ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2021
Level of Evidence on Platelet-rich Plasma in Plastic Surgery.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07306611 (Regenerative Treatment of Female Genital Atrophy), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Regenerative Treatment of Female Genital Atrophy
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the increased popularity of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in plastic surgery, there is no detailed analysis on the level of evidence on PRP use in plastic surgery. As the number of applications of PRP in plastic surgery increases, it is important for plastic surgeons to understand the scientific and validated evidence behind its use. Therefore, we performed a literature review to identify current level of evidence on platelet-rich plasma in plastic surgery.
methodsWe performed a computerized search of platelet-rich plasma in plastic surgery using the MEDLINE, Cochran Library, and EMBASE databases. Data regarding the type of study, PRP application, and outcomes were collected. Then, the level of evidence was assigned using the American Society of Plastic Surgeons Level of Evidence Rating.
resultsOur search identified 105 articles, and about 78.1% of studies were lower-quality studies: 37 level-III articles (35.2%), 32 level-IV articles (30.5%), and 13 level-V articles (12.4%). There were only 6 level-I articles and 17 level-II studies. Level-I studies were on facial rejuvenation using a laser, carpal tunnel release, cleft lip repair, trauma wounds, breast reconstruction using latissimus dorsi, and hair regrowth.
conclusionsOur review of the literature shows that the level of evidence on PRP use in plastic surgery is low (21.9%). Nevertheless, we believe level-III to level-V studies are still valuable, as performing high-level quality studies in plastic surgery is difficult due to variability in surgical techniques, experiences, and materials.
Identifiers
What 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.