Clinical Research Directory

Comparison of Leucocyte-rich PRP and Leucocyte-poor PRP in Treating Mild to Moderate Knee Osteoarthritis

The purpose of this study is to show that there is no difference in patient clinical scores when patients with knee pain are treated with joint application of high dose white blood cell PRP (platelet-rich plasma) and low dose white blood cell PRP for knee osteoarthritis. Participants will be selected based on presenting knee pain lasting for 6 months or longer. Before being recruited, they will undergo radiological examinations (X-ray and MRI), based on which they will be recruited. Before application and subjection to randomization, all patients will fill out clinical questionnaires (KOOS,WOMAC,VAS). Afterwards, the participants will be divided randomly into two groups, one receiving high dose white blood cell PRP and the other group receiving low dose white blood cell PRP. Participants will not be aware of which group they are divided into. They will have blood drawn, the blood will be processed into a PRP blood product. The blood product will then be applied into the joint space with the help of ultrasound. The patients will again fill out clinical scores (KOOS,WOMAC,VAS) at the follow-up intervals (1,3,6,12 months). At the end of the study, participants will be allowed to discover which PRP product they received.

Poly-L-Lactic Acid Threads Versus Platelet-Rich Plasma for Post-Traumatic Atrophic Scars

This study compares the efficacy and safety of poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) threads versus platelet-rich plasma (PRP), both combined with subcision, in the treatment of post-traumatic atrophic scars. Patients with post-traumatic atrophic scars were allocated to either a single session of subcision followed by PLLA thread insertion or four monthly sessions of subcision combined with PRP injection. Clinical improvement, patient satisfaction, adverse effects, and histopathological changes were assessed during a 3-month follow-up period.

Augmentation of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With Reimplantation of Subacromial Bursa Tissue and Platelet-Rich Plasma

The goal of this observational study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the biological enhancement of the arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with stem cells from the acromial bursa and PRP in individuals who undergo arthroscopic cuff repair The main question it aims to answer is: Do the stems cells from the acromial bursa and PRP promote healing and produce better results in arthroscopic cuff repair? Researchers will compare this population to three others the first do bnot receive any biological enchancement, the second receive only stem cells and the third receive only PRP to see if there are any differences.

PRP as Adjuvant Treatment to CTR for Severe CTS Tunnel Syndrome

This study assesses the potential benefit of adjuvant platelet-rich plasma (PRP) with carpal tunnel release (CTR) for patients with severe carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). CTR is a rather common procedure performed and seems to be quite effective for those with moderate CTS, but a number of patients with severe CTS do not have quite the same response post-CTR. The investigators will recruit patients who fall into the severe CTS category and compare CTR with and without adjuvant PRP to see if PRP can improve outcomes of this common surgery.

Comparison of Functional Outcomes Following Arthroscopic ACL Reconstruction With Peroneus Longus Autograft With and Without Intra-articular Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection.

This prospective RCT investigates if a single 4 ml intra-articular PRP injection improves knee function after ACL reconstruction using peroneus longus autograft. In Pakistan's resource-limited context, 88 patients (18-50 years) with isolated ACL tears receive either PRP or saline during surgery, then randomized equally. KOOS4 scores compared at 3, 6, and 12 months via ANCOVA (adjusted baseline, α=0.05). Positive results could establish affordable enhancement for recovery and guide practice in similar settings.

PRP in ACLR to Prevent PTOA

The purpose of our study is to examine the effect of platelet-rich-plasma (PRP) injection on the short-term resolution of post-injury inflammation (biomarkers) and improvement in joint function in patients with acute ACL injury. This RCT has been powered based on the questionnaire KOOS Jr. but it is considered a 'pilot study' in terms of the lab analysis proposed.

PRP Injections for Genitourinary Syndrome of Menopause

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is autologous blood which has been centrifuged to separate the supernatant resulting in a solution with high concentration of platelets. Injection of PRP stimulates cell growth and can has been proven safe and effective for uses in orthopedics, dermatology, and gynecology. Despite the relative paucity of data, the use of PRP as a therapy for sexual dysfunction and genitourinary symptoms in the setting of menopause has been patented as the O-Shot and V-Shot. This is a single-blinded randomized control trial to determine if PRP injections into the anterior vaginal wall improve sexual functioning in women diagnosed with the genitourinary syndrome of menopause (GSM) characterized by vaginal dryness/irritation.

PRP Yield and Platelet Distribution With EDTA

We will test and compare the platelet distribution after centrifugation and the platelet yield of ACD-A and EDTA anticoagulated blood

Ovarian PRP (Platelet Rich Plasma) Injection for Follicular Activation

The primary objective is to investigate the efficacy, defined as an increase in oocyte numbers upon ovarian stimulation, and safety of a single intra-ovarian PRP injection vs. saline solution (NaCl) injection (Placebo) transvaginally or laparoscopically for follicular activation in patients with child wish and with low ovarian reserve/expected poor ovarian response planning to undergo IVF or ICSI using own eggs. Pain score as numerical rating score and validated quality of life questionnaire will be requested after the procedure. Longterm follow-up of all participants will be performed 1, 2 and 5 years after end of study.

The Efficacy and Safety of Pulsed Radiofrequency Combined With Platelet-rich Plasma for the Trigeminal Neuralgia

Trigeminal neuralgia (TN), characterized by brief, recurrent paroxysms of lancinating pain in the distribution of 1 or more branches of the trigeminal nerve (fifth cranial nerve \[CNV\]), is one of the most common, severe forms of neuropathic pain. Current standard of care for TN is the sodium channel blockers such as carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine. Surgical treatments involve percutaneous procedures, stereotactic radiosurgery and open surgical treatment. Each of these treatments have drawback. In recent years, pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) has been shown to be a promising treatment option for TN. But it was reported that the long-term outcomes of PRF was not satisfactory. Thus, there is an overwhelming need for finding a safe, nondestructive treatment option that is more effective for TN. PRP releases a variety of bioactive factors and adhesion proteins, which are responsible for activating hemostatic cascade reaction, synthesizing new connective tissue and vascular reconstruction, to initiate tissue repair processes. Autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is the processed liquid fraction of autologous peripheral blood with a platelet concentration above the baseline. Studies have shown that it can reduce inflammation and promote nerve repair so it has also shown broad prospects in treating neuropathic pain. In 2012, Doss AX. published a case report indicated that PRP might be effective in TN treatment. In 2023, a randomized controlled study showed that CT-guided PRF combined with PRP can effectively treat postherpetic neuralgia (PHN), and the therapeutic effect is better than that of traditional PRF combined with glucocorticoid therapy in patients with PHN, which is similar to TN in pathology. Thus, we suppose that PRF combined with PRP might show better effectiveness than PRF alone for TN and conducted a prospective trail comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of PRP combined with PRF versus PRF alone. This study is designed as a prospective cohort study, open-label study with a 12 months follow-up period, to compare the efficacy of PRF combined with PRP versus PRP alone for TN treatment.

Arthroscopic Treatment Combined With PRP Injection for Refractory Elbow Epicondylitis

This study is a prospective randomized controlled study of different arthroscopic treatments for refractory external humeral epicondylitis combined with platelet rich plasma (PRP) injection. The patients with intractable external humeral epicondylitis were randomly divided into groups before the operation. After the arthroscopic operation was completed, they were divided into a local PRP injection group and a control group (normal saline) to perform additional operations on the damaged tendons, each for up to half a year after the operation. In different time periods, the quantitative and qualitative indicators including pain, functional score, muscle strength, MRI performance, etc. were compared between groups at the same time period to evaluate the difference in the effect of arthroscopic treatment combined with PRP on the treatment of damaged tendons. Determine the effectiveness of PRP. At the same time, in the process of arthroscopic treatment, look for risk factors that affect the curative effect of intractable external humeral epicondylitis, as well as the causes and prevention of common complications.