fracture, cases of humeral fracture, 3 cases of ulna and radia fracture, 2 cases of fracture in extremity and 2 cases of clavicular fracture. In control group, there 19 males and 11 females, aging 22 to 57 years (mean 35 years), and including 7 cases of femoral fracture, cases of tibio-fibula fracture, 5 cases of humeral fracture, 7 cases of ulna and radia fracture, 1 case of fracture in extremity and 1 case of clavicular fracture. All patients were admission within 24 hours after injury. The time from hospitalization to operation was 24 to 48 hours (mean 36 hours). There were no statistically significant differences in the common data between two groups (P > 0.05). The degree of inflammatory reaction of wounds, the grade of wounds healing and the hospitalization days were observed and analysed statistically.ResultsAt 5 days after operation, no inflammatory reaction was observed in 22 cases of RPR group and in 17 cases of control group, mild inflammatory reaction in 6 cases of RPR group and in 8 cases of control group, moderate inflammatory reaction in 1 case of RPR group and in 3 cases of control group, and serious inflammatory reaction in 2 case of control group, showing no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05). Wound healed by first intention in 29 patients of RPR group and in 29 patients of control group (29/30), by second intention after 3 days of dressing change in 1 patient of control group; showing no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05). The hospitalization days were (8.21 +/- 1.52) days in RPR group and (11.67 +/- 1.48) days in control group, showing statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). All patients of two groups were followed up 6-12 months (mean 10 months). The X-ray films at follow-up showed that bony healing was achieved within 6-8 months in RPR group and within 8-10 months in control group, showing no statistically significant differences (P > 0.05).ConclusionUsing PRP can speed up the healing of operative incision with no adverse effect, shorten the hospitalization days.

13 keywords...

hide…