Comparative efficacy of platelet-rich plasma applied in myringoplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Tympanic membrane (TM) perforation is quite common in the clinical setting. Chronic TM perforations require surgical treatments such as myringoplasty. Currently, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a novel, effective substance that is increasingly utilized for TM perforation repair. This study aims to eva...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:PloS one 2021-01, Vol.16 (1), p.e0245968-e0245968
Main Authors: Huang, Juntao, Shi, Yunbin, Wu, Linrong, Lv, Cuiting, Hu, Yi, Shen, Yi
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Bias
Biology and Life Sciences
Care and treatment
Comparative analysis
Complications
Computer programs
Drafting software
Editing
Effectiveness
Evaluation
Head and neck
Health care facilities
Hospitals
Injuries
Medical ethics
Medicine
Medicine and Health Sciences
Meta-analysis
Middle ear
Otolaryngology
Otology
Patient outcomes
Plasma
Platelet-rich plasma therapy
Research and Analysis Methods
Sensitivity analysis
Software
Subgroups
Surgery
Tympanic membrane
Visualization
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Tympanic membrane (TM) perforation is quite common in the clinical setting. Chronic TM perforations require surgical treatments such as myringoplasty. Currently, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a novel, effective substance that is increasingly utilized for TM perforation repair. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of PRP in the application of TM perforation repair. A systematic search was conducted to screen the Medline, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus and Web of Science databases up to July 2020. Studies were identified in accordance with the selection criteria by two coauthors independently. Data regarding the healing and hearing outcomes were pooled and analyzed via Review Manager version 5.3 and STATA version 12.0 software. Odds ratio (OR) was utilized to compare the closure rate. Furthermore, the results of hearing improvements and incidence of complications were also compared to evaluate the effectiveness of PRP. A total of eight studies with 455 participants were eligible according to the selection criteria. Compared to conventional surgery, the OR of closure was 2.70 (95% CI: 1.27 to 5.76, P = 0.01, I2 = 0%) in randomized controlled trial (RCT) subgroup and 6.18 (95% CI: 2.22 to 17.25, P = 0.0005, I2 = 0) in non-RCT subgroup. The overall OR of closure was 3.69 (95% CI: 2.02 to 6.74, P
ISSN:1932-6203
1932-6203
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0245968