MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990067630 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2014.05.021

Efficacy and Safety of Plasma Rich in Growth Factors Intra‐Articular Infiltrations in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis

2014· review· en· W1990067630 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eduardo Anitua, Mikel Sánchez, José Javier Aguirre, Roberto Prado, Sabino Padilla, Gorka Orive

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeriodontal Regeneration and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoarthritisPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialRheumatologyClinical trialInternal medicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) as a treatment for reducing symptoms in patients with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: A comprehensive and systematic literature search was conducted for PRGF treatment of knee osteoarthritis following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All the studies had to include a PRGF group and a control group. Pre- and post-treatment measures of joint pain, reduced function, and stiffness were evaluated using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, International Knee Documentation Committee score, Lequesne index, or number of Outcome Measures for Rheumatology Committee and Osteoarthritis Research Society International Standing Committee for Clinical Trials Response Criteria Initiative (OMERACT-OARSI) responders, with a follow-up period of at least 4 weeks. An assessment of both the quality and risk of bias of the studies was conducted. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 91 citations, but only 5 were eligible publications that met the inclusion criteria (2 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective studies, and 1 retrospective analysis). Two studies were rated as having a low risk of bias whereas 3 had a high risk. In both randomized controlled trials, it was observed that after 6 months of treatment, the number of patients with a pain reduction of more than 50% was significantly higher in the PRGF group. In 2 other studies, the patients treated with PRGF showed a significant pain reduction compared with the control group. The remaining variables (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scale for pain, function, and stiffness; Lequesne index; Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score scale; and number of OMERACT-OARSI responders) showed a statistically significant superiority of the group treated with PRGF. CONCLUSIONS: The current clinical evidence suggests that PRGF intra-articular infiltrations in patients with knee osteoarthritis reduce pain and therefore are clinically efficacious in osteoarthritis treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review of Level I, II, and III studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.007
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations66
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicPeriodontal Regeneration and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207