ArticleOrthopedic reviews2026
Platelet-Rich Plasma and Stem Cell Therapies for Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation: Current Evidence on Dosing, Activation, and Functional Performance.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 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.
- Evolving Treatment Options for Spinal Pain: Balancing Innovation and Affordability in Regenerative Medicine.Current pain and headache reports · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Musculoskeletal disorders are one of the most common causes that lead to disability throughout the world and routinely present with only limited or short-term symptom relief following traditional treatments. Recent developments, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and mesenchymal stem/stromal cell (MSC) interventions, are being used as regenerative biologic adjuncts in musculoskeletal medicine, yet significant variability exists in preparation strategies, activation methods, and dosing protocols. In addition, clinical interpretation remains limited by inconsistent biologic characterization and protocol variability. Objective: A comprehensive review of current clinical evidence regarding dosing parameters, activation methods, and functional outcomes of PRP and MSC therapies for musculoskeletal recovery, focusing on protocol variability and clinical reproducibility. Methods: A structured literature search was conducted using predefined search terms in PubMed, BMJ Journals, and SpringerLink to identify human clinical studies evaluating platelet-rich plasma and mesenchymal stem cell therapies for musculoskeletal conditions. Studies published between January 2016 and December 2025 were screened. An updated search extending through December 31, 2025 identified additional records published after February 2025; however, none met the predefined inclusion criteria. Results: Five controlled trials featuring PRP or MSC techniques met inclusion criteria. Significant heterogeneity was observed across studies in biologic preparation techniques, leukocyte content, activation methods, cell expansion protocols, dosing regimens, and follow-up duration. While improvements in pain and functional scores were reported across both types of interventions, dose-response relationships were inconsistently evaluated and direct protocol comparisons were limited. Conclusion: Although regenerative biologic therapies such as PRP and MSC are associated with improvements in musculoskeletal rehabilitation, significant variability and inconsistent reporting in dosing, activation, and preparation limit generalizability and reproducibility. Prospective clinical trials featuring standardized biologic characterization and uniform reporting frameworks are necessary to begin defining evidence-informed dosing recommendations and rehabilitation delivery.
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.