Moore, M. Lane

Abstract Platelet‐rich plasma (PRP) continues to generate both excitement and skepticism within orthopaedics and sports medicine. As a biologic derived from autologous blood, PRP offers an appealing, minimally invasive option for treating musculoskeletal pathology through the delivery of concentrated growth factors and cytokines. Evidence across orthopaedic subspecialties remains mixed, however, with studies showing variable efficacy and inconsistent methodologies. Recent data on PRP use for extra‐articular hip pathology, particularly greater trochanteric pain syndrome, hamstring injuries, and piriformis syndrome show encouraging improvements in pain and function, including faster return to sport and favorable patient‐reported outcomes. Yet, significant heterogeneity in study design, PRP preparation, and control interventions limits generalizability and hinders clear clinical guidance. These inconsistencies mirror similar challenges in PRP research for a variety of other orthopaedic pathologies, underscoring the need for standardized preparation protocols and consistent reporting frameworks. Despite these limitations, a signal of efficacy persists within the data, suggesting PRP may indeed provide meaningful benefit for select extra‐articular hip conditions. As surgical alternatives for these pathologies often carry substantial morbidity, continued refinement of PRP formulations and methodology represents a promising step toward establishing biologics as reliable, evidence‐based tools in orthopaedic care.