PurposeTo systematically review the studies regarding to the safety, efficacy and application methods of PRP in promoting the talar cartilage repair.MethodsA systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, Web of Science, OVID and EMBASE to identify studies that compared the clinical efficacy of PRP for talar cartilage repair. Main outcome was the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score for function and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain was the second outcome.ResultsA total of 10 studies were included in this systematic review, including 4 randomized controlled trials, 1 controlled trial, 3 case series and 2 cohort studies. Four RCTs were analyzed using meta-analysis. For all outcomes, statistical results favored PRP group (AOFAS: MD = 7.84; 95% CI= [-0.13, 15.80], I2= 83%,P< 0.01; VAS: MD = 1.86; 95% CI= [0.68, 3.04], I2= 85%,P< 0.01). There were almost no reports of adverse events related to PRP intervention. Subgroup analysis showed that whether PRP was used alone or combined with other treatments could result in high heterogeneity but no more specific factors were identified to contribute to this.ConclusionPRP is safe and effective for talar cartilage repair. In addition to the standardization of PRP preparation and application, it is necessary to distinguish the effects of PRP used alone or in combination with other treatments. In PRP studies, surgical treatment of talar cartilage repair remains the mainstream. The regulation of PRP in surgical applications are worth exploring. The most relative component is the mesenchymal stem cell because it is the only exposed chondrocyte precursor in the articular cavity whether it is microfracture or cell transplantation.Trial registrationThe study was registered in the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42022360183).