ReviewCureus2024
A Comparison of Functional Outcomes in Rotator Cuff Repairs Using Adjunctive Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate vs. Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate With Platelet-Rich Plasma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Rationale and methodology for injection therapy to treat rotator cuff disease: a scoping review.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Regenerative medicine, specifically bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP), has become a novel adjunct that orthopedic surgeons have started to use with surgical rotator cuff repairs (RCR). Thus, we are conducting this systematic review to determine if either RCRs with BMAC alone or with BMAC and PRP result in superior functional outcomes. We conducted a comprehensive search using five databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane. After duplicates were removed, 1205 studies were screened by title and abstract using Rayyan, resulting in three included studies (one BMAC with PRP and two BMAC only). Only studies that reported functional outcomes using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score and the University of California Los Angeles Shoulder Score were included. Changes in assessment scores from baseline to follow-up evaluation were quantified using the effect size and used in the meta-analysis for each group. Interpretation of treatment efficacy was represented using Cohen's d. The effect size of BMAC with PRP (Cohen's d = 2.19) was not significantly different (p = 0.76) from that of BMAC alone (Cohen's d = 2.35). Between-group differences in functional outcomes were Cohen's d = 0.16, which was not significant. Given the lack of superiority and the small sample size, more research is required before a conclusion can be drawn as to the benefits of combining PRP with BMAC for RCR. If functional outcomes are the same, using BMAC alone as an adjunct may be optimal to reduce resources used and cost. Future studies should be conducted with a larger pool as our primary limitation is that only three studies were included.
Indexed as
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.