SynthesisEuropean archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery2026
Navigating the efficacy, safety and outcome of intranasal platelet-rich plasma for persistent olfactory loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPersistent olfactory dysfunction (OD) poses a significant clinical challenge with limited therapeutic options. Intranasal platelet-rich plasma (PRP), an autologous source of regenerative growth factors, presents a biologically plausible intervention, yet its efficacy across various OD etiologies remains synthetically underexplored.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis adhered to PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library (2010-2025) identified studies assessing intranasal PRP for persistent OD (> 6 months). Random-effects models pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) for objective (e.g., Sniffin' Sticks TDI) and subjective outcomes.
resultsSeven studies (n = 473) were included. Meta-analysis of controlled studies (n = 314) demonstrated a moderate, significant improvement in objective olfactory scores favoring PRP over control (SMD 0.61, 95% CI 0.38-0.84). The pooled mean TDI change from baseline was 7.73 points (95% CI 6.59-8.87), exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of 5.5 points. Benefits were observed across post-COVID-19, post-viral, and post-traumatic etiologies. Adverse events were predominantly mild and transient (e.g., epistaxis).
conclusionIntranasal PRP appears to be a generally well-tolerated and promising therapeutic strategy, yielding clinically meaningful improvements in persistent OD of diverse origins. However, the evidence remains preliminary and should be interpreted cautiously, as it is based on only two small RCTs plus non-randomized or single-arm studies. Future studies must optimize its protocol and evaluate its potential synergy with standard therapies like olfactory training.
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.