Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 270

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Platelet‐rich plasma: why intra‐articular? A systematic review of preclinical studies and clinical evidence on PRP for joint degeneration

Open access
Filardo, G., Kon, E., Roffi, A., Di Matteo, B., Merli, M. L., Marcacci, M.·2015·Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this review was to analyze the available evidence on the clinical application of this biological approach for the injective treatment of cartilage lesions and joint degeneration, together with preclinical studies to support the rationale for the use of platelet concentrates, to shed some light and give indications on what to treat and what to expect from intra‐articular injections of platelet‐rich plasma (PRP). Methods: All in vitro, in vivo preclinical and clinical studies on PRP injective treatment in the English language concerning the effect of PRP on cartilage, synovial tissue, menisci, and mesenchymal stem cells were considered. A systematic review on the PubMed database was performed using the following words: (platelet‐rich plasma or PRP or platelet concentrate or platelet lysate or platelet supernatant) and (cartilage or chondrocytes or synoviocytes or menisci or mesenchymal stem cells). Results: Fifty‐nine articles met the inclusion criteria: 26 were in vitro, 9 were in vivo, 2 were both in vivo and in vitro, and 22 were clinical studies. The analysis showed an increasing number of published studies over time. Preclinical evidence supports the use of PRP injections that might promote a favourable environment for joint tissues healing. Only a few high‐quality clinical trials have been published, which showed a clinical improvement limited over time and mainly documented in younger patients not affected by advanced knee degeneration. Conclusions: Besides the limits and sometimes controversial findings, the preclinical literature shows an overall support toward this PRP application. An intra‐articular injection does not just target cartilage; instead, PRP might influence the entire joint environment, leading to a short‐term clinical improvement. Many biological variables might influence the clinical outcome and have to be studied to optimize PRP injective treatment of cartilage degeneration and osteoarthritis. Level of evidence: IV.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00167-013-2743-1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 270

Metadata

Authors
Filardo, G., Kon, E., Roffi, A., Di Matteo, B., Merli, M. L., & Marcacci, M.
Venue
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-11-26
Volume
23
Issue
9
Pages
2459-2474
ISSN
  • 0942-2056 (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-7347
OpenAlex
W2073305164
Cited by
270
References
1
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Platelet‐rich plasma: why intra‐articular? A systematic review of preclinical studies and clinical evidence on PRP for joint degeneration. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00167-013-2743-1
The paper
Filardo, G., Kon, E., Roffi, A., Di Matteo, B., Merli, M. L., & Marcacci, M. (2015). Platelet‐rich plasma: why intra‐articular? A systematic review of preclinical studies and clinical evidence on PRP for joint degeneration. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2743-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.