Platelet-rich plasma injections in the management of severe dry eye
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dear Editor, we would like to share ideas on ‘Assessment of the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma injections in the management of severe dry eye’[1]. Elessawy et al. concluded that ‘The use of PRP injections is safe and effective, …… but it is not effective in improving Meibomian gland function[1]’. The results from this report repeatedly confirm another similar report by Avila et al.[2]. We agree that platelet-rich plasma injections might be useful. However, it is considered a more harm procedure comparing to standard management. As a plasma product, it might consider safe but we should still recognize for risk for unknown pathogen contamination[3]. Finally, an allergic reaction might occur[4]. A small study with few subjects might not detect an adverse event. Hence, there should be a good preparation for any possible problem when there are usages in a large number of patients. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest. 1. Elessawy KB, Araissi AB, Nasr HE, Abdelbaky SH. Assessment of the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma injections in the management of severe dry eye J Egypt Ophthalmol Soc. 2021;114:63–68 2. Avila MY, Igua AM, Mora AM. Randomised, prospective clinical trial of platelet-rich plasma injection in the management of severe dry eye Br J Ophthalmol. 2018 doi: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2018-312072. 3. Greco C, Mastronardi C, Pagotto F, Mack D, Ramirez-Arcos S. Assessment of biofilm-forming ability of coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated from contaminated platelet preparations in Canada Transfusion. 2008;48:969–977 4. Latalski M, Walczyk A, Fatyga M, Rutz E, Szponder T, Bielecki T, Danielewicz A. Allergic reaction to platelet-rich plasma (PRP): case report Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98:e14702 Reply to the Editor Regarding your concern (However, it is considered a more harm procedure comparing to standard management. As a plasma product, it might consider safe but we should still recognize for risk for unknown pathogen contamination). Generally, the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is considered safer and more practical than other cell-based therapies, as they are autologous. Because it is an autologous preparation, PRP is inherently safe and therefore free from risk of transmittable diseases such as HIV, hepatitis, West Nile fever, and Cruetzfeldt-Jacob disease (CJD).[1] The procedure of PRP extraction and injection were done under compete aseptic condition. PRP was injected immediately after preparation with no storage. PRP is similar in composition to the blood clot that is formed in every wound, and therefore could not support bacterial growth any more than any other blood clot.[1] PRP has a pH of 6.5 to 6.7 compared with a mature blood clot of 7.0 to 7.2. It has thus been suggested that PRP actually inhibits bacterial growth.[1] We suggest use of PRP injection in severe not mild case, which is not improving. Also, punctal plug is considered also an intervention We surely emphasize the importance of compete sterilization during preparation and injection with immediate injection of PRP after preparation without storage to avoid this minimal possibility. And regarding the other concern (Finally, an allergic reaction might occur). It was only one case report after intra-articular injection of PRP that completely resolved within 4 days. This is attributed to calcium citrate used in preparation. It should be put into consideration; however, there are many studies on large scale support the safety of PRP injection in different parts of body whether intra-articular or in the face with no adverse side effects[2,3,4]. 1. Fukawa T, Yamaguchi S, Akatsu Y, Yamamoto Y, Akagi R, Sasho T. Safety and Efficacy F of S Intra-articular S Injection S of S Platelet-Rich S Plasma S in S Patients S With S Ankle S Osteoarthritis Foot Ankle Int. 2017;38(6):596–604 DOI doi: 10.1177/1071100717700377. Epub 2017 Apr 11. PMID:28399635 2. Kydd A.S.R., Hart D.A.. Efficacy and Safety of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for Osteoarthritis Curr Treat Options in Rheum. 2020;6:87–98 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40674-020-00142-1 3. Maisel-Campbell AL, Ismail A, Reynolds KA, Poon E, Serrano L, Grushchak S, Farid C, West DP, Alam M. A systematic review of the safety and effectiveness F of S platelet-rich S plasma F (PRP) S for S skin S aging Arch Dermatol Res. 2020;312(5):301–315 DOI doi: 10.1007/s00403-019- 01999-6. Epub 2019 Oct 18. PMID:31628542 4. Jaehoon Choi, Kyung Won Minn, Hak Chang. The Efficacy and Safety of Platelet-Rich Plasma and Adipose-Derived Stem Cells: An Update Arch Plast Surg. 2012;39(6):585–592 Published online 2012 Nov 14. doi: 10.5999/aps.2012.39.6.585 PMCID: PMC3518000
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».