Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 432

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Belk, John W., Kraeutler, Matthew J., Houck, Darby A., Goodrich, Jesse A., Dragoo, Jason L., McCarty, Eric C.·2021·The American Journal of Sports Medicine

Abstract

Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid (HA) are 2 nonoperative treatment options for knee osteoarthritis (OA) that are supposed to provide symptomatic relief and help delay surgical intervention. Purpose: To systematically review the literature to compare the efficacy and safety of PRP and HA injections for the treatment of knee OA. Study Design: Meta-analysis of level 1 studies. Methods: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify level 1 studies that compared the clinical efficacy of PRP and HA injections for knee OA. The search phrase used was platelet-rich plasma hyaluronic acid knee osteoarthritis randomized. Patients were assessed via the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scale. A subanalysis was also performed to isolate results from patients who received leukocyte-poor and leukocyte-rich PRP. Results: A total of 18 studies (all level 1) met inclusion criteria, including 811 patients undergoing intra-articular injection with PRP (mean age, 57.6 years) and 797 patients with HA (mean age, 59.3 years). The mean follow-up was 11.1 months for both groups. Mean improvement was significantly higher in the PRP group (44.7%) than the HA group (12.6%) for WOMAC total scores ( P < .01). Of 11 studies based on the VAS, 6 reported PRP patients to have significantly less pain at latest follow-up when compared with HA patients ( P < .05). Of 6 studies based on the Subjective IKDC outcome score, 3 reported PRP patients to have significantly better scores at latest follow-up when compared with HA patients ( P < .05). Finally, leukocyte-poor PRP was associated with significantly better Subjective IKDC scores versus leukocyte-rich PRP ( P < .05). Conclusion: Patients undergoing treatment for knee OA with PRP can be expected to experience improved clinical outcomes when compared with HA. Additionally, leukocyte-poor PRP may be a superior line of treatment for knee OA over leukocyte-rich PRP, although further studies are needed that directly compare leukocyte content in PRP injections for treatment of knee OA.

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 · 10.1177/0363546520909397

Cites

42 of 42 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 42 references

Cited by

See all 432

Metadata

Authors
Belk, J. W., Kraeutler, M. J., Houck, D. A., Goodrich, J. A., Dragoo, J. L., & McCarty, E. C.
Venue
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
Published
2020-04-17
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
249-260
ISSN
  • 0363-5465 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3365
OpenAlex
W3016844721
Cited by
432
References
42
FWCI
19.04
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: Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0363546520909397
The paper
Belk, J. W., Kraeutler, M. J., Houck, D. A., Goodrich, J. A., Dragoo, J. L., & McCarty, E. C. (2021). Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Hyaluronic Acid for Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546520909397

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.