Anandaban Hospital, The Leprosy Mission Nepal, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2024 May 2;18(5):e0012088. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0012088. eCollection 2024 May.
Autologous blood products like Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) and Leukocyte and Platelets Rich Fibrin (L-PRF) have been used for many years across many types of skin ulcers. However, the effectiveness of autologous blood products on wound healing is not well established.
We evaluated the 'second generation' autologous product- Leukocyte and Platelet- Rich Fibrin (L-PRF). Our trial was undertaken on patients suffering from neuropathic leprosy ulcers at the Anandaban hospital which serves the entire country of Nepal. We conducted a 1:1 (n = 130) individually randomised trial of L-PRF (intervention) vs. normal saline dressing (control) to compare rate of healing and time to complete healing. Rate of healing was estimated using blind assessments of ulcer areas based on three different measurement methods. Time to complete healing was measured by the local unblinded clinicians and by blind assessment of ulcer images.
The point estimates for both outcomes were favourable to L-PRF but the effect sizes were small. Unadjusted mean differences (intervention vs control) in mean daily healing rates (cm2) were respectively 0.012 (95% confidence interval 0.001 to 0.023, p = 0.027); 0.016 (0.004 to 0.027, p = 0.008) and 0.005 (-0.005 to 0.016, p = 0.313) across the three measurement methods. Time to complete healing at 42 days yielded Hazard Ratios (unadjusted) of 1.3 (0.8 to 2.1, p = 0.300) assessed by unblinded local clinicians and 1.2 (0.7 to 2.0, p = 0.462) on blind assessment.
Any benefit from L-PRF appears insufficient to justify routine use in care of neuropathic ulcers in leprosy.
ISRCTN14933421. Date of trial registration: 16 June 2020.
富含血小板的血浆(PRP)和白细胞及血小板富纤维蛋白(L-PRF)等自体血液制品已在多种皮肤溃疡中使用多年。然而,自体血液制品在伤口愈合方面的效果尚未得到充分证实。
我们评估了“第二代”自体产品——白细胞及血小板富纤维蛋白(L-PRF)。我们的试验在阿南丹班医院(为整个尼泊尔提供服务)接受神经麻风溃疡治疗的患者中进行。我们进行了一项 1:1(n=130)的个体随机试验,比较 L-PRF(干预组)与生理盐水敷料(对照组)治疗的愈合率和完全愈合时间。通过三种不同的测量方法,对溃疡面积进行盲法评估来估计愈合率。完全愈合时间由当地非盲法临床医生和溃疡图像的盲法评估来测量。
两种结局的点估计值均有利于 L-PRF,但效应量较小。未调整的平均差异(干预组与对照组)中,平均每日愈合率(cm2)分别为 0.012(95%置信区间 0.001 至 0.023,p=0.027);0.016(0.004 至 0.027,p=0.008)和 0.005(-0.005 至 0.016,p=0.313),这三个测量方法的差异分别为 0.012(95%置信区间 0.001 至 0.023,p=0.027);0.016(0.004 至 0.027,p=0.008)和 0.005(-0.005 至 0.016,p=0.313)。42 天时完全愈合的时间得出无调整的风险比(unadjusted)分别为 1.3(0.8 至 2.1,p=0.300),由未盲本地临床医生评估和 1.2(0.7 至 2.0,p=0.462),由盲法评估。
L-PRF 的任何益处似乎都不足以证明其在麻风性神经溃疡护理中的常规使用是合理的。
ISRCTN8001161. 试验注册日期:2020 年 6 月 16 日。