A systematic review and meta‐analysis of the efficacy of platelet‐rich plasma products for treatment of equine joint disease

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundEquine joint disease including septic arthritis (SA) and osteoarthritis (OA) is a critical cause of equine lameness. Platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) is one of the most popular regenerative therapies to treat equine OA, even SA, but the evidence in support of the treatment is conflicting.ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to systematically review the current evidence on PRP products used for SA and OA, as well as the efficacy of PRP products as treatment for OA on the basis of a meta‐analysis of the available literature.Study designSystematic review and meta‐analysis.MethodsA systematic search of relevant databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus) was performed to identify studies published from 2013 to 2023, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Randomised controlled trials, non‐randomised trials and controlled laboratory studies that used at least one type of PRP products were included. Dichotomous outcomes were presented using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).ResultsA total of 21 publications were identified in the systematic review and 5 of them in the meta‐analysis. These publications involved various types of PRP products and reported different outcomes. Although most of the studies were associated with a high risk of bias, the overall estimated effect was consistent with a significant improvement in the PRP products treatment group compared with the control group (OR: 15.32; 95% CI: 3.00–78.15; p < 0.05). There was a significant improvement in clinical performance outcomes between the groups (OR: 36.64; 95% CI: 3.69–364.30; p < 0.05).ConclusionPRP products as intra‐articular treatment are likely efficacious for treatment of equine OA and have potential for treating SA. These conclusions might be affected by the limited number of randomised controlled studies and high variability of different types of PRP products. To better evaluate the efficacy of PRP, a widely recognised classification system and the utilisation of randomised, blinded, equivalency or non‐inferiority trials are required.