Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection for the Treatment of Hamstring Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis With Best-Worst Case Analysis.

BACKGROUND

Hamstring injuries are common and account for considerable time lost to play in athletes. Platelet-rich plasma has potential as a means to accelerate healing of these injuries.

PURPOSE

(1) To present the evidence of platelet-rich plasma injection in the treatment of hamstring injuries, (2) evaluate the "best-case scenario" in dichotomous outcomes, and (3) evaluate the "worst-case scenario" in dichotomous outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Two authors systematically reviewed the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, with any discrepancies resolved by mutual consensus. The level of evidence was assessed per the criteria of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine and the quality of evidence by the Coleman Methodology Score. Meta-analysis by fixed effects models was used if heterogeneity was low ( < 25%) and random effects models if heterogeneity was moderate to high (≥ 25%). values <.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were included with 207 hamstring injuries in the platelet-rich plasma group and 149 in the control group. Random-effects model for mean time to return to play that compared platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy to physical therapy alone non-significantly favored platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy (mean difference, -5.67 days). The fixed effects model for reinjury rates, which also compared platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy with physical therapy alone nonsignificantly favored platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy (risk ratio, 0.88). The best-case scenario fixed effects model for reinjury rates nonsignificantly favored platelet-rich plasma + physical therapy (risk ratio, 0.82). The worst-case scenario fixed effects model for reinjury rates nonsignificantly favored physical therapy alone (risk ratio, 1.13). The mean ± SD complication rate for either postinjection discomfort, pain, or sciatic nerve irritation was 5.2% ± 2.9% (range, 2.7% to 9.1%).

CONCLUSION

There has been statistically nonsignificant evidence to suggest that PRP injection ± PT reduced mean time to RTP or reinjury rates compared to no treatment or PT alone for hamstring injuries in a short-term follow-up. The complication profiles were favorable. Further studies of high quality and large cohorts are needed to better support or disprove the consensus of the systematic review and meta-analysis.