Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33195721›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2020

Preparation Methods and Clinical Outcomes of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Intra-articular Hip Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Flávio Luís Garcia, Brady T Williams, Evan M Polce, Daniel B Heller, Zachary S Aman, Benedict U Nwachukwu, Shane J Nho, Jorge Chahla

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 24 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) augmentation does not result in more favourable outcomes in arthroscopic meniscal repair: a meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. The Management of Acetabular Labral Tears: A Contemporary Review.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Flávio Luís GarciaSection of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Brady T WilliamsSection of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Evan M PolceSection of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Daniel B HellerSection of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Zachary S AmanSidney Kimmel Medical College, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Benedict U NwachukwuDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, USA.
Shane J NhoSection of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Jorge ChahlaSection of Young Adult Hip Surgery, Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Rush University Medical Center · USClinics Hospital of Ribeirão Preto · BRHospital for Special Surgery · USSidney Kimmel Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite its increasing use in the management of musculoskeletal conditions, questions remain regarding the preparation methods of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and its clinical applications for intra-articular hip disorders, including femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS), labral pathology, and osteoarthritis (OA). PURPOSE: To systematically review and assess the preparation methods and clinical outcomes from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on the use of PRP for intra-articular hip disorders. STUDY

designSystematic review; Level of evidence, 2.

methodsA systematic review in accordance with the 2009 PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed in September 2019. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Ovid Medline, and Embase were queried for studies regarding the use of PRP to treat intra-articular hip disorders. Qualifying articles were English-language RCTs describing the use of PRP for intra-articular hip disorders, either as standalone treatment or surgical augmentation. Two authors independently assessed article eligibility. Data pertaining to patient characteristics, indication for treatment, PRP preparation method, follow-up period, and clinical outcomes were extracted. Study results were qualitatively reported and quantitatively compared using meta-analysis when appropriate.

resultsSeven RCTs met inclusion criteria. Four studies described the use of PRP for hip OA and 3 utilized PRP at arthroscopy for FAIS and labral tears. Outcomes after PRP for OA demonstrated improvement in validated patient-reported outcome measures for up to 1 year; however, pooled effect sizes found no statistically significant difference between PRP and hyaluronic acid (HA) regarding pain visual analog scale scores at short-term (≤2 months;

conclusionTreatment of OA with PRP demonstrated reductions in pain and improved patient-reported outcomes for up to 1 year. However, there was no statistically significant difference between PRP and HA in pain reduction. Likewise, for FAIS and labral surgery there was no statistically significant difference in mHHS outcomes between patients treated with PRP and controls. Given the limited number of studies and variability in PRP preparations, additional high-quality randomized trials are warranted.

Indexed as

femoroacetabular impingementhip arthroscopyosteoarthritisoutcomesplatelet-rich plasma

Identifiers

PMID33195721
PMCPMC7607802
OpenAlexW3096973110

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.