Skip to main content
. 2014 Apr 29;2014(4):CD010071. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010071.pub3

Vadalà 2013.

Methods Randomised controlled trial. Sequence generation and allocation methodology were not reported. Participants were followed for a mean of 14.7 months
Trial conducted: no details available; recruitment: no details available
Participants Participants: 40 undergoing ACL reconstruction
Inclusion criteria: participants with chronic instability (> 30 days of trauma)
Exclusion criteria: age > 50 years; concomitant medial or lateral collateral ligament injuries; degenerative joint disease or chondral damage (MRI or radiographic examinations)
Age mean (range): 34.5 years (18‐48)
 PRT group mean (range): not available
 No PRT mean (range): not available
Gender: all were men
PRT group (number of men:women): 20:0
 No PRT (number of men:women): 20:0
Sports activity: not available
Interventions All patients underwent arthroscopic ACL reconstruction with hamstring graft
PRT (number of participants = 20): single intraoperative application. PRP was applied in the femoral and tibial tunnel. 10 mL blood was centrifuged, thrombin and calcium gluconate added few minutes before its application in order to obtain a thick and adhesive gel
PRT preparation: kit: PRP Fast Biotech kit (MyCells PPT‐Platelet Preparation Tube)
Quantification of platelet concentrates after preparation: not reported
No PRT (number of participants = 20): no platelet‐rich therapy controls
Co‐interventions: same rehabilitation protocol
Outcomes Tunnel enlargement (assessed by CT)
Tegner activity score
Lysholm score
IKDC score
Other quality issues Sample size: the authors did not calculate the sample size
Validation of PRT: PRP preparation methodology was not clear and there are some inconsistencies between sections of the manuscript
Notes The authors described different quantities for PRP preparation and application
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Adequate sequence generation Unclear risk Not reported
Allocation concealment Unclear risk Not reported
Blinding 
 All outcomes Low risk Outcome assessors were blinded
Incomplete outcome data addressed 
 All outcomes Low risk No participants were lost to follow‐up
Free of selective reporting High risk The study protocol is not available and the authors did not report outcomes at each time point
Free of other bias Low risk The study appears to be free of other bias