The effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma injection for the treatment of suspected sacroiliac joint complex pain; a systematic review
Pain Medicine (United States), ISSN: 1526-4637, Vol: 21, Issue: 10, Page: 2518-2528
2020
- 9Citations
- 47Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef1
- Captures47
- Readers47
- 47
Review Description
Objective. To determine the effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) for the treatment of suspected sacroiliac joint complex (SIJC) pain. Design. Systematic review. Subjects. Persons aged ≥18 with suspected SIJC pain. Comparison. Sham, placebo procedure, or active standard of care treatment. Outcomes. The primary outcome was ≥50% pain improvement, and the secondary outcome was functional improvement of ≥30% at three or more months after the treatment intervention. Methods. Publications in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Databases were reviewed up to April 3, 2019. Randomized or nonrandomized comparative studies and nonrandomized studies without internal controls were included. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system and the joint consensus American Academy of Orthopedic Surgery/National Institutes of Health recommendations were used for quality assessment and reporting standards. Results. Query identified 151 publications; three were appropriate for inclusion. There were no studies of BMAC that met inclusion criteria. There were three eligible PRP studies: One randomized comparative trial (RCT) and two case series. In the single RCT comparing ultrasound-guided PRP with corticosteroid injection for suspected SIJC pain, the PRP group had a significantly increased likelihood of achieving ≥50% improvement of pain at three months (adjusted odds ratio = 37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.65-298.69). Pooled pain outcomes from two studies showed that 28/30, 93% (95% CI = 93-100%), experienced ≥50% pain improvement at three months. Conclusions. The literature supporting the effectiveness of PRP for SIJC pain is very low-quality according to the GRADE system. Well-designed RCTs and large cohort studies with consistent selection protocols and reporting characteristics are needed to determine the effectiveness of PRP and BMAC for the treatment of SIJC pain.
Bibliographic Details
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know