Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Rotator Cuff Repair
Are We Adhering to the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics?
Madeleine G. DeClercq, BSc, Alyson M. Fiorentino, BA, Haylie A. Lengel, BSc, Joseph J. Ruzbarsky, MD, Sara K. Robinson, MS, Verena T. Oberlohr, BSc,
Kaitlyn E. Whitney, BSc, Peter J. Millett, MD, MS, and Johnny Huard, PhD
Background: The therapeutic efficacy of orthobiologic therapies for rotator cuff repair is difficult to evaluate owing to reporting inconsistences. In response, the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics (MIBO) guidelines were developed to ensure standard reporting on orthobiologic therapies.
Purpose: To systematically review clinical studies evaluating platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for full-thickness rotator cuff repair and adherence to MIBO guidelines.
Study Design: Scoping review; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods: A search was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses) guidelines using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies reporting on rotator cuff tears (1 cm) surgically repaired with PRP. Patient demographics, biologic intervention, and adherence to the MIBO guidelines were systematically reviewed.
Results: A total of 19 studies (1005 patients) were included in this review. Across all studies, 58.5% of the MIBO checklist items for PRP were reported. Out of 47 checklist items, 19 were reported in over 85% of studies, whereas 22 were reported in less than half of studies. Details of whole-blood processing and characteristics, as well as PRP processing and characteristics, were reported inconsistently, and no study provided adequate information to enable the precise replication of preparation protocols for PRP.
Conclusion: This systematic review highlights the current reporting deficiencies within the scientific literature of important variables for evaluating PRP for full-thickness rotator cuff repair. There was widespread variability among published studies that evaluate PRP for this application and, more specifically, studies were limited by inconsistent universal reporting of whole-blood and PRP processing and postprocessing characteristics. To improve our understanding of biologic efficacy and to promote repeatability, stricter adherence to the MIBO guidelines is necessary. We propose that the checklist limitations be addressed and that modification of the MIBO guidelines be considered to improve the reporting of individual components within certain categories.
You may read the complete study here: Systematic Review of Platelet-Rich Plasma for Rotator Cuff Repair