SynthesisSports medicine - open2026
Platelet-Rich Plasma Accelerates the Return to Sport in Athletes with Acute Muscle Injuries: A Systematic Review and Statistical Fragility Index-Based Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in Sports medicine - open, 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.
- Advancing fat graft survival: from adipose-derived stem cell mechanisms to next-generation regenerative strategies.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMuscle lesions are common sport injuries resulting in prolonged absence from sport activity and long rehabilitation periods. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to quantify the clinical benefits of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections in treating acute muscle injuries.
methodsThe search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science in January 2026. The PRISMA guidelines were used. Inclusion criteria were: randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in English comparing PRP injections with control (rehabilitation or placebo) for the treatment of acute muscle injuries. The outcomes analysed were: time to return to sport (RTS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, re-injury and complication rates. Two sub-analyses were performed, one on the double-blind RCTs and one on the RCTs focusing on hamstrings. A fragility analysis was performed using the fragility index (FI) and the continuous FI (CFI). The quality of each article was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 and the GRADE tools.
resultsAmong the 4969 articles retrieved, nine RCTs (474 patients) were included. PRP provided faster RTS both in the overall analysis (p < 0.001, mean difference (MD) = 7.5, CFI = 188) and in the two sub-analyses (p < 0.001, MD = 8.8, CFI = 67 and p = 0.001, MD = 7.5, CFI = 97 respectively), as well as superior VAS improvement in the hamstring sub-analysis (p = 0.006, MD = 0.4, CFI = 22). No difference was found in terms of re-injury and complication rates between the two groups (FI = 5 and FI = 7, respectively). The evaluation using the RoB 2 tool showed that four studies had a "low risk" of bias and five had a "high risk" of bias. The GRADE evaluation showed a limited quality of evidence of the analysed outcomes.
conclusionPRP produced a faster RTS compared to controls in acute muscle injury patients, both in the overall analysis and in the sub-analyses. PRP was able to produce a statistically higher pain relief only in the hamstring subgroup, while no difference was found in terms of re-injury and complication rates, suggesting a similar safety profile when compared to rehabilitation alone and placebo. The fragility analysis supported the benefits in terms of RTS, although the high-quality literature addressing this topic remains limited, warranting caution in the interpretation of the current results.
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.