SynthesisClinical rheumatology2025
A critical overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of intra-articular injection of platelet rich plasma versus hyaluronic acid for knee osteoarthritis.
Synthesis in Clinical rheumatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management of Musculoskeletal Injuries with an Inflammatory Damage-Associated Molecular Pattern (DAMP) Etiology.Pain and therapy · 2026Review
- Current Perspectives on Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis: How to Optimize Clinical Outcomes.Open access journal of sports medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study is to summarize and evaluate the available evidence for the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Eight databases were searched from inception to September 15, 2024. All systematic reviews (SRs)/meta-analyses (MAs) treated with PRP versus HA for KOA were collected. Literature screening and data extraction were independently performed by two reviewers. The methodological quality, reporting quality, risk of bias, evidence quality, and evidence overlap rate of the included studies were evaluated by using AMSTAR 2, PRISMA 2020, ROBIS, GRADE, and GROOVE systems. Seventeen SRs were included. The results showed that the effectiveness and safety of PRP in the treatment of KOA may be superior to HA. The methodological quality of all 17 documents was extremely low quality. Sixteen of them had poor reporting quality, and there were relatively serious information deficiencies. All SRs were determined to be at high risk. Among the 221 outcome indicators, there were two medium-quality evidences, 30 low-quality evidences, and 189 extremely low-quality evidences. It was found that there was a very high overlap among the included articles. Currently, the quality of SRs on the treatment of KOA with PRP versus HA is relatively low. Future authors of SRs should adhere to quality assessment tool criteria, expand sample sizes to reduce overlap, and evaluate the quality of evidence for merged study results, in order to provide more reliable and rigorous evidence-based support for clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39738804What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.