Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21744284›Full record

Trial reportEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2011

Platelet-rich plasma in mono-segmental posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

J Sys, J Weyler, T Van Der Zijden, P Parizel, J Michielsen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03261843 (The Effect of Using Autologous Platelet Rich Plasma on Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03261843 phase4unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2017, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Using Autologous Platelet Rich Plasma on Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion : a Randomized Comparative Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2017 to 2019Enrolled60ConditionsAutologous Platelet Rich Plasma Effect on Bone HealingArmsautologous platelet rich plasma, posterior lumbar interbody fusion without autologous platelet rich plasma
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Efficacy and safety of bone substitutes in lumbar spinal fusion: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Efficacy of platelet-rich plasma in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Platelet concentrates in spine fusion: meta-analysis of union rates and complications in controlled trials.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2016
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Advances with Platelet-Rich Plasma for Bone Healing.Biologics : targets & therapy · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

J SysDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Sint Basius Hospital, Kroonveldlaan 50, 9200 Dendermonde, Belgium. j.sys@skynet.be
J Weyler
T Van Der Zijden
P Parizel
J Michielsen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe results of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in spinal fusion applications are limited and controversial. Both beneficial and inhibitory effects have been shown. In this prospective randomised controlled trial, our objective was to assess both the clinical and radiological effect of PRP when added to autograft iliac crest bone in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty patients were recruited for the study fulfilling strict entry requirements and were randomised with a 1:1 ratio. In each group, one patient was lost to follow-up. Thirtyeight patients completed the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) preoperatively and postoperatively at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively. CT-scans of the lumbar spine were taken at 3, 6, and 12 months. Posterior stabilisation was achieved with pedicle screws and interbody fusion was aimed at with carbon cages filled with autologous bone.

resultsBaseline demographic data (age, sex, smoking history, preoperative outcome measures) showed no relevant difference between groups. For patients who received autograft only, the mean VAS improved by 4.0 points (p < 0.01), mean ODI improved by 32.1 points (p < 0.001), and mean SF-36 showed statistically significant improvement in each of the eight domains and in the physical (p < 0.001) and mental (p < 0.001) component summary measures. For patients who received autograft with PRP, the mean VAS improved by 4.92 points (p < 0.01), mean ODI improved by 30 points (p < 0.001), and mean SF-36 showed statistically significant improvement in six of the eight domains (p < 0.02) and in the physical (p = 0.016) and mental (p < 0.001) component summary measures. The improvement of the VAS score and the physical component summary score was more pronounced in patients who received autograft with PRP. These differences were, however, not statistically significant. CT-scans showed uneventful osseous healing in all but one patient with no difference between groups.

conclusionIn this prospective randomised controlled clinical and radiological trial, adding PRP in posterior lumbar interbody fusion did not lead to a substantial improvement or deterioration when compared with autologous bone only. No inhibitory effect of PRP was observed on CT-scans. From a clinical and radiological point of view, the use of PRP seems to be justified in posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. From an economical point of view, the expense of using PRP cannot be justified until statistical significance can be reached in a larger study.

Indexed as

AdultBone TransplantationFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIliumIntervertebral DiscLumbar VertebraeMalePlatelet-Rich PlasmaProspective StudiesRadiographySpinal FusionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID21744284
PMCPMC3175872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.