To summarise evidence on the effectiveness of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) gel and Leucocyte and Platelet Rich Fibrin (L-PRF) gel as agents promoting ulcer healing compared with the standard wound dressing techniques alone.

Systematic review.

Individual patient randomised controlled trials on skin ulcers of all types excluding traumatic lesions.

Intervention group: treatment with topical application of L-PRF gel or PRP gel to the wound surface.

Control group: treatment with standard skin ulcer care using normal saline, normgel or hydrogel dressings.

Medline (Ovid), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Web of Science and manual search of studies from previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The papers published from 1946 to 2022 with no restriction on geography and language were included. The last date of the search was performed on 29 August 2022.

Independent reviewers identified eligible studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using V.2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials tool and assessed certainty of evidence by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

Time to complete healing, proportion healed at a given time and rate of healing.

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria, five using PRP gel and two using L-PRF gel. One study showed a better proportion of complete healing, three reported reduced meantime to complete healing and five showed improved rate of healing per unit of time in the intervention group. The risk of bias was high across all studies with one exception and the GRADE showed very low certainty of evidence.

The findings show potential for better outcomes in the intervention; however, the evidence remains inconclusive highlighting a large research gap in ulcer treatment and warrant better-designed clinical trials.

CRD42022352418.

Active case finding (ACF) is an important tuberculosis (TB) intervention in high-burden settings. However, empirical evidence garnered from field data has been equivocal about the long-term community-level impact, and more data at a finer geographic scale and data-informed methods to quantify their impact are necessary.

Using village development committee (VDC)-level data on TB notification and demography between 2016 and 2017 in four southern districts of Nepal, where ACF activities were implemented as a part of the IMPACT-TB study between 2017 and 2019, we developed VDC-level transmission models of TB and ACF. Using these models and ACF yield data collected in the study, we estimated the potential epidemiological impact of IMPACT-TB ACF and compared its efficiency across VDCs in each district.

Cases were found in the majority of VDCs during IMPACT-TB ACF, but the number of cases detected within VDCs correlated weakly with historic case notification rates. We projected that this ACF intervention would reduce the TB incidence rate by 14% (12–16) in Chitwan, 8.6% (7.3–9.7) in Dhanusha, 8.3% (7.3–9.2) in Mahottari and 3% (2.5–3.2) in Makwanpur. Over the next 10 years, we projected that this intervention would avert 987 (746–1282), 422 (304–571), 598 (450–782) and 197 (172–240) cases in Chitwan, Dhanusha, Mahottari and Makwanpur, respectively. There was substantial variation in the efficiency of ACF across VDCs: there was up to twofold difference in the number of cases averted in the 10 years per case detected.

ACF data confirm that TB is widely prevalent, including in VDCs with relatively low reporting rates. Although ACF is a highly efficient component of TB control, its impact can vary substantially at local levels and must be combined with other interventions to alter TB epidemiology significantly.