To synthesize and critically assess the available evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses regarding the use of PRP in women with unexplained recurrent implantation failure.
Approach:
Methodology: A thorough web search was performed on multiple databases to identify systematic reviews addressing the research question. Reviews were assessed based on methodology, search strategy, validity of studies, risk of bias, and certainty of evidence.
Key Findings:
15 systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials were included, with a high overlap (42%) among the studies.
An improvement in implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate was observed, although the certainty of evidence was low or not reported.
Interpretation:
Qualitative reviews indicate a potential effect of PRP in RIF, but the low quality of evidence limits the ability to make definitive recommendations.
Limitations:
Only five out of the 15 studies performed GRADE analysis, which affects the certainty of the findings.
Meta-analysis may overestimate the true effect due to the overall low quality of evidence.
Conclusion:
Intrauterine infusion of PRP may be considered as an adjunct therapy for women with unexplained recurrent implantation failure; however, the overall quality of evidence remains low, making definitive recommendations challenging.
