MedElevator
Войти в исследования Revista espanola de cirugia ortopedica y traumatologia · 2017
Use of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of rotator cuff pathology. What has been scientifically proven?
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Miranda I, Sánchez-Alepuz E, Lucas F J, Carratalá V, González-Jofre C A
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To analyze the current scientific and/or clinical evidence supporting the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in the treatment of rotator cuff pathology.
METHODS: After a systematic review in PubMed, studies assessing PRP efficacy in the treatment of rotator cuff pathology published since 2013 to date were identified. Data were grouped based on type of study (laboratory, clinical or meta-analysis); accordingly study design, pathology treated and clinical outcomes were summarized.
RESULTS: Thirty five articles have been analyzed: 10 laboratory studies, 17 clinical assays and 8 meta-analyses. While laboratory studies report positive or partially positive results for the use of PRP, 70.6% of clinical studies and 75% of meta-analysis found no statistically significant differences between the PRP group and the control group.
DISCUSSION: The positive results of laboratory studies do not translate well to clinical practice. There is no concordance among the few positive results reported in the clinical studies, and even some contradictory effects have been reported.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no solid scientific and/or clinical evidence supporting the use of PRP in the treatment of rotator cuff pathology in routine clinical practice.
METHODS: After a systematic review in PubMed, studies assessing PRP efficacy in the treatment of rotator cuff pathology published since 2013 to date were identified. Data were grouped based on type of study (laboratory, clinical or meta-analysis); accordingly study design, pathology treated and clinical outcomes were summarized.
RESULTS: Thirty five articles have been analyzed: 10 laboratory studies, 17 clinical assays and 8 meta-analyses. While laboratory studies report positive or partially positive results for the use of PRP, 70.6% of clinical studies and 75% of meta-analysis found no statistically significant differences between the PRP group and the control group.
DISCUSSION: The positive results of laboratory studies do not translate well to clinical practice. There is no concordance among the few positive results reported in the clinical studies, and even some contradictory effects have been reported.
CONCLUSIONS: There is no solid scientific and/or clinical evidence supporting the use of PRP in the treatment of rotator cuff pathology in routine clinical practice.