SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2026
Autologous platelet-rich plasma versus hyaluronic acid, corticosteroids or saline for knee osteoarthritis: can blood draw volume serve as a proxy for platelet dose? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeTo compare platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with hyaluronic acid (HA), corticosteroid (CS), or saline placebo (NS) for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to assess whether total blood-draw volume, a proxy for platelet dose, is associated with treatment effect.
methodsFollowing PRISMA, randomized controlled trials comparing intra-articular PRP with HA, CS, or NS were identified. Random-effects meta-analyses estimated mean differences (MDs) in pain (VAS) and function (WOMAC) at six and twelve months. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2.0 and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Subgroup analyses stratified PRP vs HA trials by total blood draw volume (< 40 mL vs ≥ 40 mL).
resultsSixty-two trials (n = 4,969) were included. PRP improved VAS and WOMAC versus HA, CS, and NS at six months and remained superior versus HA and CS at twelve months (insufficient studies for twelve-month PRP vs NS). In PRP vs HA trials, blood draw volume ≥ 40 mL was associated with larger improvements in six-month WOMAC (P = 0.004) and twelve-month VAS (P = 0.029). Heterogeneity was substantial (I
conclusionPRP provides superior patient-reported pain and function outcomes compared with HA, CS, and NS through six months, with benefits maintained to twelve months versus HA and CS in longer-term trials. Blood-draw volume may be a useful alternate when platelet dose is unreported.
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.