TABLE 1.

Baseline characteristics of patients in the trials included in the meta‐analysis.

Study	Country	Study design	Treatment regimen	No. of patients	Male/female	Age (mean ± SD, y)	Wound etiology	NOS
Ahmed et al. 19	Egypt	RCT	Autologous PRP	28	20/8	43.2 ± 18.2	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Antiseptic ointment dressing	28	18/10	49.8 ± 15.4
Game et al. 20	UK	RCT	Autologous PRP+ Standard care	131	107/25	61.9 ± 11.4	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Standard care	134	110/24	62 ± 11.9
Saldalamacchia et al. 21	Italy	Cohort	Autologous PRP + Standard care	7	4/3	61.1 ± 9.4	Diabetic foot ulcers	5
			Standard care	7	2/5	58.1 ± 7.8
Jeong et al. 22	Korea	RCT	Allogenic PRP	52	27/25	64.5 ± 8.1	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Topicalfibrinogen and thrombin	48	26/22	63.8 ± 6.4
Abdelghani et al. 23	Egypt	RCT	Autologous PRP	20	9/11	34.9 ± 15.39	Non‐segmental vitiligo	NA
			Laser	20	6/14	29.6 ± 10.80
Kakagia et al. 24	Greece	RCT	Autologous PRP	17	NR	57 ± 12	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Cellulose/collagen biomaterial	17	NR	58 ± 10
Singh et al. 25	India	Cohort	Autologous PRP	25	19/6	36.84 ± 12.67	Press ulcers	5
			saline dressing	25	19/6	36.84 ± 12.67
Li et al. 26	China	RCT	Autologous PRP+ standard treatment	59	37/22	61.4 ± 13.1	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			standard treatment	58	38/20	64.1 ± 9.4
Moneib et al. 27	Egypt	Cohort	Autologous PRP	20	19/1	36.4 ± 10.2	Chronic venous leg ulcers	5
			conventional therapy	20	20/0	32.5 ± 7.5
Ibrahim et al. 28	Egypt	Cohort	Autologous PRP	60	NR	28 ± 5.65	Stable vitiligo	6
			Narrowband—ultraviolet B	60	NR	28 ± 5.65
Kazakos et al. 29	Belgium	Cohort	Autologous PRP	27	14/13	36 (20–56)	Acute trauma wounds	6
			Conventional dressings	32	20/12	38 (19–52)
Ramos‐Torrecillas et al. 30	Spain	RCT	Autologous PRP	34	NR	82.5	Press ulcers	NA
			Standard care	25	NR	82.5
Saad Setta et al. 31	Egypt	Cohort	Autologous PRP	12	NR	40–60	Diabetic foot ulcers	5
			Platelet‐poor plasma	12	NR	40–60
Milek et al. 32	Poland	Cohort	Autologous PRP	50	16/34	53–89	Venous leg ulcers	6
			conventional hydrocolloid dressings	50	11/39	54–79
Steed et al. 33	USA	RCT	Allogenic PRP	7	5/2	58.7 ± 12.4	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Saline dressings	6	4/2	54.2 ± 12.9
Steed et al. 34	USA	RCT	Allogenic PRP	11	NR	NR	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Saline dressings	5	NR	NR
Escamilla Cardeñosa et al. 35	USA	RCT	Autologous PRP	55	15/40	65 ± 13.72	Venous leg ulcers	NA
			Standard care	47	16/31	69 ± 16.26
De Angelis et al. 41	Italy	Cohort	Autologous PRP	182	NR	NR	Diabetic foot ulcers	7
			Hyaluronic acid	182	NR	NR
Senet et al. 36	France	RCT	Autologous PRP	7	4/3/	72.3 (45–88)	Venous leg ulcers	NA
			Saline dressings	6	3/3	72.3 (50–83)
Burgos‐Alonso et al. 37	Spain	RCT	Autologous PRP	5	2/3	76.6 ± 8.7	Venous leg ulcers	NA
			Standard care	3	3/0	69.7 ± 11.1
Kadry et al. 42	Hungary	Cohort	Autologous PRP	30	NR	NR	Vitiligo	6
			Laser	30	NR	NR
Serra et al. 43	Italy	Cohort	Autologous PRP	26	19/7	67.5 (43–85)	Diabetic foot ulcers	6
			Standard care	32	27/5	63.5 (41–79)
Khattab et al. 44	Egypt	Cohort	Autologous PRP	26	4/22	25.42 ± 7.6	Vitiligo	6
			Excimer laser	26	6/20	24.9 ± 5.6
Parambath et al. 38	India	RCT	Autologous PRP	20	NR	NR	Vitiligo	NA
			Phosphate buffered saline	20	NR	NR
Driver et al. 39	USA	RCT	Autologous PRP	40	32/8	56.4 ± 8.1	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Saline dressings	32	27/5	57.5 ± 9.1
Karimi et al. 45	Iran	RCT	Autologous PRP	25	20/5	NR	Diabetic foot ulcers	NA
			Saline dressings	25	18/7	NR
Stacey et al. 40	Australia	RCT	Autologous PRP	42	15/27	72 (35–90)	Venous leg ulcers	NA
			Placebo	44	21/23	70 (26–92)

Abbreviations: NR, not reported; PRP, platelet rich plasma; RCT, randomized control trial; SD, standard deviation.