Platelet-Rich Plasma Has Better Results for Retear Rate, Pain, and Outcome Than Platelet-Rich Fibrin After Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yinghao Li ◽  
Tao Li ◽  
Jian Li ◽  
Xin Tang ◽  
Ran Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Platelet Rich Fibrin ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Cuff Repair ◽  
Retear Rate

scholarly journals Is routine distal clavicle resection necessary in rotator cuff repair surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 39-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Livingstone ◽  
Rafik Asaid ◽  
Afshin Kamali Moaveni
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Analogue Scale ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Distal Clavicle ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Cuff Repair ◽  
Distal Clavicle Resection

Background The objective of the present study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials looking at the effect of distal clavicle resection in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (RCR). Methods A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify randomized controlled trials looking at RCR +/– distal clavicle resection. Primary clinical outcome measures included in the meta-analysis were American Shoulder Elbow Society (ASES) score, pain on visual analogue scale and range of motion in forward elevation. Results The systematic review identified three studies with a total of 203 participants. Those who underwent distal clavicle resection in conjunction with RCR had worse pain and acromioclavicular joint tenderness at 3-month follow-up. This difference, however, was not observed at the 24-month follow-up. The mean difference (95% confidence interval) for the ASES score was 0.45 (–3.67 to 4.58) and pain on visual analogue scale was – 0.27 (–0.70 to 0.16). Conclusions Routine distal clavicle resection in the setting of rotator cuff repair does not result in improved outcomes for patients with no difference being observed at 24 months post surgery. The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis do not support routine distal clavicle resection when performing RCR.

The Effect of Platelet-Rich Plasma Leukocyte Concentration on Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652097543
Author(s):  
Eoghan T. Hurley ◽  
Christopher A. Colasanti ◽  
Utkarsh Anil ◽  
Tyler A. Luthringer ◽  
Michael J. Alaia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Platelet Rich Plasma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tendon Healing ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Analog Scale ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff ◽  
Cuff Repair

Background: It is unclear whether leukocyte-poor (LP) or leukocyte-rich (LR) varieties of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) as an adjuvant to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) result in improved tendon healing rates. Purpose: To perform a network meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials in the literature to ascertain whether there is evidence to support the use of LP- or LR-PRP as an adjunct to ARCR. Methods: The literature search was based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials comparing LP- or LR-PRP with a control alongside ARCR were included. Clinical outcomes, including retears and functional outcomes, were compared using a frequentist approach to network meta-analysis, with statistical analysis performed using R. The treatment options were ranked using the P-score. Results: There were 13 studies (868 patients) included, with 9 studies comparing LP-PRP with a control and 4 studies comparing LR-PRP with a control. LP-PRP was found to significantly reduce the rate of retear and/or incomplete tendon healing after fixation, even among medium-large tears; it also improved outcomes on the visual analog scale for pain, Constant score, and University of California Los Angeles score. LP-PRP had the highest P-score for all treatment groups. LR-PRP did not result in any significant improvements over the control group, except for visual analog scale score for pain. However, post hoc analysis revealed that LP-PRP did not lead to significant improvements over LR-PRP in any category. Conclusion: The current study demonstrates that LP-PRP reduces the rate of retear and/or incomplete tendon healing after ARCR and improves patient-reported outcomes as compared with a control. However, it is still unclear whether LP-PRP improves the tendon healing rate when compared with LR-PRP.

scholarly journals Bone marrow-stimulating techniques in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (9) ◽  
pp. e022086
Author(s):  
Liang-Tseng Kuo ◽  
Chi-Lung Chen ◽  
Pei-An Yu ◽  
Yu-Shiun Tsai ◽  
Wei-Hsiu Hsu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Rotator Cuff ◽  
Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Tendon Healing ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff ◽  
Cuff Repair

IntroductionBone marrow-stimulating (BMS) techniques during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery theoretically enhance the biological component for healing and hence improve tendon healing, but their efficacy remains unproven. The purpose of this review is to determine the effects and associated harms of BMS in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery.Methods and analysisWe will perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised-controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies (RCS) that compare outcomes following BMS use against no use of BMS during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair surgery. We will search the databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline and Embase, and clinical trial registries for relevant studies. We will include studies published from start of indexing until 23 August 2018. Two reviewers will independently assess the eligibility for studies. For each included trial, we will conduct duplicate independent data extraction and risk of bias assessment. We will use the Cochrane Collaboration tool to assess the risk of bias of included RCTs, while we will use the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions tool to evaluate the risk of bias of RCS. We will perform a random-effects meta-analysis in calculating the pooled risk estimates when appropriate. We will assess the overall quality of the data for each individual outcome using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessments, Development and Evaluation approach. The primary outcomes are tendon healing rate, overall pain and shoulder functions. The secondary outcomes are the proportion of participants with adverse events related to interventions, the range of motion and the proportion of participants with return to previous activities.Ethics and disseminationWe will report this review according to the guidance of the PRISMA statement. The results of this review will be disseminated through conference presentations and publications in peer-reviewed journals.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018087161.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document