• Arthroscopy · May 2021

    Review

    Platelet-Rich Plasma Has Better Results for Retear Rate, Pain, and Outcome Than Platelet-Rich Fibrin After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

    • Yinghao Li, Tao Li, Jian Li, Xin Tang, Ran Li, and Yan Xiong.
    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, People's Republic of China.
    • Arthroscopy. 2021 May 27.

    PurposeTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the literature to ascertain the extent to which platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) improved patient outcomes in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.MethodsTwo independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, with a third author resolving any discrepancies. RCTs comparing PRP or PRF to a control in rotator cuff repair were included. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Clinical outcomes were compared using the risk ratio for dichotomous variables and the mean difference for continuous variables. A P value <.05 was deemed statistically significant.ResultsIncluded in this review are 23 RCTs with 1440 patients. PRP resulted in significantly decreased rates of retear (15.9% versus 29.0%, respectively; P < .0001). Significant results were noted in favor of PRP compared with control based on the Constant score (83.9 versus 81.2, respectively; P = .0006); the University of California, Los Angeles score (31.1 versus 30.2; P < .00001); the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (87.3 versus 84.5; P = .04); and the visual analog scale score (1.3 versus 1.6; P = .01). PRF resulted in an improved Constant score (80.1 versus 80.0, respectively; P = .04) compared with control.ConclusionsThe current evidence shows that using PRP in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair can improve pain levels and functional outcome scores while reducing the retear rate after surgery. PRF injection, on the other hand, improves only the Constant score.Level Of EvidenceII; systematic review and meta-analysis of level I and II evidence.Copyright © 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.