ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Platelet-Rich Plasma in Acute Muscle Injuries: An Umbrella Review and Meta-analysis of Return to Sport and Reinjury Outcomes.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2026. 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.
- Imaging characterization of sports-related hamstring injuries.Skeletal radiology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is frequently used in sports medicine to treat muscle injuries; however, the clinical evidence remains inconsistent and fragmented. Purpose: To assess whether PRP therapy improves clinical outcomes, particularly return to sport (RTS) and reinjury rate, compared with conventional treatments for acute muscle injuries. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, BVS, and Scopus was conducted through April 2025 for systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, to evaluate PRP for acute muscle injuries in athletes. A total of 1464 manuscripts were identified through the initial search. Main outcomes included RTS, reinjury rate, pain, and complications. Methodological quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models with Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman adjustments. Results: Eight systematic reviews were included. PRP significantly reduced reinjury risk compared with controls (risk ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.76 to 0.92]; Conclusion: Our review study demonstrated that PRP may reduce muscular reinjury rates and potentially accelerate RTS, although benefits on pain and safety remain uncertain. Current evidence supports the selective use of PRP in sports settings; however, standardization in protocols and outcomes is needed. These findings may assist clinicians in individualizing treatment strategies involving PRP for acute muscle injuries, particularly in high-performance athletes at risk of recurrence.Registration: CRD42021279300.
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.