Abstract
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has been tested in vitro, in animal models, and clinically for its efficacy in enhancing the rate of wound healing, reducing pain associated with injuries, and promoting axon regeneration. Although extensive data indicate that PRP-released factors induce these effects, the claims are often weakened because many studies were not rigorous or controlled, the data were limited, and other studies yielded contrary results. Critical to assessing whether PRP is effective are the large number of variables in these studies, including the method of PRP preparation, which influences the composition of PRP; type of application; type of wounds; target tissues; and diverse animal models and clinical studies. All these variables raise the question of whether one can anticipate consistent influences and raise the possibility that most of the results are correct under the circumstances where PRP was tested. This review examines evidence on the potential influences of PRP and whether PRP-released factors could induce the reported influences and concludes that the preponderance of evidence suggests that PRP has the capacity to induce all the claimed influences, although this position cannot be definitively argued. Well-defined and rigorously controlled studies of the potential influences of PRP are required in which PRP is isolated and applied using consistent techniques, protocols, and models. Finally, it is concluded that, because of the purported benefits of PRP administration and the lack of adverse events, further animal and clinical studies should be performed to explore the potential influences of PRP.
Read More