Cochrane · systematic review · CD006899
Autologous platelet‐rich plasma for treating chronic wounds
Martinez‐Zapata, MJ, Martí‐Carvajal, AJ, Solà, I, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016 · Cochrane Library
WoundsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 25%Low 3 · 75%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Autologous platelet‐rich plasma compared with standard care with/without placebo for chronic wounds
Population: adults with chronic wounds
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Chronic wounds (all) completely healed Autologous platelet‐rich plasma vs standard care with/without placebo | RR 1.19 [0.95, 1.5] | 8 studies · 391 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Chronic wounds (diabetic foot ulcers) completely healed Autologous platelet‐rich plasma vs standard care with/without placebo | RR 1.22 [1.01, 1.49] | 2 studies · 189 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Chronic wounds (venous leg ulcers) completely healed Autologous platelet‐rich plasma vs standard care with/without placebo | RR 1.02 [0.81, 1.27] | 2 studies · 101 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events Autologous platelet‐rich plasma vs standard care with/without placebo | RR 1.05 [0.29, 3.88] | 3 studies · 102 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |