The Combined Potential of PRP and Osteoinductive Carrier Matrices for Bone Regeneration
Meglei AY., Nedorubova IA., Basina VP., Chernomyrdina VO., Goldshtein DV., Bukharova TB.
Narrative Review, published in Int J Mol Sci (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Narrative Review
- Journal
- Int J Mol Sci (2025)
- Reported sample size
- —
- Source database
- Europe PMC
- PMID
- 40943378
- PMCID
- PMC12428504
- DOI
- 10.3390/ijms26178457
Abstract (original English)
In regenerative medicine, orthobiologics, particularly platelet-rich plasma (PRP), are widely used due to their ability to enhance natural tissue repair mechanisms. PRP contains a concentrated pool of growth factors and cytokines that enhance regeneration while also acting as a biomimetic scaffold, thereby optimizing the microenvironment for tissue healing. In bone tissue engineering, PRP is commonly combined with synthetic or natural biomaterials, as its fibrin matrix alone lacks sufficient mechanical stability. However, even such composite systems frequently exhibit limited osteoinductive capacity, necessitating further supplementation with bioactive components. This review evaluates the regenerative potential of PRP in bone defect healing when combined with osteoinductive agents in preclinical in vivo models. We present compelling experimental evidence supporting the efficacy of this combined therapeutic approach.
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
- • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.
Evidence level
Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.