PRP Versus Standard of Care for Venous leg Ulcers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Comparative Studies

Comparison of the therapeutic efficacy of magneto-LED therapy and magnetostimulation applied as the adjuvant treatment of venous leg ulcers - preliminary study

PURPOSE

Venous leg ulcers are chronic wounds that are difficult to cure. The aim of the study was to compare the therapeutic efficacy of two methods of physical medicine - magneto-LED therapy and magnetostimulation, applied as adjuvant treatment in the treatment of venous leg ulcers.

METHODS

The study included 81 patients, 37 male (45.6%) and 44 female (54.3%) ones, age range between 45 and 90 years, with venous leg ulcers. The patients were assigned to two study groups: magneto-LED therapy (group 1) or magnetostimulation (group 2). In both groups, a total of 40 daily procedures were performed. Wound healing was evaluated using computerized planimetry and the pain intensity on numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

After treatment, the decrease in healing rate in group 1 was statistically significantly higher in comparison to group 2 (p < 0.001), while a statistically significant reduction in the surface area of ulcers was obtained, amounting on the average from 6.34 ± 1.29 cm2 to 2.31 ± 1.25 cm2 in group 1 (p < 0.001), and from 6.52 ± 1.20 cm2 to 4.79 ± 1.17 cm2 in group 2 (p < 0.001). The percentage changes of ulcers area in group 1 (64.21 ± 17.94%) were statistically significantly greater as compared to group 2 (25.87 ± 14.07%) (p < 0.001). After treatment, the decrease in pain relief in group 1 was statistically significantly higher in comparison to group 2 (p = 0.006), while pain intensity after treatment decreased statistically significantly in both compared groups of patients (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Magneto-LED therapy and magnetostimulation caused significant reduction of surface area of the treated venous leg ulcers and pain intensity, yet magneto-LED therapy was more efficient. Both evaluated methods also significantly reduced pain intensity.

Efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of venous ulcers: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Considering the substantial impact of venous ulcers on quality of life and healthcare systems, this study evaluated the efficacy and safety of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in comparison to conventional therapy. A systematic review of four databases identified 16 randomized clinical trials, including 20 study groups. PRP significantly enhanced complete ulcer healing, exhibiting an odds ratio (OR) of 5.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.35-10.89), and increased the percentage of healed ulcer area by a mean difference of 47% (95% CI: 32%-62%). Additionally, PRP shortened the time required for complete healing by an average of 3.25 months (95% CI: -4.06 to -2.43). Although pain reduction was similar in both groups, PRP considerably decreased ulcer recurrence rates (OR = 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05-0.50) without increasing the risks of infection or irritative dermatitis. These results suggest PRP as a viable, safe alternative for venous ulcer treatment, providing significant improvements in healing outcomes.

Platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of diabetic foot ulcer: a systematic review

Background

With the increasing incidence of diabetes, diabetic foot ulcer(DFU) has become one of the most common and serious complications in people with diabetes. DFU is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, and can also result in significant economic, social and public health burdens. Due to peripheral neuropathy, peripheral vascular disease, hyperglycemic environment, inflammatory disorders and other factors, the healing of DFU is impaired or delayed, resulting in the formation of diabetic chronic refractory ulcer. Because of these pathological abnormalities in DFU, it may be difficult to promote wound healing with conventional therapies or antibiotics, whereas platelet-rich plasma(PRP) can promote wound healing by releasing various bioactive molecules stored in platelets, making it more promising than traditional antibiotics. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review is to summarize and analyze the efficacy of PRP in the treatment of DFU.

Methods

A literature search was undertaken in PubMed, CNKI, EMB-ASE, the Cochrane Library, the WanFang Database and the WeiPu Database by computer. Included controlled studies evaluating the efficacy of PRP in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. The data extraction and assessment are on the basis of PRISMA.

Results

Twenty studies were evaluated, and nineteen measures for the evaluation of the efficacy of PRP in DFU treatment were introduced by eliminating relevant duplicate measures. The efficacy measures that were repeated in various studies mainly included the rate of complete ulcer healing, the percentage of ulcer area reduction, the time required for ulcer healing, wound complications (including infection rate, amputation rate, and degree of amputation), the rate of ulcer recurrence, and the cost and duration of hospitalization for DFU, as well as subsequent survival and quality of life scores. One of the most important indicators were healing rate, ulcer area reduction and healing time. The meta-analysis found that PRP was significantly improve the healing rate(OR = 4.37, 95% CI 3.02-6.33, P < 0.001) and shorten the healing time(MD = -3.21, 95% CI -3.83 to -2.59,P < 0.001)of patients with DFU when compared to the conventional treatment, but there was no significant difference in reducing the of ulcer area(MD = 5.67, 95% CI -0.77 to 12.11,P =0.08>0.05 ).

Conclusion

The application of PRP to DFU can improve ulcer healing rate and shorten ulcer healing time, but more clinical data are needed to clarify some efficacy measures. At the same time, a standardized preparation process for PRP is essential.