Platelet-rich plasma and ablative fractional carbon dioxide laser therapy for chronic scar management: a systematic review

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)

Purpose Scarring following acne, burns, and trauma remains a significant clinical and psychosocial challenge. Despite increasing clinical use, there is no consensus on the efficacy and safety of Ablative Fractional CO₂ Laser (AFCL) combined with Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) across scar aetiologies. This systematic review evaluated the efficacy and safety of AFCL with PRP for chronic acne, traumatic, and burn scars. Methods MEDLINE (PubMed) and Embase (Ovid) were searched to 1 September 2025 using terms related to scars, fractional CO₂ laser, and platelet-rich plasma. Eligible studies included human subjects treated with AFCL (10,600 nm) and autologous PRP delivered topically or intradermally. Studies using platelet-rich fibrin, PRP gel, or non-synchronous administration were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I. Results Seventeen studies (n = 420) met inclusion criteria. Nine (53%) were randomised studies, six (29%) non-randomised, and two (12%) retrospective. AFCL settings ranged from 10 to 30 W, dwell times 0.1–1.54 ms, and spot spacing 0.5–2.0 mm. PRP was predominantly prepared via double-spin centrifugation and delivered topically (47%) or intradermally (59%). AFCL+PRP showed superior efficacy to AFCL alone, with significant improvements in scar texture, pigmentation, erythema, and depth. Patient satisfaction was consistently higher with combination th

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.