Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29632775›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2017

A Systematic Review of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma and Fat Graft Preparation Methods.

Joshua Luck, Oliver J Smith, Afshin Mosahebi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joshua LuckDepartment of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Oliver J SmithDepartment of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Afshin MosahebiDepartment of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
The Royal Free Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe addition of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) to adipose tissue may improve fat graft survival, although graft retention rates vary markedly between studies. To what extent this outcome heterogeneity reflects differing methodological factors remains unknown. This systematic review aims to synthesize and critically review methodological approaches to autologous PRP and fat cotransplantation in both human and animal studies.

methodsIn accordance with PRISMA guidelines, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to April 2017. Data were extracted from all in vivo studies involving autologous PRP and fat cotransplantation. A secondary aim was to assess reporting of technical detail; authors were not contacted to provide missing data.

resultsFrom 335 articles, 23 studies were included in the qualitative synthesis. Some 21 were performed in humans and 2 in rabbits. Six studies were randomized control trials; the remainder reported on observational data. Methods of PRP extraction and activation varied markedly between studies. Fat graft preparation was comparatively more consistent. Methods of PRP and fat mixing differed significantly, especially with regards to relative volume/volume ratios.

conclusionsOur study represents the first systematic review of methodological factors in autologous PRP and fat cotransplantation. It demonstrates that technical factors in graft preparation and administration vary significantly between in vivo studies. Such methodological heterogeneity may explain observed differences in experimental and clinical outcomes. Reporting of key procedural information is inconsistent and often inadequate. These issues make meaningful evaluation of the PRP-enhanced fat grafting literature difficult and may limit its translation into clinical practice.

Identifiers

PMID29632775
PMCPMC5889438
OpenAlexW2775808918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.