A commentary on the need for minimum information for studies evaluating biologics in plastic surgery.

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

• 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

Abstract (original English)

Biologics including platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are increasingly utilized in plastic surgery for applications ranging from facial rejuvenation to wound healing. However, the literature currently contains heterogeneous reporting that undermines evidence synthesis and clinical application. A recent systematic review found that the vast majority of authors failed to disclose final platelet concentrations, concluding that systematic evaluation is limited by high heterogeneity in preparation protocols. 3 Orthopedic surgery addressed this problem in 2017 by developing the Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics (MIBO) guidelines through Delphi consensus, establishing 23 mandatory reporting items across 12 categories. However, voluntary MIBO adoption has been poor, with no improvement in adherence before versus after guideline publication. 5 Plastic surgery has reporting guidelines for stromal vascular fraction (CLINIC-STRA-SVF), leaving PRP and MSCs without standardized reporting requirements. This commentary proposes that plastic surgery journals mandate MIBO checklist completion for all PRP and MSC studies as a condition of publication. Standardized reporting would enable meaningful meta-analyses, allow clinicians to identify optimal protocols, and demonstrate professional commitment to scientific rigor.

Evidence level

Relatively higher-quality human studies compared with other topics in this database, e.g. multiple RCTs or systematic reviews. This does not mean it is standard or approved care.

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.