Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32341925›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2020

Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation to Microfracture Provides a Limited Benefit for the Treatment of Cartilage Lesions: A Meta-analysis.

Angelo Boffa, Davide Previtali, Sante Alessandro Altamura, Stefano Zaffagnini, Christian Candrian, Giuseppe Filardo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Five-year radiographic and clinical outcomes after arthroscopic synovectomy of the ankle in rheumatoid arthritis: A clinical trial.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The 50 most-cited clinical articles in cartilage surgery research: a bibliometric analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Angelo BoffaClinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Davide PrevitaliOrthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, EOC, Lugano, Switzerland.
Sante Alessandro AltamuraClinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Stefano ZaffagniniClinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Christian CandrianOrthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, EOC, Lugano, Switzerland.
Giuseppe FilardoOrthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, Ospedale Regionale di Lugano, EOC, Lugano, Switzerland.
Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITOspedale regionale di Lugano · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicrofracture is the most common first-line option for the treatment of small chondral lesions, although increasing evidence shows that the clinical benefit of microfracture decreases over time. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been suggested as an effective biological augmentation to improve clinical outcomes after microfracture. PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical evidence regarding the application of PRP, documenting safety and efficacy of this augmentation technique to improve microfracture for the treatment of cartilage lesions. STUDY

designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

methodsA systematic review was performed in PubMed, EBSCOhost database, and the Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies evaluating the clinical efficacy of PRP augmentation to microfracture. A meta-analysis was performed on articles that reported results for visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores. Risk of bias was documented through use of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions assessment tools. The quality assessment was performed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines.

resultsA total of 7 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis: 4 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective comparative studies, and 1 retrospective comparative study, for a total of 234 patients. Of the 7 studies included, 4 studies evaluated the effects of PRP treatment in the knee, and 3 studies evaluated effects in the ankle. The analysis of all scores showed a difference favoring PRP treatment in knees (VAS,

conclusionPRP provided an improvement to microfracture in knees and ankles at short-term follow-up. However, this improvement did not reach the MCID, and thus it was not clinically perceivable by the patients. Moreover, the overall low evidence and the paucity of high-level studies indicate further research is needed to confirm the potential of PRP augmentation to microfracture for the treatment of cartilage lesions.

Indexed as

augmentationbone marrow stimulationcartilage defectmicrofractureosteochondral lesionplatelet-rich plasma

Identifiers

PMID32341925
PMCPMC7175068
OpenAlexW3020534358

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.