Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceMeta-analysisEurope PMCOpen access

Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation to Microfracture Provides a Limited Benefit for the Treatment of Cartilage Lesions: A Meta-analysis

Boffa A., Previtali D., Altamura SA., Zaffagnini S., Candrian C., Filardo G.

Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 234 on Cartilage Damage, Ankle Injury, published in Orthop J Sports Med (2020) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level A· Stronger Clinical EvidenceEvidence level of this study

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Meta-analysis
Journal
Orthop J Sports Med (2020)
Reported sample size
234
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
32341925
PMCID
PMC7175068
DOI
10.1177/2325967120910504
Citations
28

Abstract (original English)

Background Microfracture is the most common first-line option for the treatment of small chondral lesions, although increasing evidence shows that the clinical benefit of microfracture decreases over time. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been suggested as an effective biological augmentation to improve clinical outcomes after microfracture. Purpose To evaluate the clinical evidence regarding the application of PRP, documenting safety and efficacy of this augmentation technique to improve microfracture for the treatment of cartilage lesions. Study design Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods A systematic review was performed in PubMed, EBSCOhost database, and the Cochrane Library to identify comparative studies evaluating the clinical efficacy of PRP augmentation to microfracture. A meta-analysis was performed on articles that reported results for visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores. Risk of bias was documented through use of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias 2.0 and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions assessment tools. The quality assessment was performed according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation guidelines. Results A total of 7 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the me

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research