Platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer: a systematic review

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

Abstract (original English)

Background With the increasing incidence of diabetes, diabetic foot ulcer(DFU) has become one of the most common and serious complications in people with diabetes. DFU is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and can also result in significant economic, social and public health burdens. Due to peripheral neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, hyperglycemic environment, inflammatory disorders and other factors, the healing of DFU is impaired or delayed, resulting in the formation of diabetic chronic refractory ulcer. Because of these pathological abnormalities in DFU, it may be difficult to promote wound healing with conventional therapies or antibiotics, whereas platelet-rich plasma(PRP) can promote wound healing by releasing various bioactive molecules stored in platelets, making it more promising than traditional antibiotics. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and analyze the efficacy of PRP in the treatment of DFU. Methods A literature search was undertaken in PubMed, CNKI, EMB-ASE, the Cochrane Library, the WanFang Database and the WeiPu Database by computer. Included controlled studies evaluating the efficacy of PRP in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. The data extraction and assessment are on the basis of PRISMA. Results Twenty studies were evaluated, and nineteen measures for the evaluation of the efficacy of PRP in DFU

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.

Browse all related research

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