Background: Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a blood-derived preparation whose use has grown exponentially in orthopaedic practice. However, there remains an unclear understanding of the biological properties and effects of PRP on musculoskeletal healing. Heterogeneous processing methods, unstandardized nomenclature, and ambiguous classifications make comparison among studies challenging. A comprehensive assessment of orthopaedic clinical PRP trials is key to unraveling the biological complexity of PRP, while improving standardized communication. Toward this goal, we performed a systematic review of the PRP preparation protocols and PRP composition utilized in clinical trials for the treatment of musculoskeletal diseases. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed from 2006 to 2016. Inclusion criteria were human clinical trials, English-language literature, and manuscripts that reported on the use of PRP in musculoskeletal/orthopaedic conditions. Basic-science articles, editorials, surveys, special topics, letters to the editor, personal correspondence, and nonorthopaedic applications (including cosmetic use or dental application studies) were excluded. Results: A total of 105 studies (in 104 articles) met the inclusion criteria for analysis. Of these studies, only 11 (10%) provided comprehensive reporting that included a clear description of the preparation protocol that could be used by subsequent investigators to repeat the method. Only 17 studies (16%) provided quantitative metrics on the composition of the final PRP product. Conclusions: Reporting of PRP preparation protocols in clinical studies is highly inconsistent, and the majority of studies did not provide sufficient information to allow the protocol to be reproduced. Furthermore, the current reporting of PRP preparation and composition does not enable comparison of the PRP products being delivered to patients. A detailed, precise, and stepwise description of the PRP preparation protocol is required to allow comparison among studies and provide reproducibility.

The Permanente Journal is a peer-reviewed journal of medical science, social science in medicine, and medical humanities.

➢ Clinicians should exercise a high level of suspicion in at-risk patients (those who use corticosteroids, consume excessive alcohol, have sickle cell disease, etc.) in order to diagnose osteonecrosis of the femoral head in its earliest stage. ➢ Nonoperative treatment modalities have generally been ineffective at halting progression. Thus, nonoperative treatment is not appropriate in early stages when one is attempting to preserve the native joint, except potentially on rare occasions for small-sized, medially located lesions, which may heal without surgery. ➢ Joint-preserving procedures should be attempted in early-stage lesions to save the femoral head. ➢ Cell-based augmentation of joint-preserving procedures continues to show promising results, and thus should be considered as an ancillary treatment method that may improve clinical outcomes. ➢ The outcomes of total hip arthroplasty in the setting of osteonecrosis are excellent, with results similar to those in patients who have an underlying diagnosis of osteoarthritis.

A clinical practice guideline on total knee arthroplasty was developed by an American Physical Therapy (APTA) volunteer guideline development group that consisted of physical therapists, an orthopedic surgeon, a nurse, and a consumer. The guideline was based on systematic reviews of current scientific and clinical information and accepted approaches to management of total knee arthroplasty.

The Permanente Journal advances knowledge in scientific research, clinical medicine, and innovative health care delivery. Sponsored by the National Permanente Medical Groups, The Permanente Journal is a peer-reviewed journal of medical science, social science in medicine, and medical humanities. The Permanente Journal (ISSN 1552-5767) is published quarterly by The Permanente Press. The Permanente Journal is available online (ISSN 1552-5775) at www.thepermanentejournal.org. Physicians may earn up to 1 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit per article for reading and analyzing the designated CME articles published in each edition of TPJ. Each edition has four articles available for review. Other clinicians for whom CME is acceptable in meeting educational requirements may report up to four hours of participation. The Permanente Journal welcomes requests for reprints and reproduction. Use of any and all material published in The Permanente Journal is copyrighted and protected. The Permanente Journal offers free full-text access for all online content. Use as a handout, reprinting, republishing, adapting, or any other use, requires permission.

Non-traumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head is a potentially devastating condition, the prevalence of which is increasing. Many joint-preserving forms of treatment, both medical and surgical, have been developed in an attempt to slow or reverse its progression, as it usually affects young patients. However, it is important to evaluate the best evidence that is available for the many forms of treatment considering the variation in the demographics of the patients, the methodology and the outcomes in the studies that have been published, so that it can be used effectively. The purpose of this review, therefore, was to provide an up-to-date, evidence-based guide to the management, both non-operative and operative, of non-traumatic osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1267–79.