ArticleInternational journal of health sciences
A case series of autologous platelet-rich plasma injection in treating chronic ulcers conducted in Saudi Arabia.
Article in International journal of health sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Epidemiological characteristics of adult inpatients with diabetes-related chronic non-healing wounds in Hainan province].Zhonghua shao shang yu chuang mian xiu fu za zhi · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This is a case series study of 14 cases of chronic unhealed ulcers involving patients of 19-85 years, aimed to demonstrate the positive therapeutic outcomes of using autologous platelet rich plasma (PRP) in diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) and other chronic wound healing. Methods: This is a formal consecutive clinical case series. Patients with chronic unhealed ulcers were enrolled from the amputation prevention clinic by an interdisciplinary team includes podiatrist, general surgeon, orthopedic, vascular surgeon, and wound care nurses at Kahel Specialized Centre, a specialized center for managing foot and ankle diseases, located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Those patients who presented with chronic wounds and showed no significant wound reduction despite following the standard wound care protocol were included in the study. There were no specific predetermined exclusion criteria when considering patients for treatment with this modality. Results: In this case series, majority (80%) of the patients were above 50 years of age, and 10 (66.7%) patients were male and 5 (33.3%) were female. Of all the cases presented to the amputation prevention clinic, majority (73.3%) reported suffering from type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and also, one reported type 1 DM [6.7%]). All the cases of DFU received a combination of hydrogel and autologous PRP treatment and were put of suitable offloading devices, except one case received a combination of Cadexomer iodine, hydrogel and PRP treatment. In the present case series involving 3-14 weeks of the treatment duration, only 2-3 doses of autologous PRP provided complete healing and or maximum wound closure. Conclusion: Autologous PRP therapy is efficacious in facilitating, enhancing wound healing and aids in complete wound closure. This case series was limited in term of the sample size which is the number patients enrolled for the study, hence, the study finding remain inconclusive to some extent and hence, further study is required with greater number of sample size. The strength of this study is that it is the first study in Saudi Arabia and gulf region, to report the beneficial effect of PRP in chronic unhealed ulcers including diabetic ulcers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36891041PMC9986877W4323652298What 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.