Platelet-Rich Plasma in Aesthetic Dermatology: Current Evidence and Future Directions

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)

Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) has emerged as a promising treatment in aesthetic dermatology. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current evidence for PRP applications in skin rejuvenation, hair restoration, wound healing, and fat grafting. Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases and 13 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were selected for review. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of included studies. The reviewed studies consistently reported positive outcomes for PRP across various applications. In skin rejuvenation, significant improvements in collagen density and overall skin appearance were observed. For hair restoration, studies showed mean increases of 18-27.7 hairs/cm² in treated areas. PRP demonstrated efficacy in accelerating wound healing across various wound types, including chronic ulcers. In fat grafting, PRP was associated with improved graft survival and integration. Patient satisfaction was generally high across all applications. However, there was significant heterogeneity in PRP preparation methods and treatment protocols among studies. This systematic review provides evidence supporting the efficacy of PRP in aesthetic dermatology, particularly in skin rejuvenation, hair restoration, w

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.