User:AMR2024/Platelet-rich plasma

Medical use

Evidence for benefit of PRP is mixed, with some evidence for use in certain conditions and against use in other conditions. It has been investigated for chronic tendinitis, osteoarthritis, in oral surgery, and in plastic surgery.

Elbow tendinitis

A 2022 study from the Journal of Clinical Medicine compared PRP injections to physical therapy. They found that PRP lowered pain scores and increased elbow function significantly. A 2022 study examined the effectiveness of PRP for elbow tendinopathy. They found that PRP was effective and that the concentration of the platelets and healing factors such as epidermal growth factor (EGF) were correlated with success of treatment.

A 2022 meta-analysis examined 26 studies on PRP for elbow tendinopathy. They found that PRP treated patients rated their results significantly better using validated patient rated outcomes measures. A 2021 systematic review by the Cochrane Library examined PRP and autologous whole blood injections and concluded that it was "uncertain" if PRP or autologous whole blood injections improved elbow tendon healing.

A 2018 systematic review and meta-analysis of high quality studies found that PRP was beneficial for treatment of lateral epicondylitis.

Numerous systematic reviews and meta-analyses have found that for elbow tendinopathy, PRP is superior to cortisone injections. It has been shown to have similar or equal effects compared to surgery.

Rotator cuff disease

A 2022 systematic review and meta-analysis showed improved patient rated outcomes in patients with partial rotator cuff tears.  At 8 weeks post injection, they found PRP to be effective. A 2021 prospective study examined the effectiveness of PRP for partial thickness rotator cuff tears. Patients were given 2 separate PRP injections and followed for 2 years.  The study noted:  “No adverse events were seen in any patient. Based on global rating scores positive results were seen in 77.9 % of patients at 6 months, 71.6 % at 1 year, and 68.8 % of patients at 2 years”.  They found PRP most effective in more damaged tendons. A 2021 meta-analysis found that PRP was effective for partial rotator cuff tears but the effects were no longer evident at 1 year.

PRP has been shown to be superior to cortisone injections in several studies. This is especially evident in the longer term.

A 2019 review found it not to be useful in rotator cuff disease. A 2019 meta-analysis found that, for most outcomes in Achilles tendinopathy, PRP treatment did not differ from placebo treatment. A 2018 review found that it may be useful. A 2009 review found few randomized controlled trials that adequately evaluated the safety and efficacy of PRP treatments and concluded that PRP was "a promising, but not proven, treatment option for joint, tendon, ligament, and muscle injuries".

Osteoarthritis

Tentative evidence supports the use of PRP in osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. A 2019 meta-analysis found that PRP might be more effective in reducing pain and improving function than hyaluronic acid in knee OA.

Dental

A 2010 Cochrane review of use in sinus lifts during dental implant placement found no evidence of benefit.

Other musculoskeletal

A 2014 Cochrane review of musculoskeletal injuries found very weak evidence for a decrease in pain in the short term, and no difference in function in the short, medium or long term. It has not been shown to be useful for bone healing. A 2016 review of bone graft augmentation found only one study reporting a difference in bone augmentation, while four studies found no difference. As compared to other conservative treatments for non-surgical orthopedic illnesses (e.g. steroid injection for plantar fasciitis), evidence does not support the use of PRP as a conservative treatment. A 2018 review found that evidence was lacking for Achilles tendinopathy. A 2019 study conducted an umbrella review that "considered studies that included populations with differing levels of physical activity, including studies on the sporting population (professional and/or recreational athletes) and studies didn't explicitly mention involving a sporting population." This inquiry showed that there is poor quality evidence that PRP offers any clinical benefits for treatment in acute muscle, tendon, and ligament injuries in any population.

Hair loss

Studies have found that PRP is beneficial for alopecia areata and androgenetic alopecia and can be used as an alternative to minoxidilor finasteride. It has been documented to improve hair density and thickness in both genders. A minimum of 3 treatments, once a month for 3 months are recommended, and afterwards a 3-6 month period of continual appointments for maintenance. Factors that determine efficacy include amount of sessions, double versus single centrifugation, age and gender, and where the PRP is inserted.

Larger randomized controlled trials and other high quality studies are recommended to strengthen consensus. Further development of a standardized practice for procedure is also recommended.

Assisted reproduction

PRP obtained from the patient herself can be inoculated into the uterine cavity, since the growth factors it contains could improve endometrial receptivity in cases of refractory endometrium. Different studies have shown that intrauterine inoculation of PRP before embryo transfer can help these women obtain a thicker endometrium and improve their reproductive prognosis. PRP has also been studied for the management of Asherman's Syndrome.

PRP can also be inoculated into the ovary, with the aim of promoting ovarian tissue regeneration. However, this technique is at a more experimental stage. The main applications of PRP in the ovary would be in cases of diminished ovarian reserve or premature ovarian failure. Thus, the ovarian injection of PRP is intended to improve the ovarian function of these patients.

A 2023 retrospective observational study demonstrated PRP's effectiveness in rejuvenating ovarian fertility and viability. 469 women participated in the study with the average age of 41.9 ± 4.3 years. His team's research revealed that the restorative properties present in PRP have to potential to restore ovarian function when used for intraovarian infusions. This study indicates that PRP may work because of the growth factors present in the shot that are able to spur the remaining ovarian stem cells to redevelop and grow stronger. They produced these results by examining "the influence of intraovarian injection of autologous PRP on the levels of E2 and FSH and pregnancy outcome in women treated with PRP who had a history of infertility, hormonal abnormalities, an absence of menstrual cycle, and premature ovarian failure in a single centre."

A 2024 systemic review showed that PRP is beneficial when used as intraovarian injections for women with decreased fertility. When PRP is used for fertility trouble, it has been proven to increase AFC, number of retrieved oocytes, number of cleavage embryos, and improve cancellation rate in women with POR. However the authors highlight that despite the positive results garnered, they are not statistically telling. "Although there was an improvement of baseline hormones (AMH, FSH, and E2) after intraovarian injection of PRP, this improvement failed to reach statistical significance (except the improvement of serum AMH analyzed in quasi-experimental studies)." This study helped to show that PRP still needs to be studied further to truly grasp the full fertility benefits.

Venous ulcers

Venous ulcers are ankle or lower leg wounds that become open and remain that way for weeks to months. A 2024 meta-analysis provided evidence that PRP has a positive effect on the size of ulcers as well as complete healing time for venous ulcers compared to the time with standard treatments. Combining PRP with conventional venous ulcer treatments has shown improved quality of life and healing time. When addressing concerns for this use of PRP, The author said "In terms of safety, the recurrence rate in the PRP group was significantly lower than that in the control group, while the rates of infection and irritative dermatitis showed no significant difference from the control group." PRP is both a safe and effective method for the treatment of venous ulcers.

Diabetic foot ulcers

A 2024 meta-analysis showed that the growth factors present in aPRP are vital in the healing of DFU patients specifically the closure of the ulcers. The author states that “these treatments significantly increase the ulcer healing rate compared to existing conventional treatments.” When using aPRP, DFU patients can expect their ulcer to close better than compared to how they would close with standard treatments.

Copied from Platelet-rich plasma