Literature DB >> 33155867

Technical and biological review of authorized medical devices for platelets-rich plasma preparation in the field of regenerative medicine.

Jeremy Magalon1,2,3, Thibault Brandin1, Pauline Francois1,2, Clara Degioanni1, Lucille De Maria1, Fanny Grimaud1, Julie Veran1, Francoise Dignat-George2, Florence Sabatier1,2,3.   

Abstract

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has seen increased interest and utilization over the past decade, particularly in the field of musculoskeletal disease. This growth has been accompanied by the development of medical devices to realize PRP preparation which includes blood collection, centrifugation, and PRP isolation. The final PRP composition is directly influenced by this preparation step and absence of biological quality control led to a lack of comparability between PRP products that could explain the large variability in the clinical benefit of PRP reported in literature. To circumvent this issue, the scientific community developed different PRP classifications but none of them have been adopted. The goal of this review is to furnish both technical and biological characteristics from PRP commercial systems. On review of 1379 studies, 105 studies were selected according to inclusion criteria for technical analysis and led to the identification of 50 commercial systems that have been classified in three technical categories based on the blood harvesting technique (tubes, syringes or bags). Twelve studies were selected and sufficiently describe biological characteristics from only 14 commercial systems from the 50 identified in the technical analysis. Inclusion of duplicates characterization from a same PRP system lead to the final analysis of 36 PRP preparations that met the inclusion criteria of the biological analysis. All these PRP preparations have been classified among the seven existing classifications. Comparison from all biological parameters and classifications revealed a large heterogeneity among the available current PRP commercial systems. Index of biological sensitivity of classifications to distinguish PRP preparations were also variable. Although these findings should help clinicians in selecting a system that meets their specific needs, this also raises the question to standardize the parameters to biologically define PRP preparation among users and to systematically performed PRP qualification when used.

Entities:  

Keywords:  classification; platelet-rich-plasma (PRP); platelets; quality control; regenerative medecine

Year:  2020        PMID: 33155867     DOI: 10.1080/09537104.2020.1832653

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Platelets        ISSN: 0953-7104            Impact factor:   3.862


  3 in total

1.  Clinical Response After Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis With a Standardized, Closed-System, Low-Cost Platelet-Rich Plasma Product: 1-Year Outcomes.

Authors:  Judit Fernández-Fuertes; Tamara Arias-Fernández; Andrea Acebes-Huerta; Marlene Álvarez-Rico; Laura Gutiérrez
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2022-03-31

2.  The Emperor Has No Platelets: Minimal Effects in an Alopecia Split-Scalp Study Unsurprising as Platelet-Rich Plasma Was Actually Platelet-Poor.

Authors:  Patrick K Yam
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 4.283

3.  Would you have an injection without knowing its formula? New challenges in platelet-rich plasma therapy.

Authors:  Theodorakys Marín Fermín; Marius M Scarlat; Markus Wilhelm Laupheimer
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-10       Impact factor: 3.479

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.