ReviewCureus2024
Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma in Endoscopic Sinus Surgery for Chronic Sinusitis: 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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The potential of platelet-rich plasma and PRP-derived biologics for neurological disorders: mechanisms and translational research.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chronic rhinosinusitis (CR) is a persistent inflammation of the nasal mucosa and paranasal sinuses. Endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is a procedure that improves sinus drainage and ventilation. Despite advancements in ESS, additional corrective procedures post-ESS are often needed. Clinical trials have explored the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as adjunctive therapy after ESS. This study aims to provide evidence supporting the efficacy of PRP post-ESS for CS patients. Independent authors searched three electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)) and assessed the methodological quality of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. We pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Five RCTs met our inclusion criteria. Among 260 patients, 133 were allocated to PRP and 127 to the control group. PRP was associated with significantly lower postoperative nasal endoscopy scores (-1.74 (95% CI: -2.96, -0.52), P = 0.005) and Lund-Kennedy scores (-3.05 (95% CI: -4.97, -1.13), P = 0.002). PRP also significantly lowered Sinonasal Outcome Test-22 (SNOT-22) scores at one and three months follow-up (-8.25 (95% CI: -11.26, -5.24), P < 0.00001, and -2.75 (95% CI: -5.38, -0.12), P = 0.04, respectively). Subgroup analysis based on the location of administration showed borderline significance in the middle meatus group (-2.70 (95% CI: -5.35, -0.04), P = 0.05). This meta-analysis supports using PRP following ESS for CS patients. Despite promising results, further RCTs are needed to confirm long-term efficacy.
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.