ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
A comparative study of the clinical value of PRP and microfracture techniques in the repair of rotator cuff injuries.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical value of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy versus microfracture technique in rotator cuff repair.
methodsA retrospective study included 142 patients undergoing rotator cuff repair surgery, divided into PRP, microfracture, and control groups. Postoperative tendon-bone union, shoulder function scores (ASES, UCLA), pain scores (VAS), and complication rates were compared across groups.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable across groups. Both PRP and microfracture techniques effectively promoted tendon-bone healing and improved shoulder function, outperforming the control group. Safety profiles were equivalent between the two intervention groups. However, early VAS scores indicated higher pain levels in the microfracture group compared to both the PRP group and control groups.
conclusionBoth PRP and microfracture techniques demonstrate sound clinical utility and safety in rotator cuff repair. PRP yields milder early postoperative pain, while microfracture offers cost advantages. Clinicians may tailor intervention choices based on individual patient factors including pain tolerance and financial circumstances.
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.