Format

Send to

Choose Destination
PM R. 2015 Apr;7(4 Suppl):S53-S59. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.02.005.

A call for a standard classification system for future biologic research: the rationale for new PRP nomenclature.

Author information

1
Department of PM&R and Orthopedics, Emory Orthopedics and Spine Center, Atlanta, GA.
2
New Jersey Regenerative Institute LLC, Cedar Knolls, NJ; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, New Jersey Medical School, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ.
3
Departments of PM&R, Radiology, and Anatomy, Mayo Clinic Sports Medicine Center, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN.
4
Department of Family Medicine, The Center for Sports Medicine and Wellness, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
5
Performance and Musculoskeletal Regeneration Center, Washington, DC.
6
Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA; The Orthohealing Center and The Orthobiologic Institute (TOBI), Los Angeles, CA.
7
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, New Jersey Medical School, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ; New Jersey Regenerative Institute, Cedar Knolls, NJ.

Abstract

Autologous cell therapies including platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and bone marrow concentrate (BMC) are increasingly popular options for soft tissue and joint-related diseases. Despite increased clinical application, conflicting research has been published regarding the efficacy of PRP, and few clinical publications pertaining to BMC are available. Preparations of PRP (and BMC) can vary in many areas, including platelet concentration, number of white blood cells, presence or absence of red blood cells, and activation status of the preparation. The potential effect of PRP characteristics on PRP efficacy is often not well understood by the treating clinician, and PRP characteristics, as well as the volume of PRP delivered, are unfortunately not included in the methods of many published research articles. It is essential to establish a standard reporting system for PRP that facilitates communication and the interpretation and synthesis of scientific investigations. Herein, the authors propose a new PRP classification system reflecting important PRP characteristics based on contemporary literature and recommend adoption of minimal standards for PRP reporting in scientific investigations. Widespread adoption of these recommendations will facilitate interpretation and comparison of clinical studies and promote scientifically based progress in the field of regenerative medicine.

PMID:
25864661
DOI:
10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.02.005
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wiley
Loading ...
Support Center