Platelet-Rich Plasma for Lateral Ankle Ligament Injuries: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence and Limitations

The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate the clinical outcomes, complication rates, and failure rates following platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for lateral ankle ligament injuries.

During June 2025, a systematic review of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines to identify comparative clinical studies evaluating PRP for lateral ankle ligament injuries. Data extracted included patient demographics, clinical outcomes, complications, failures, and secondary procedure rates.

Five studies were included involving a total of 126 patients (126 ankles) who received PRP injections and 48 patients (48 ankles) who were in the control cohort, with a mean follow-up of 7.1 ± 4.3 months. Across studies, no consistent differences were found in clinical outcome scores between PRP and control cohorts at short-term follow-up. Significant heterogeneity in PRP preparation and administration protocols precluded a pooled meta-analysis from being performed. Platelet-rich plasma injections were associated with low complication (3.4%) and failure (5.1%) rates, and no secondary procedures were reported. Overall, the certainty of the available evidence was low, representing a limited and heterogeneous evidence base.

Based on limited short-term data, the available studies do not demonstrate a clear or consistent difference in clinical outcomes between PRP-treated patients and controls. However, the evidence base is scarce, highly heterogeneous, and of low certainty. Substantial variability in PRP preparation and administration, small sample sizes, and short follow-up preclude reliable quantitative synthesis and comparative conclusions. Consequently, the current literature is insufficient to determine whether PRP provides any clinical advantage over standard care for lateral ankle ligament injuries. Further well-designed, adequately powered prospective studies with standardized PRP protocols and longer follow-up are warranted.

V.