Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 22, 2025
Preparation, Procedures and Evaluation of Platelet-Rich Plasma Injection in the Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis
Published on: January 4, 2019
Effect of Bone Marrow Aspirate Concentrate and Platelet-Rich Plasma Augmentation on the Rate of Revision Rotator Cuff
Bradley S Schoch1, Brian C Werner2, Shane A Shapiro1
1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, Florida, USA.
Background:
The application of orthobiologics at the time of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) has received an increasing amount of clinical interest despite a relative scarcity of human clinical studies on their efficacy.
Purpose:
To utilize a national administrative database to determine the association of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) applied at the time of RCR with revision surgery rates.
Study Design:
Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods:
The Mariner data set from the PearlDiver patient records repository was utilized to identify patients undergoing RCR using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 29827. Patients receiving BMAC or PRP at the time of RCR were then identified using CPT coding. For comparison purposes, a matched cohort was created consisting of patients who underwent RCR without biologic augmentation in a 5:1 fashion for each biologic separately. Cases were matched according to age, sex, tobacco use, biceps tenodesis, distal clavicle excision, and subacromial decompression. All groups were then queried for revision RCR or conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Revision rates were compared utilizing a multivariate binomial logistic regression analysis. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated.
Results:
A total of 760 patients who underwent biologic augmentation during RCR were identified, including 646 patients in the PRP group and 114 patients in the BMAC group. They were compared with 3800 matched controls without documented biologic application at the time of surgery. Compared with matched controls, patients who received BMAC at the time of surgery experienced a significantly lower incidence of revision surgery at 2 years (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.82; P = .015). There was no significant difference in revision rates between PRP and matched controls (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62-1.23; P = .183).
Conclusion:
The application of BMAC at the time of RCR was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of revision surgery. There was no apparent effect of PRP on the incidence of revision surgery after primary RCR. Higher-level clinical studies considering surgical factors are needed to more clearly define the role of biologic adjuvants in RCR.
