ReviewCureus2025
The Effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Management of Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections have been proposed to enhance tendon healing and alleviate symptoms in rotator cuff tears, but clinical evidence of their efficacy remains mixed. This systematic review synthesizes the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PRP's effectiveness for rotator cuff tears. We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched PubMed, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and the Cochrane Library from inception through March 2025 for RCTs comparing PRP injection with placebo, corticosteroid injection, or no adjunct therapy in adults with partial- or full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Primary outcomes included pain [Visual Analog Scale (VAS)], functional scores [American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES)], Constant-Murley score, and tendon healing on imaging. Thirty-six studies (approximately 2000 patients) met the inclusion criteria. PRP generally produced significant short-term pain relief, with pooled data showing lower VAS scores at six weeks, three months, six months, and one year compared with controls (all P<0.05). In terms of function, PRP often improved ASES and Constant-Murley scores during the first three to six months. However, long-term functional gains were inconsistent, and some trials reported no between-group differences. Regarding tendon healing, a large meta-analysis of arthroscopic repair RCTs (n=1359) found a significantly lower retear rate with PRP (16.5% vs 23.6%, P=0.002), while other trials found no difference. Current evidence suggests that PRP injection provides significant short-term pain reduction and functional improvement in adults with rotator cuff tears and may enhance tendon healing when used as a surgical adjunct. However, considerable heterogeneity in PRP protocols and mixed long-term results mean its definitive superiority over standard care is not firmly established. PRP may be considered a potential adjunct, but further high-quality, standardized RCTs are needed.
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.