Reporting in Clinical Studies on Platelet-Rich Plasma Therapy Among All Medical Specialties: A Systematic Review of Level I and II Studies
April 2021
in “
PLOS ONE
”
New to Platelet-Rich Plasma? There is a guide in the encyclopedia. Read the guide → 
Studysummary This systematic review found that most level I/II clinical studies on platelet-rich plasma therapy have focused on musculoskeletal injuries, but inconsistent reporting of PRP composition complicates comparisons across medical specialties.
Our plain-language summary. Not medical advice or a treatment recommendation. Consult a qualified healthcare professional before changing treatment. Full disclaimer
This systematic review analyzed 132 Level I and II clinical studies on platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy across all medical specialties, with the majority conducted for musculoskeletal injuries. The review found that only 33% of the studies provided details on PRP processing or characteristics, and only 17% reported the leukocyte component. Overall, 61% of the studies found PRP to be favorable over control treatment. The authors concluded that there is a significant lack of uniformity in reporting PRP protocols and characteristics, which may contribute to the uncertainty of PRP within the medical community. They emphasized the need for more meticulous reporting of PRP protocols in human studies for proper evaluation of the therapy's efficacy.
