SynthesisInternational urogynecology journal2026
Intravesical Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for Refractory Interstitial Cystitis/Painful Bladder Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International urogynecology journal, 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.
- Reconsidering the Evidence for Intravesical Platelet-Rich Plasma in Interstitial Cystitis/Bladder Pain Syndrome.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisIntravesical injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a novel therapeutic approach for patients with interstitial cystitis/ bladder pain syndrome (IC/BPS). This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the efficacy of PRP in alleviating pain and other related symptoms and outcomes in women.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines and the PICO framework. A comprehensive search was conducted in multiple databases. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Review Manager (RevMan), and quality of evidence was evaluated using the Modified Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine tool. All included studies were quasi-experimental, uncontrolled, and non-randomized, resulting in a low overall level of evidence. A pre-post meta-analysis was performed assessing outcomes such as Global Response Assessment (GRA), pain (VAS), symptom scores (ICSI, ICPI, OSS), urinary frequency, nocturia, and urodynamic parameters. Standardized mean differences were calculated using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the I
resultsThe meta-analysis revealed a potential treatment effect, with a mean success rate (GRA ≥ 2) of 48%. Given that all the results derive from uncontrolled and non-randomized studies, they should therefore be interpreted with caution. Statistically significant improvements were observed in pain scores, urinary frequency, nocturia, and bladder function, including increases in Qmax and voided volume.
conclusionsIntravesical PRP injection may represent a promising therapeutic option for refractory IC/BPS, showing trends toward improvement in pain, nocturia, frequency, and bladder capacity. However, as current evidence is derived exclusively from uncontrolled and non-randomized studies, its efficacy remains uncertain and the findings should be interpreted with caution. Nonetheless, higher-quality randomized controlled trials are required to confirm its efficacy and better define its role in clinical practice.
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.