| Title |
Platelet‐rich plasma to treat ankle cartilage pathology ‐ from translational potential to clinical evidence: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40634-015-0019-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesca Vannini, Berardo Di Matteo, Giuseppe Filardo |
| Abstract |
Platelet-rich Plasma (PRP) is a fascinating biological treatment showing promising results for the management of cartilage disorders. However, despite the step forwards in this research area and the increasing use of PRP in clinical practice, its use remains still controversial and especially its application as injective treatment for ankle cartilage pathology have been scarcely investigated.The aim of this paper is to describe the translational evidence for the use of PRP in cartilage treatment and to systematically review all the available evidence regarding the clinical application of PRP for ankle cartilage disorders, in order to understand what is the current state of the art for this specific clinical indication, underlining both limits and potential of this biological strategy.A systematic review of the clinical literature was performed on the use of PRP to treat ankle cartilage disorders and 7 papers were identified. PRP has been used in two different ways: 5 of the available papers focus on its use as an augmentation procedure to various surgical techniques for cartilage regeneration, while only two studies report its conservative application through intra-articular injections. Based on the limited number of clinical studies available on this topic, this systematic review showed the lack of major adverse events related to PRP and overall good results for the treatment of ankle cartilage pathology, thus confirming the translational potential of this biological treatment suggested by several preclinical studies. Further high quality clinical trials in the ankle are still needed to clarify proper indications and best applicative modalities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 11 | 22% |
| Researcher | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 55% |
| Engineering | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,816,222
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#217
of 328 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#246,599
of 358,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 328 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 358,172 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them