ReviewMuscles, ligaments and tendons journal2014
Learning about PRP using cell-based models.
Review in Muscles, ligaments and tendons journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Angiogenic factor-driven improvement of refractory thin endometrium with autologous platelet-rich plasma intrauterine infusion in frozen embryo transfer cycles.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Ultrasound Imaging in Sport-Related Muscle Injuries: Pitfalls and Opportunities.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
- Article
- Ultrasound-guided procedures to treat sport-related muscle injuries.The British journal of radiology · 2016Review
- Growth factor delivery vehicles for tendon injuries: Mesenchymal stem cells and Platelet Rich Plasma.Muscles, ligaments and tendons journal · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies using in vitro cell models enable evaluation of the effects of different PRP products under very controlled and standardized conditions. Therefore the results of such studies build the basis for understanding the variable results of clinical studies on the use of PRPs. The main lessons learned through the use of in vitro cell models are that many different PRP products exist and researchers have to report on component variation within each product. These different products may have distinctive effects on the various cells treated in musculoskeletal injuries; therefore, some products might be more beneficial in certain indication than others. In its utilization in cell models, PRP may generate a variety of positive effects on cell proliferation, recovery, and inflammatory response. There might also be a benefit to adding PRP to current pharmacological therapies (e.g. corticosteroids) to prevent their commonly known negative effects on e.g. tendon and cartilage tissue.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24932446PMC4049649W2017587037What OpenQuestion holds
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.