Skip to main content
Physiatry '25 Main banner
Final Program


Final Program

222 - Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Surgical Repair or Reconstruction in Athletes with Ulnar Collateral Ligament Sprain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Thursday, February 27, 2025
5:00 PM - 6:30 PM MST

    Presenting Author(s)

  • ZL

    Zarif A. Ladak, BS

    Second Year Medical Student
    Rowan-Virtua SOM
    Voorhees Township, New Jersey, United States

    • Co-Author(s)

  • AD

    Amritjot Dhillon, MS

    Medical Student
    TouroCOM
    Hicksville, New York, United States

  • JL

    Justin Le, BS

    Medical Student
    Rowan-Virtua SOM
    Bronx, New York, United States

  • VR

    Valerie Rome, BA

    Third Year Medical Student
    Rowan-Virtua SOM
    Voorhees, New Jersey, United States

  • SS

    Seth J. Spicer, MS

    Medical Student
    Futures Forward Research Institute
    Voorhees, New Jersey, United States

    • Corresponding Author(s)

  • IJ

    Iqbal Jafri, MD

    Medical Director of the Center for Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation
    JFK-Johnson Rehabilitation Institute
    Edison, New Jersey, United States

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) therapy versus surgical repair or reconstruction in reducing return-to-play time for athletes with Ulnar Collateral Ligament (UCL) sprains. UCL injuries, common in athletes often performing overhead movements, often require extended recovery times. While surgery has been the standard treatment for severe UCL injuries, PRP therapy—an increasingly recognized, minimally invasive alternative—may offer potential benefits in promoting tissue healing and reducing recovery time. This study sought to provide insights into the comparative benefits of these treatment options.

Design: This systematic review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Databases searched included PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Studies were included if they assessed surgery, stem cell injection, PRP, or physical therapy for treating grade 1-4 UCL sprains in athletes. The primary outcome measure was return-to-play time.

Results:

Following a database search, 4,558 articles were initially identified. Of these, 3,331 duplicates were removed, leaving 2,273 articles for title and abstract screening to determine if they met the inclusion criteria. Out of these, 2,223 articles were excluded. A full-text review was conducted on the remaining 50 articles, leading to the exclusion of 25 additional articles. Ultimately, 25 articles were included in the final analysis.

For UCL sprains, the return-to-play (RTP) times were compared among PRP, repairs, and reconstructions. Repairs demonstrated a significantly shorter RTP time compared to both PRP (p < 0.01) and reconstructions (p < 0.01). PRP did not show a statistically significant advantage over the control group.

Conclusions: While PRP did not significantly reduce RTP times compared to surgical repair or reconstruction for UCL sprains, it provides a promising, less invasive alternative. Further research could uncover its unique benefits in specific patient cases or long-term outcomes.