Tissue Engineering for Rotator Cuff Repair: An Evidence-Based Systematic Review

Table 1

Study and demographic data.

Study	Level of evidence		Patients	Mean age; (Range or ± SD), y	Men/Women	Followup; (Range or ± SD), months	Size of lesion
Castricini et al., 2011 [17]	I	Control group	45	55.2 (37–69)	23/22	20.2 (16–30)	20 Small RCT	25 Medium RCT	0	0
		PRP group	43	55.5 (41–72)	17/26		18 Small RCT	25 Medium RCT	0	0
Randelli et al., 2011 [30]	I	Control group	27	59.5 (±10.7)	13/14	23	12 Minor	7 Moderate	4 Severe	4 Massive
		PRP group	26	61.6 (±8.3)	8/18		9 Minor	7 Moderate	3 Severe	7 Massive
Jo et al., 2011 [29]	II	Control group	23	59.80 (±8.84)	9/14	20.30 (±1.89)	2 Small RCT	15 Medium RCT	3 Large RCT	3 Massive RCT
		PRP group	19	61.80 (±8.86)	6/13	18.94 (±1.63)	1 Small RCT	7 Medium RCT	5 Large RCT	6 Massive RCT

RCT: rotator cuff tear.