Home
中文
English தமிழ் Português 中文 Tiếng Việt Filipino ਪੰਜਾਬੀ 自动翻译 — 英文版本为权威版本。

富血小板血浆（PRP）与注射治疗 资料

本页面由机器翻译，尚未经临床医生审核。英文版本为权威版本。

什么是富血小板血浆

富血小板血浆（PRP）是一种用您自己的血液制备的治疗方法。医生会抽取您的一份血液样本，经过处理将其中的血小板浓缩；血小板是帮助愈合的微小细胞。随后将这种浓缩的混合物注射到需要治疗的部位。

医生可能会针对几种不同的问题考虑使用 PRP。对于膝关节的磨损性关节炎（骨关节炎），建议至少注射两次，其效果可持续至少24周 [1]。它也用于某些肌腱问题，例如网球肘（肘部外侧的疼痛点）。对于运动中的肌肉损伤，在某些情况下会有选择地使用 PRP [2]。不过，它并不是在所有情况下都适用。目前的证据不支持将其用于跟腱问题或髋部外侧疼痛 [3] [4]。

其作用机制仍在研究中。血小板会释放天然的生长因子，这些化学物质能促进身体修复组织。研究发现，所用血小板的浓度与患者报告的缓解程度之间存在直接关系 [5]。研究还显示，不同配方的 PRP 可能适合关节炎的不同阶段 [6]。

PRP 的证据因疾病而异。有些研究支持使用，另一些则不支持，研究人员一致认为还需要更多研究来确认谁获益最多 [7] [8] [9]。医生会与您讨论 PRP 是否适合您的具体问题。

它有效吗？

坦白地说，这取决于所治疗的问题。对于膝关节骨关节炎，试验发现 PRP 可能有帮助，无论其配方是否含有白细胞 [10]。两种配方的结果相似，患者的感受和副作用均无差异 [11]。在 PRP 中加入透明质酸（关节中存在的一种天然润滑物质），可能比单用 PRP 带来更好的疼痛缓解和活动能力 [12]。

对于肌腱问题，情况好坏参半。对于网球肘，证据相互矛盾。一项试验发现，PRP 在6个月和12个月时的效果优于类固醇注射，不过在最初几周内类固醇的效果更好 [13]。但一项汇总多项试验的分析发现，与安慰剂注射相比，PRP 并未改善疼痛或功能 [19]。血小板浓度越高，缓解程度越大 [5]。但对于跟腱问题，PRP 的效果并不比安慰剂注射更好 [3]。

证据中也存在空白。对于膝关节炎，一些关于 PRP 研究的综述在撰写方式上使结果看起来比实际更积极 [14]。对于前交叉韧带（ACL）重建，加用 PRP 尚未被证明能明显改善恢复 [15]。研究人员仍在探索哪种 PRP 配方适合关节炎的哪个阶段 [6]。

因此，PRP 对某些疾病有切实的依据支持，对另一些疾病的依据较弱，对少数疾病则没有依据支持。医生会与您讨论针对您的具体问题，证据处于什么水平。

风险有哪些？

PRP 使用的是您自己的血液，因此其风险与药物或手术不同。尽管如此，在做决定之前，仍有一些事情您应该了解。

最常见的影响是注射部位的短期反应。您可能会注意到进针处疼痛、肿胀或瘀青。这些通常会在几天内消退。对于膝关节炎，追踪副作用的研究发现，两种主要的 PRP 配方之间没有差异，治疗失败率也没有差异 [11]。膝关节 PRP 注射的试验报告了12个月内的临床获益，并发现该治疗是安全的 [16]。

有些风险取决于注射的部位和原因。对于网球肘，一项试验发现类固醇注射在最初几周内效果更好，而 PRP 在6个月和12个月时的效果更好 [13]，不过一项汇总多项试验的分析发现，PRP 的效果并不比安慰剂注射更好 [19]。这一点很重要，因为这意味着 PRP 注射后的早期阶段可能会感觉比其他选择恢复得慢。对于跟腱问题，PRP 的效果并不比安慰剂注射更好 [3]，因此在该部位注射意味着承担风险却没有任何已被证实的益处。对于前交叉韧带重建，证据还不足以表明加用 PRP 能改善恢复 [15]。

研究本身也存在坦白需要说明的局限。一些关于膝关节炎 PRP 治疗的综述在撰写方式上使结果看起来比实际更积极 [14]。对于愈合缓慢的骨折，在 PRP 成为常规治疗之前还需要更多研究 [17]。而对于脊柱的小关节（关节突关节）问题，长期结果尚不清楚 [8]。

医生会与您逐一讨论针对您的病情和注射部位的具体风险。如果您回家后发现注射部位疼痛加重、发红或发热，请联系诊所寻求建议。

这适合您吗？

PRP 往往更适合某些问题。对于膝关节骨关节炎，在12个月期间内进行的注射已被发现有帮助且安全 [16]。所用的配方可以根据关节炎的早晚阶段来选择，因为不同阶段对不同制剂的反应不同 [6]。参加竞技运动且大关节患有关节炎的人，是会被系统性地提供 PRP 的群体之一 [18]。

对于某些疾病，证据并不支持常规使用。这包括髋部外侧疼痛 [4]。对于网球肘，一项汇总多项试验的分析发现，PRP 的效果并不比安慰剂注射更好 [19]，尽管一项试验发现它在6个月和12个月时的效果优于类固醇注射 [13]。对于前交叉韧带重建，加用 PRP 尚未被证明能明显改善恢复 [15]。相比之下，对于慢性腱鞘炎（即肌腱周围的组织鞘发生肿胀），一项试验发现 PRP 的效果优于安慰剂注射 [20]。

PRP 与其他选择相比处于什么位置，取决于您的问题。对于膝关节炎，两种主要的 PRP 配方（含或不含白细胞）结果相似 [10] [11]。对于网球肘，一项试验发现类固醇在最初几周内效果更好，而 PRP 在6个月和12个月时的效果更好 [13]，但汇总多项试验的分析并未证实它比安慰剂更有益 [19]。

选择 PRP 是您与医生共同做出的决定。它应当符合您的病情、关节炎所处的阶段以及您的目标。上面的风险部分列出了可能出现的情况，包括注射部位的短期反应。请在做决定之前提出问题，并确保该方案对您来说是合理的。

核心要点

PRP 对某些问题值得考虑，对另一些问题则不然。对于膝关节骨关节炎，已发现在12个月期间内注射有帮助且安全 [16]。对于网球肘和跟腱问题，以及髋部外侧疼痛，证据并不支持常规使用 [19] [3] [4]。请相应地调整您的预期：缓解往往在数周到数月内逐渐出现，而不是几天内；对于膝关节炎，效果可持续至少24周 [1]。最重要的一点是，相关研究参差不齐，一些关于膝关节炎 PRP 治疗的综述在撰写方式上使结果看起来比实际更积极 [14]。请在做决定之前与医生充分讨论。

参考文献

[1] Efficacy of multiple autologous apheresis platelet-rich plasma injections for treating knee osteoarthritis and its influencing factors: a retrospective cohort study. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-025-05756-6

[2] Platelet-Rich Plasma in Acute Muscle Injuries: An Umbrella Review and Meta-analysis of Return to Sport and Reinjury Outcomes. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/23259671251399907

[3] Editor’s Spotlight/Take 5: Is Platelet-rich Plasma Effective in Treating Achilles Tendinopathy? A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1097/corr.0000000000003478

[4] Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2025. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.24.00763

[5] Platelet Concentration Factor Explains Variability in Outcomes of Platelet-rich Plasma for Lateral Epicondylitis: High Dose Critical for Positive Response. Journal of ISAKOS. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jisako.2025.100442

[6] The efficacy of platelet-rich plasma preparation protocols in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-025-06026-1

[7] Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Disease in 2025 and Beyond. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251395284

[8] Overview of Available Treatments and Their Limitations for Hypertrophic Facet Joints—A Systematic Review of the Literature. JAAOS: Global Research and Reviews. 2025. DOI: 10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-24-00140

[9] Letter Regarding “Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections are Inferior to Corticosteroid Injections for Short-Term Pain Relief: A Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial”. The Journal of Arthroplasty. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.05.007

[10] Leukocyte-rich versus leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2026. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-026-06689-4

[11] Leukocytes Do Not Influence the Safety and Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/03635465241283500

[12] RETRACTED ARTICLE: A meta-analysis and systematic review of the clinical efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma combined with hyaluronic acid (PRP + HA) versus PRP monotherapy for knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-05429-w

[13] A Randomized Controlled Trial of 1-Year Clinical Outcomes of a Single Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection Versus Corticosteroid for the Treatment of Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/23259671251386862

[14] Statistically Significant Results Favored in Abstracts of Platelet Rich Plasma Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Spin Analysis. Arthroscopy. 2026. DOI: 10.1002/arj.70027

[15] The impact of platelet-rich plasma augmentation on postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2026. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-026-06714-6

[16] Microfragmented Adipose Tissue as an Alternative to Platelet-Rich Plasma for Intra-articular Injection in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2025. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251337759

[17] PS9 Is platelet-rich plasma injection an effective choice in cases of delayed union or non-union?. Injury. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(13)70158-x

[18] Platelet-rich plasma treatment for large joint osteoarthritis: retrospective study highlighting a possible treatment protocol with long-lasting stimulation of the joint with an adequate dose of platelets. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-025-08663-3

[19] Platelet-Rich Plasma Does Not Improve Pain or Function in Patients With Lateral Epicondylitis as Compared With Placebo: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251383039

[20] Time-dependent growth factor kinetics, platelet concentration, and clinical response following platelet-rich plasma versus saline in chronic tenosynovitis: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-025-09339-8

Reviewed by Kieran Hirpara · 13 June 2026.

Want the clinical detail? Read the clinician version.

Talk to your treating clinician for advice specific to you.

For an appointment with the CQ Hand + Upper Limb team, ask your GP about a referral or visit www.cqupperlimb.com.

Evidence & references

This is the clinical evidence summary written for health professionals. It is technical, and it lists the research this page was built from. You do not need to read it to understand your treatment or to make a decision about it.

Overview

  • At least two PRP injections are recommended for treating knee osteoarthritis, with effects lasting for at least 24 weeks [1].
  • Rigorous basic, translational, and clinical research remains fundamental to realize the promise of PRP treatment for musculoskeletal disease [2].
  • Further studies are needed to evaluate PRP’s long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness for practical patient use in the future [3].
  • Conclusions regarding the clinical utility of PRP should be interpreted with caution due to major methodological concerns, including lack of PRP characterization and short-term follow-up [4].
  • Future studies should prioritize long-term outcomes to guide clinical decision-making more effectively [4].
  • Both leukocyte-rich PRP (L-PRP) and leukocyte-poor PRP (LP-PRP) are effective treatment options with comparable efficacy based on current evidence [5].
  • Extensive clinical studies are required on the subject of the routine use of PRP in fracture healing [6].
  • An innovative biological approach to the treatment of muscle injuries is the application of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF) in intramuscular infiltrations [7].
  • A direct, linear relationship was observed between the concentration factor of PRP used and the magnitude of patient-reported symptom relief after PRP injection for lateral epicondylitis [8].
  • High-dose PRP showed significant efficacy over alternative treatment strategies for lateral epicondylitis [8].
  • Interventions employing PRP, MSCs, and exosomes are considered in the context of degenerative osteoarthritis as a reversible chronic disease [9].
  • Findings from a randomized controlled trial refute claims of PRP equivalence to placebo and support its efficacy over placebo in chronic tenosynovitis [10].
  • The authors recommend systematically offering PRP therapy for competition sports practitioners with large joint osteoarthritis [11].
  • Current evidence supports the selective use of PRP in sports settings for acute muscle injuries, though standardization in protocols and outcomes is needed [12].
  • The authors argue that they fulfilled the reporting requirements for the injected PRP product as defined by MIBO [13].
  • Findings from a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials do not support PRP as a recommended treatment for lateral epicondylitis [14].
  • Corticosteroids resulted in greater short-term improvement than PRP for lateral elbow tendinopathy [15].
  • PRP demonstrated superior longer-term outcomes than corticosteroids at 6 and 12 months for lateral elbow tendinopathy [15].
  • PRP is no more effective than placebo for treating Achilles tendinopathy and should not be used for this indication until new, large, high-quality RCTs upend current knowledge [16].
  • The routine use of PRP for the treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome is not supported [17].
  • Studies evaluating the outcomes and procedures of the use of PRP in the setting of lateral epicondylitis have poor adherence to MIBO guidelines [18].
  • The economic value of LP-PRP is conditional rather than uniform and depends on revision probability and preparation cost [20].
  • The combination of PRP with non-crosslinked hyaluronic acid in mono-injection was found to be non-inferior to crosslinked hyaluronic acid regarding the percentage of responders over 6 months for knee osteoarthritis [24].
  • Current orthobiologics can be categorised into three tiers of recommendations based on the level of clinical evidence [28].

How It Works

Osteoarthritis

  • At least two PRP injections are recommended for knee osteoarthritis, with effects lasting for at least 24 weeks [1].
  • Both leukocyte-rich PRP and leukocyte-poor PRP are effective treatment options with comparable efficacy for knee osteoarthritis based on current evidence [5].
  • Leukocyte-rich PRP and leukocyte-poor PRP demonstrate comparable clinical outcomes at all follow-up time points for knee osteoarthritis, without differences in subjective and objective outcomes or adverse events [23].
  • The combination of PRP with non-crosslinked hyaluronic acid in a mono-injection is non-inferior to crosslinked hyaluronic acid regarding the percentage of responders over 6 months for knee osteoarthritis [24].
  • Intra-articular PRP injection is an effective treatment for improving overall function in patients with primary osteoarthritis, particularly in younger individuals [27].
  • Optimizing osteoarthritis treatment involves tailoring PRP protocols to disease stage, with low platelet, high leukocyte PRP recommended for early osteoarthritis due to anti-inflammatory effects [19].
  • High platelet, low leukocyte PRP is preferred for advanced osteoarthritis to promote tissue repair and regeneration [19].
  • The application of PRP following core decompression results in significant pain relief, improved short-term functional outcomes, and enhanced quality of life compared to core decompression alone in early osteonecrosis of the femoral head [22].
  • Further studies are needed to evaluate PRP’s long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness for practical patient use in hypertrophic facet joints [3].

Tendinopathy

  • Corticosteroids resulted in greater short-term improvement, while PRP demonstrated superior longer-term outcomes at 6 and 12 months for lateral elbow tendinopathy [15].
  • PRP injections are a safe and effective conservative treatment method for reducing pain symptoms and increasing functionality in patients with lateral epicondylitis [21].
  • PRP is not supported for routine use in the treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome [17].
  • Time-dependent growth factor kinetics and platelet concentration following PRP versus saline in chronic tenosynovitis refute claims of PRP equivalence to placebo and support its efficacy over placebo [10].

Muscle Injuries

  • PRP and hyperbaric oxygen therapy are hypothesized to enhance muscle regeneration after contusion injury, with a synergistic effect when combined [30].

Fracture Healing

  • Extensive clinical studies are required on the subject of the routine use of PRP in fracture healing for delayed union or non-union [6].

General Considerations

  • The authors' conclusions regarding the clinical utility of PRP should be interpreted with caution due to major methodological concerns, including lack of PRP characterization and short-term follow-up [4].
  • Future studies should prioritize long-term outcomes to guide clinical decision-making more effectively regarding PRP [4].
  • The authors recommend systematically offering PRP therapy for competition sports practitioners [11].

What the Evidence Shows

Knee Osteoarthritis

  • Leukocyte-rich PRP and leukocyte-poor PRP are effective treatment options with comparable efficacy based on current evidence [5].
  • Leukocyte-rich PRP and leukocyte-poor PRP demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes at all follow-up time points, without showing differences in subjective and objective outcomes or in adverse events and treatment failures [23].
  • Optimizing osteoarthritis treatment involves tailoring PRP protocols to disease stage, with low platelet, high leukocyte PRP recommended for early osteoarthritis due to its anti-inflammatory effects [19].
  • The combination of PRP with non-crosslinked hyaluronic acid in mono-injection was found to be non-inferior to crosslinked hyaluronic acid regarding the percentage of responders over 6 months for WOMAC pain [24].
  • Intra-articular injections of PRP and microfragmented adipose tissue both provided significant clinical benefits and were safe for treating knee osteoarthritis over a 12-month period [29].
  • Spin bias is highly prevalent in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of intra-articular PRP to treat knee osteoarthritis, with identified spin tending to favor the use of PRP [33].

Tendinopathy and Epicondylitis

  • Minimally invasive needle tenotomy and PRP resulted in significant improvements in pain with no significant differences in function for chronic elbow epicondylitis [34].
  • PRP can effectively improve pain and functional impairment in patients with tendinopathy, and its midterm efficacy is superior to that of corticosteroids [31].

Other Musculoskeletal Indications

  • The application of PRP following core decompression results in significant pain relief, improved short-term functional outcomes, and enhanced quality of life compared to core decompression alone for early osteonecrosis of the femoral head [22].
  • The application of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors in intramuscular infiltrations is an innovative biological approach to the treatment of muscle injuries [7].
  • Current evidence is of insufficient quality to determine if anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction augmented with PRP application provides a clinically meaningful improvement in postoperative outcomes over anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction without PRP [26].
  • The economic value of leukocyte-poor PRP is conditional rather than uniform and depends on revision probability and preparation cost [20].

Methodology and Research Gaps

  • Further studies will be needed to evaluate PRP’s long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness for practical patient use in the future [3].
  • Interventions employing PRP, mesenchymal stem cells, and exosomes are considered in the context of degenerative osteoarthritis as a reversible chronic disease [9].

Practical Considerations

Dosing and Protocol Optimization

  • A direct, linear relationship exists between the concentration factor of PRP used and the magnitude of patient-reported symptom relief after PRP injection for lateral epicondylitis [8].
  • High-dose PRP shows significant efficacy over alternative treatment strategies for lateral epicondylitis [8].
  • Low platelet, high leukocyte PRP is recommended for early osteoarthritis due to its anti-inflammatory effects [19].
  • Optimizing osteoarthritis treatment involves tailoring PRP protocols to disease stage [19].

Leukocyte Content and Preparation

  • Leukocyte-rich PRP and leukocyte-poor PRP demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes at all follow-up time points for knee osteoarthritis, without showing differences in subjective and objective outcomes or in adverse events and treatment failures [23].

Indication-Specific Efficacy

  • Intra-articular injections of PRP provided significant clinical benefits and were safe for treating knee osteoarthritis over a 12-month period [29].

Research Gaps and Methodological Considerations

  • Further studies will be needed to evaluate PRP’s long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness for practical patient use in the future for hypertrophic facet joints [3].

Key Evidence

  • [L3] At least two PRP injections are recommended, with effects lasting for at least 24 weeks. [1] (10.1186/s13018-025-05756-6)
  • [Paper] Rigorous basic, translational, and clinical research remains fundamental to realize the promise of PRP treatment for musculoskeletal disease. [2] (10.1177/03635465251395284)
  • [L4] Further studies will be needed to evaluate PRP’s long-term efficacy and cost-effectiveness for practical patient use in the future. [3] (10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-24-00140)
  • [L5] The authors' conclusions regarding the clinical utility of PRP should be interpreted with caution due to major methodological concerns, including lack of PRP characterization and short-term follow-up; future studies should prioritize long-term outcomes to guide clinical decision-making more effectively. [4] (10.1016/j.arth.2025.05.007)
  • [L1] Both L-PRP and LP-PRP are effective treatment options with comparable efficacy based on current evidence. [5] (10.1186/s13018-026-06689-4)
  • [L4] Extensive clinical studies are required on the subject of the routine use of PRP in fracture healing. [6] (10.1016/s0020-1383(13)70158-x)
  • [L5] An innovative biological approach to the treatment of muscle injuries is the application of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors (PRGF) in intramuscular infiltrations. [7] (10.1016/s0020-1383(14)70004-x)
  • [L1] A direct, linear relationship was observed between the concentration factor of PRP used and the magnitude of patient-reported symptom relief after PRP injection, with high-dose PRP showing significant efficacy over alternative treatment strategies. [8] (10.1016/j.jisako.2025.100442)
  • [L5] Interventions employing PRP, MSCs and exosomes are considered in this article. [9] (10.1016/j.reth.2020.07.007)
  • [L1] These findings refute claims of PRP equivalence to placebo and support its efficacy over placebo. [10] (10.1186/s12891-025-09339-8)
  • [L4] The authors recommend systematically offering PRP therapy for competition sports practitioners. [11] (10.1186/s12891-025-08663-3)
  • [L2] Current evidence supports the selective use of PRP in sports settings, though standardization in protocols and outcomes is needed. [12] (10.1177/23259671251399907)
  • [Paper] The authors argue that they fulfilled the reporting requirements for the injected PRP product as defined by MIBO. [13] (10.1177/03635465231203202)
  • [L1] These findings do not support PRP as a recommended treatment for this condition. [14] (10.1177/03635465251383039)
  • [L1] Corticosteroids resulted in greater short-term improvement, while PRP demonstrated superior longer-term outcomes at 6 and 12 months. [15] (10.1177/23259671251386862)
  • [L1] PRP is no more effective than placebo for treating Achilles tendinopathy and should not be used for this indication until new, large, high-quality RCTs upend current knowledge. [16] (10.1097/corr.0000000000003478)
  • [L1] As a result, we do not support the routine use of PRP for the treatment of this condition. [17] (10.2106/jbjs.24.00763)
  • [L2] This review demonstrated that studies evaluating the outcomes and procedures of the use of PRP in the setting of LE have poor adherence to MIBO guidelines. [18] (10.5397/cise.2024.01060)
  • [L1] Optimizing OA treatment involves tailoring PRP protocols to disease stage, with low platelet, high leukocyte PRP recommended for early OA due to its anti-inflammatory effects and high platelet, low leukocyte PRP preferred for advanced OA to promote tissue repair and regeneration. [19] (10.1186/s13018-025-06026-1)
  • [L1] The economic value of LP-PRP is conditional rather than uniform and depends on revision probability and preparation cost. [20] (10.1016/j.jse.2026.02.018)
  • [L4] PRP injections are a safe and effective conservative treatment method for reducing pain symptoms and increasing functionality in patients with lateral epicondylitis. [21] (10.1177/2325967125s00169)
  • [L3] The application of PRP following CD results in significant pain relief, improved short-term functional outcomes, and enhanced quality of life compared to CD alone. [22] (10.1186/s12891-024-08243-x)
  • [L1] Both LR-PRP and LP-PRP demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes at all follow-up time points, without showing differences in subjective and objective outcomes or in adverse events and treatment failures. [23] (10.1177/03635465241283500)
  • [L1] The combination of PRP with non-crosslinked HA in mono-injection was found to be non-inferior to crosslinked HA, with regards to the percentage of responders over 6 months (WOMAC pain). [24] (10.1186/s12891-026-09625-z)
  • [L1] Current evidence is of insufficient quality to determine if ACLR augmented with PRP application provides a clinically meaningful improvement in postoperative outcomes over ACLR without PRP. [26] (10.1186/s13018-026-06714-6)
  • [L1] Intra-articular PRP injection is an effective treatment for improving overall function in patients with primary OA, particularly in younger individuals. [27] (10.1186/s12891-026-09486-6)
  • [Paper] Current orthobiologics can be categorised into three tiers of recommendations based on the level of clinical evidence. [28] (10.1136/bjsports-2022-106494)
  • [L2] Intra-articular injections of PRP and MFAT both provided significant clinical benefits and were safe for treating knee OA over a 12-month period. [29] (10.1177/03635465251337759)
  • [Paper] The study hypothesized that PRP and HBO therapy will enhance muscle regeneration after contusion injury, with a synergistic effect when combined. [30] (10.1016/j.jseint.2025.101453)
  • [L1] PRP can effectively improve pain and functional impairment in patients with tendinopathy, and its midterm efficacy is superior to that of corticosteroids. [31] (10.1186/s12891-025-08566-3)
  • [L1] Spin bias is highly prevalent in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of intra-articular PRP to treat knee osteoarthritis, with identified spin tending to favor the use of PRP. [33] (10.1002/arj.70027)
  • [L3] Both MINT and PRP resulted in significant improvements in pain (VAS) with no significant differences in function (qDASH). [34] (10.1016/j.jseint.2024.08.183)

References

[1] Efficacy of multiple autologous apheresis platelet-rich plasma injections for treating knee osteoarthritis and its influencing factors: a retrospective cohort study. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-025-05756-6

[2] Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Musculoskeletal Disease in 2025 and Beyond. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251395284

[3] Overview of Available Treatments and Their Limitations for Hypertrophic Facet Joints—A Systematic Review of the Literature. JAAOS: Global Research and Reviews. 2025. DOI: 10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-24-00140

[4] Letter Regarding “Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections are Inferior to Corticosteroid Injections for Short-Term Pain Relief: A Prospective, Double-Blinded, Randomized Controlled Trial”. The Journal of Arthroplasty. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2025.05.007

[5] Leukocyte-rich versus leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma and hyaluronic acid for knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2026. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-026-06689-4

[6] PS9 Is platelet-rich plasma injection an effective choice in cases of delayed union or non-union?. Injury. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(13)70158-x

[7] Muscle repair: platelet-rich plasma derivates as a bridge from spontaneity to intervention. Injury. 2014. DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(14)70004-x

[8] Platelet Concentration Factor Explains Variability in Outcomes of Platelet-rich Plasma for Lateral Epicondylitis: High Dose Critical for Positive Response. Journal of ISAKOS. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jisako.2025.100442

[9] Degenerative osteoarthritis a reversible chronic disease. Regenerative Therapy. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.reth.2020.07.007

[10] Time-dependent growth factor kinetics, platelet concentration, and clinical response following platelet-rich plasma versus saline in chronic tenosynovitis: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-025-09339-8

[11] Platelet-rich plasma treatment for large joint osteoarthritis: retrospective study highlighting a possible treatment protocol with long-lasting stimulation of the joint with an adequate dose of platelets. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-025-08663-3

[12] Platelet-Rich Plasma in Acute Muscle Injuries: An Umbrella Review and Meta-analysis of Return to Sport and Reinjury Outcomes. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/23259671251399907

[13] Improving Injectable Orthobiologics Reporting Guidelines Adherence: Response. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2023. DOI: 10.1177/03635465231203202

[14] Platelet-Rich Plasma Does Not Improve Pain or Function in Patients With Lateral Epicondylitis as Compared With Placebo: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251383039

[15] A Randomized Controlled Trial of 1-Year Clinical Outcomes of a Single Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection Versus Corticosteroid for the Treatment of Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/23259671251386862

[16] Editor’s Spotlight/Take 5: Is Platelet-rich Plasma Effective in Treating Achilles Tendinopathy? A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1097/corr.0000000000003478

[17] Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Placebo for the Treatment of Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2025. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.24.00763

[18] Adherence rates to the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopedics guidelines for clinical studies on platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review. Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow. 2026. DOI: 10.5397/cise.2024.01060

[19] The efficacy of platelet-rich plasma preparation protocols in the treatment of osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-025-06026-1

[20] Leukocyte-poor platelet-rich plasma reduces retear risk after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a meta-analysis with mechanistic and economic evaluation. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2026.02.018

[21] Poster 58: Decreased Pain After Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection in Lateral Epicondylitis Patients in the Early Follow-up Period. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2025. DOI: 10.1177/2325967125s00169

[22] Efficacy of small-diameter core decompression with platelet-rich plasma in early osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a retrospective study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-08243-x

[23] Leukocytes Do Not Influence the Safety and Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/03635465241283500

[24] Efficacy and safety of a combination of platelet-rich plasma with non-crosslinked hyaluronic acid versus a crosslinked hyaluronic acid, in single-injection for knee osteoarthritis. Randomized, controlled, multicenter, non-inferiority trial. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2026. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-026-09625-z

[26] The impact of platelet-rich plasma augmentation on postoperative clinical outcomes in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2026. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-026-06714-6

[27] Investigating the therapeutic impact of platelet-rich plasma on knee, hip, and traumatic osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2026. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-026-09486-6

[28] Tiered approach to considering orthobiologics for patients with musculoskeletal conditions. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2023. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2022-106494

[29] Microfragmented Adipose Tissue as an Alternative to Platelet-Rich Plasma for Intra-articular Injection in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2025. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251337759

[30] Synergistic Effects of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy on Muscle Contusion Recovery in Mice. JSES International. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2025.101453

[31] Platelet-rich plasma and corticosteroid injection for tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2025. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-025-08566-3

[33] Statistically Significant Results Favored in Abstracts of Platelet Rich Plasma Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Spin Analysis. Arthroscopy. 2026. DOI: 10.1002/arj.70027

[34] Minimally invasive needle tenotomy vs. platelet rich plasma injection in the treatment of chronic elbow epicondylitis. JSES International. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.08.183

专业协会这些代表什么？→