Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 444

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Dai, Wen-Li, Zhou, Ai-Guo, Zhang, Hua, Zhang, Jian·2017·Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

Abstract

PURPOSE: To use meta-analysis techniques to evaluate the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for the treatment knee of osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane database through April 2016 to identify Level I randomized controlled trials that evaluated the clinical efficacy of PRP versus control treatments for knee OA. The primary outcomes were Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and function scores. The primary outcomes were compared with their minimum clinically important differences (MCID)-defined as the smallest difference perceived as important by the average patient. RESULTS: We included 10 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1069 patients. Our analysis showed that at 6 months postinjection, PRP and hyaluronic acid (HA) had similar effects with respect to pain relief (WOMAC pain score) and functional improvement (WOMAC function score, WOMAC total score, International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lequesne score). At 12 months postinjection, however, PRP was associated with significantly better pain relief (WOMAC pain score, mean difference -2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.26 to -1.39, P = .0001) and functional improvement (WOMAC function score, mean difference -12.53, 95% CI -14.58 to -10.47, P < .00001; WOMAC total score, International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lequesne score, standardized mean difference 1.05, 95% CI 0.21-1.89, P = .01) than HA, and the effect sizes of WOMAC pain and function scores at 12 months exceeded the MCID (-0.79 for WOMAC pain and -2.85 for WOMAC function score). Compared with saline, PRP was more effective for pain relief (WOMAC pain score) and functional improvement (WOMAC function score) at 6 months and 12 months postinjection, and the effect sizes of WOMAC pain and function scores at 6 months and 12 months exceeded the MCID. We also found that PRP did not increase the risk of adverse events compared with HA and saline. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence indicates that, compared with HA and saline, intra-articular PRP injection may have more benefit in pain relief and functional improvement in patients with symptomatic knee OA at 1 year postinjection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, meta-analysis of Level I studies.

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 · 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.024

Cites

4 of 4 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

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 444

Metadata

Authors
Dai, W.-L., Zhou, A.-G., Zhang, H., & Zhang, J.
Venue
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-03
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
659-670.e1
ISSN
0749-8063 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2563112167
Cited by
444
References
4
FWCI
50.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.024
The paper
Dai, W.-L., Zhou, A.-G., Zhang, H., & Zhang, J. (2017). Efficacy of Platelet-Rich Plasma in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.024

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.