Non-Cochrane · intervention · PM42707822
Efficiency of platelet-rich plasma in management of oral lichen planus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Sasikumar Radhika, Aditya Amita, Sawant Vaishnavi, et al. · Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur) · 2026 · PubMed · doi:10.21142/2523-2754-1403-2026-304
Findings
Population Patients with oral lichen planus
2 findings
| Intralesional platelet-rich plasma or platelet-rich fibrin | Intralesional corticosteroid | Pain, visual analogue scale | MD 0.33 [-0.57, 1.23] GRADE not reported 4 studies |
| Intralesional platelet-rich plasma or platelet-rich fibrin | Intralesional corticosteroid | Pain, visual analogue scale | MD 0.61 [0.22, 0.99] GRADE not reported 4 studies |
Included primary studies 6
Open in Studies| Study | Year | Also included by | Outcomes it informs here | Trial data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Al-Hallak 2022 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Bennardo 2021 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | Pain, visual analogue scale | not extracted yet |
| ElGhareeb 2023 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | Pain, visual analogue scale | not extracted yet |
| Hijazi 2022 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | not stated | not extracted yet |
| Saglam 2021 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | Pain, visual analogue scale | not extracted yet |
| Sharma 2023 matched by author and year (probable) | NR | this review only | Pain, visual analogue scale | not extracted yet |
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Patients with oral lichen planus | Patients with (mainly erosive) oral lichen planus (n=129 in 6 studies) |
| Intervention | Platelet-rich plasma in the form of intralesional injections | Intralesional PRP or PRF injection (n=6 studies) |
| Comparison | Intralesional corticosteroid injections | Intralesional triamcinolone or methylprednisolone injection (n=6 studies) |
| Outcomes | Changes in symptoms and reduction in area of the lesion | Pain VAS pooled (n=4 studies); lesion size, satisfaction, REU and recurrence narrative |
| Study designs | Clinical studies and split-mouth studies (RCT, cohort, longitudinal), published 2016 to 2024, English, with mean and SD | Randomized trials, incl. split-mouth (n=6) |
| Timing | Not specified | 15 days to 6 months follow-up |
AMSTAR 2 items
Two independent extractors rated each item. Their ratings are shown side by side because they have not been reconciled yet. The overall rating follows Shea et al. 2017: one critical flaw gives Low, more than one gives Critically Low.
| Item | Extractor A | Extractor B | Agree |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1Research question includes PICO components | Yes | Yes | yes |
| 2Protocol established before the reviewcritical | Partial Yes | Partial Yes | yes |
| 3Choice of study designs explained | No | No | yes |
| 4Comprehensive literature searchcritical | No | No | yes |
| 5Study selection in duplicate | No | No | yes |
| 6Data extraction in duplicate | No | No | yes |
| 7List of excluded studies with reasonscritical | No | No | yes |
| 8Included studies described in detail | Partial Yes | Yes | no |
| 9Risk of bias assessed satisfactorilycritical | RCT: Yes | NRSI: N/A · RCT: Yes | no |
| 10Funding of included studies reported | No | No | yes |
| 11Appropriate meta-analysis methodscritical | RCT: No | NRSI: N/A · RCT: No | no |
| 12Impact of risk of bias on the pooled results | No | No | yes |
| 13Risk of bias accounted for in interpretationcritical | No | No | yes |
| 14Heterogeneity explained | Yes | No | no |
| 15Publication bias investigatedcritical | No | No | yes |
| 16Conflicts of interest reported | Yes | Yes | yes |
| Overall | Critically Low | Critically Low | yes |